Vientiane Double Visa: Three Strikes And You'Re Out!

[blakegeee]

This report doesn't actually specify what "she did get". Despite the count of previous stamps, did she at least get the single entry tourist visa?

[SweRob]

How many is "too many" previous Visas in your passport?

Ive got two double entry touristvisas in my passport, and im up for renewal and im heading for laos at the end of the month.

My first double entry touristvisa was issued in August 2009

My second double entry touristvisa was issued in August 2010

Both of these double entry Visas were issued in Sweden, and ive been home in Sweden for six/seven months between these two trips.

This is the first time i will try to get a new tourist visa in Asia (double entry).

And im a bit worried.

[NanLaew]

Richard - I totally agree with that. Most countries don't allow that. Thailand has been unique in this matter of letting people do the visa runs for years. This is why so many people came and stayed here. And I think it was good for Thailand. I also think it would still be good for Thailand, and I don't understand the reason and logic's for this sudden change in policy. What I called idiotic is the fact that this new rules are put into action without seems like considering all involved, and that includes regular tourists. What bothers me, and and what I referred to as 'idiotic', is how this new policy is implemented - simply counting how many previous visa sticker you have. I got a 60 days visa sticker, and they counted it as 'one'. It didn't matter that I stayed in Thailand only 2 weeks instead of the full 2 months, and the other one was from a previous year and followed by a month in Laos, then Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia. Obviously - I am not making back to back visa run!

The changes in Thailand's local consulate policies regarding issuing of back-to-back Tourist visas obviously addresses some very real concerns that the authorities NOW have regarding who is "hanging around the moobahn". Yes, the "multi" entry TR visa WAS a good idea and addressed the situation AT THAT TIME ie. the aspirations of TAT among others to encourage money-spending tourists to come back. This was a time when you could safely say that most foreigners arriving as a Tourist were, maybe like yourself, a bona fide holidaymaker and had disposable income. However, you cannot discount that the world has changed rapidly in the past dozen years or so and most countries have changed their immigration policies to some extent to address all sorts of evils including terrorism, fraud, money laundering, human trafficking, drug smuggling, etc.. Contrary to your opinion, these changes do NOT affect the 'regular tourist'. Tourists by definition do NOT take up residence in another country, migrants and immigrants do. The lax TR visa policy that allowed 'nice people' like yourself to stay longer also allowed the socially undesirable to do the same but this appears to be of no consequence to you. Those that proclaim that Cambodia is much more visa-friendly NOW probably don't remember when Thailand was SE Asia's most visa-friendly destination; back when nobody would even think about going to Cambodia. Things do change.

So, I am addressing and calling 'idiotic' the mindless implementation of this new policy. It is inconsiderate to me, inconsiderate to those who have been in the country for longer period of time - because Thailand allowed them to do it! In this context, so what this might not be possible elsewhere. it was here, for a very long time, so an excuse of 'in other countries you can't do it' so they all off the sudden scrap it just doesn't cut as civilized and considerate of people who built their lives here. It's almost like a call for repatriation, not a very humanitarian thing to do. I really feel sorry for all those people. And sure, some got that citizenship, some didn't. But Thailand allowed this type of life and the visa runs, so it should take some responsibility for it now. Let's say tell people - take care of your affairs, because we will be implementing such rule in 6, 12, or whatever months. I can't hide the impression that people being treated like and inanimate objects, and certainly this doesn't impress me. It makes me want to be cynical.

It is not 'almost like a call for repatriation', but it IS a call for voluntary repatriation... Thai-style. You could make draconian changes that would be instigated at the front-end, ie. all embassies and consulates world-wide. Or, you could quietly make it less convenient and more expensive for the ones already 'living' here to remain. The former would certainly tarnish the country's smiling image to the would-be first-time visitor but the latter would really sort out the mess that is within the countries borders already. If you turn up the heat, the less ardent will bugger off. Like western countries, Thailand does not desire to harbour the lazy, the indolent, the sick, the impoverished or the criminal. They have enough of their own thanks! Thailand IS taking responsibility for these decades of lax immigration rules and weak implementation of immigration law by doing the very thing you are contesting here as uncivilized and inconsiderate. They are enforcing their own laws. Thailand IS building a social welfare system to take care of their own. They don't need the ER's of government hospitals cluttered up with old foreigners who didn't do their sums right and can't afford the bus back to Bognor. Sorry, but as someone has already stated, you cannot just LIVE here because you like it. Not anymore. If you look at those here arguing 'for' stricter enforcement; they have mostly been here for a while and TAKEN THE TIME, MONEY AND INTEREST to make their domicile in Thailand legal, comfortable and in line with their actual status. They have not hijacked a TR visa, multi or otherwise, because it seems the easiest and cheapest to get and can be moderately abused without being inconvenienced much beyond 20000 baht. Oh yes, to try and look at it this inconvenience under a humanitarian spotlight has got to be your idea of a joke, no?

In my argument, I could have just used 'inconsiderate and unreasonable' instead of 'idiotic'. We have this part solved then now, ok?

So, my beef is with how this visa sticker policy is being implemented. It seems like you could be twice in Thailand for combined period of two weeks and be rejected because you have two stickers.

And I find this inconsiderate and unreasonable. I have no problem with Thailand saying at one point - enough, we are going to change our policies. It's their country. But I am disappointed in this being done the way it is, especially in the recent 'pro-democracy' context.

You do have a valid point with the scattergun and otherwise arbitrary application of this admittedly nebulous 'too many stickers' approach at the Vientiane Embassy. It's wrong and discriminatory... but there is a solution. Go get a visa back home. This is the nearest/cheapest place to Thailand to get abused by a Thai consular person. If you don't have an inkling of why they are behaving this way, you are missing a whole lot about life in LOS. It is NOT the enchanted kingdom anymore, hasn't been for quite a while (if it ever was that is).

I also want to mention, that it is much easier to judge others by the people who got their lives secure here. You were lucky, smarter, or whatever, than those others. Good for you. Why not to help those weaker but not bad out there, those stuck in uncertain situation, consider help and give a practical advise. Bashing and intellectualizing will make someone feel good, self-assured of having control over your own life and perhaps a bit of intoxication on the feeling of being powerful. ButnNo matter what, almost anyone of us can end up in dire straits one day, willingly or not, and I am sure any help and compassion offered in a difficult situation would be returned one day. That's the theory of making lives of people happier, at least, and this place a better one. Understanding, consideration, and help in resolving bad happenings. Can you expect that from a government, by definition of it? It would be great if we could do it at least in this small expat community.

The practical advice has been given over and over and over again in this thread and hundreds of others. It is just that some people are deluded that because Thailand is an easy touch in most matters, not only 'tourist' immigration, that if you ask the right people, bung the right official and hang around long enough, all the problems will eventually go away. TV (this forum) is legend for giving well considered advice based on practical, hands-on experience and correcting the mistaken beliefs and discounting the anecdotal tales that abound. It is also noted for supporting, even actively helping those with a real problem in LOS. The fact that a few hundred people find it a bit harder and more expensive to legally stay in their chosen domicile really is not that big a problem. It certainly isn't Thailand's problem.

[NanLaew]

This report doesn't actually specify what "she did get". Despite the count of previous stamps, did she at least get the single entry tourist visa?

Yes blake... if you read the whole thread, around the middle, the lawyer lady that the OP is talking about contributed with the notice that she did indeed get a single entry in lieu of the double she requested.

So, in reality, nobody was too badly inconvenienced or forced to stay in Laos or prevented from entering Thailand.

Edited February 11, 2011 by NanLaew

[Arkady]

It was here, for a very long time, so an excuse of 'in other countries you can't do it' so they all off the sudden scrap it just doesn't cut as civilized and considerate of people who built their lives here. It's almost like a call for repatriation, not a very humanitarian thing to do. I really feel sorry for all those people. And sure, some got that citizenship, some didn't. But Thailand allowed this type of life and the visa runs, so it should take some responsibility for it now. Let's say tell people - take care of your affairs, because we will be implementing such rule in 6, 12, or whatever months. I can't hide the impression that people being treated like and inanimate objects, and certainly this doesn't impress me. It makes me want to be cynical.

Unfortunately this how things are done in Thailand. They like to have fairly strict laws but allow flexibility in the interpretation, so they can adjust things from time to time without having to change the law. You could say the same about land ownership laws. It suited them to let foreigners buy land through Thai companies for decades. At first, there were no condos and Thai wives of foreigners were not allowed to buy land. A handful of long term expats bought land through companies as the only alternative to renting a house or apartment. Much later the situation was perceived to have got out of hand with foreigners buying houses and land all over the country and the company loophole has all but been shut down since 2006. Now rightly or wrongly they think the situation with foreigners staying in Thailand without proper visas has got out of hand and seem to be attempting to enforce the existing regulations more strictly. I find it sad that people may be evicted as a result of this but it doesn't seem a great idea to built your life in a country where you can only get a temporary tourist visa. I also find it sad that many Thais and others from developing countries build lives in Western countries working illegally without working visas. When they are caught their new lives are over and they get summarily booted out and blacklisted.

[CobraSnakeNecktie]

I just got back from VTE with a fresh double TV. I had a new passport so it was not a problem. Quite a few people tried for doubles who had tons of prior TV's and just got singled. I didn't see or hear anyone shutdown with no TV. I got a late number and had to sit there while most everyone went thru and just didn't seem much disappointment. A good number of people with lots of prior stickers got doubles also. One scruffy beach bum looking guy was hooting like he won the lottery after bagging a double and he had years of prior TV's. I don't know what if any pattern there is at this point because this guy did not look presentable at all.

Outside the various agents gave varying claims on being able to get a little more sway with the officials. YMMV but the guy down the street in front of the filipino hotel seemed the most professional and connected. PM me if you want his number to run your situation down with him before arriving.

I think its very likely the new recently appointed consulate general or whatever his title is has put down new short term rules to get more business after the fee's go back into effect.

If they were giving away lots more doubles then it would be months and months before the cash flow started back up.

Before a bunch of wild prognostications about new policies I would just plan on possibly less than a double before March 31th and afterward I would not be at all surprised if back to easy doubles again.

Edited February 12, 2011 by CobraSnakeNecktie

[Madivad]

 At first, there were no condos and Thai wives of foreigners were not allowed to buy land.

is this still the case, I read a news article recently saying a thai wife of foreigner couldn't buy land without her husbands approval. Is this really (or still) the case?

Also, the above quote I got from my daily digest, yet when I come to the forum and look for the same timestamp, I can't find it. (I'm on an iPad so I can't search the page)... So, I made the quote from the apparently unedited post, but had it reflect what I read in my digest ... I'm confused on this one

[NanLaew]

A Thai woman married to a foreigner is no longer prevented from buying land even if she has taken her foreign husbands family name and has changed her ID card to show this.

[lopburi3]

However she will be asked to confirm that the money be her own and husband asked to confirm his understanding that it is not joint marriage property.

[Arkady]

At first, there were no condos and Thai wives of foreigners were not allowed to buy land.

is this still the case, I read a news article recently saying a thai wife of foreigner couldn't buy land without her husbands approval. Is this really (or still) the case?

Also, the above quote I got from my daily digest, yet when I come to the forum and look for the same timestamp, I can't find it. (I'm on an iPad so I can't search the page)... So, I made the quote from the apparently unedited post, but had it reflect what I read in my digest ... I'm confused on this one

The Land Code doesn't specifically cover the issue of Thais with foreign spouses at all but ministerial regulations prohibited Land Dept officials from allowing a transfer of land to a Thai woman who was known to be either married to or cohabiting with a foreign man (cohabiting with foreign women was OK!). In 1999 a new ministerial regulation removed the gender bias and allowed Thais with a foreign spouse (whether legally married or simply cohabiting) to buy land, if both parties sign a standard declaration that the funds used to purchase the land are the Thai partner's property alone and that the land will not be considered part of the conjugal property (that can be divided in the event of divorce). Thus the situation was made much easier for Thai women with foreign spouses but slightly more complicated for Thai men with foreign spouses. Thai-foreign couples who live together without being married theoretically risk prosecution for buying land without signing this declaration, although this is very unlikely to happen.

My understanding of the spousal consent issue is that it is required for purchase and sale of conjugal property (Sin Somros). A Thai male or female, who is married to another Thai, should obtain spousal consent to buy property and this is registered with the Land Dept. I am not sure how diligent Land Dept officials are in ensuring spousal consent is obtained, especially in the case of Thai males. It is often not clear from ID cards and Tabien Baan whether some one is married or not. Women can now retain their family names and the title Nangsao (Miss), or revert back to that later on. Married couples are often not on the same Tabien Baan. Anyway once spousal consent is registered to buy a property, it will also be required to sell it. So the purpose of this is actually to protect people from having conjugal property sold from under them without their knowledge, although forged spousal consents to sell property are unfortunately very common. Now to answer your question. Because a Thai-foreign couple have to sign the declaration that the (landed) property will remain the personal property (Sin Suan Tua) of the Thai spouse, there is no need for spousal consent. The cases of condos are a little less clear cut. If one of a foreign couple buys a condo that they can legally register in their own name, he or she should obtain spousal consent. If a foreigner with a Thai spouse buys a condo, he or she should also obtain spousal consent. If a Thai spouse of a foreigner buys a condo, I am not sure how the Land Dept treats it because foreigners are allowed to own condos but only up to 49% of the usable space in the building. I suspect that it assumes the property cannot be owned by foreigners, since the foreign limit could be full or fill up in future, and requires the declaration, rather than spousal consent.

Interesting fact: signing the spousal consent for his wife to buy land from a government controlled entity in a shady deal was what got Thaksin convicted and sentenced to two years in prison for corruption. Without his signed spousal consent form, there would have been no case.

Tip: if you buy a house in the name of your Thai wife, most Land Dept offices (at least in Bangkok and other major urban areas) will allow you to register a life time usufruct agreement on the title deed for nil rent and consequently nil tax. This means that she (or her heirs, if she predeceases you) can't sell it or mortgage it. Technically your usufruct right allows you to rent the land to a third party (your farang kids maybe) for 30 years without the owner's consent and the rental agreement would still be valid if you passed on but most Land offices would probably want the owner's consent anyway to cover themselves.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Arkady

[Madivad]

Clear as mud. Actually I do get most of it. Intereting. The main part that concerns me here:

We want to buy house/land but we have to sign a declaration that it's her money we buy it with. We have no other choice, basically we (and everyone else) has to lie about it. No problem. I'm happy to brin the money into the country.

But then, in the unfortunate demise of the relationship, if we decide to sell the property she has to consent. Otherwise it just remains her property (since it was her money that bought it). But even if you sell under these circumstances then any proceeds would probably remain hers too since it was hers to begin with. Yeah?

I'm suspecting there are ways I can be somewhat protected, but darn. This is risky.

Lucky I love my wife! Or more to the point, she loves me.

;-)

Anyway sorry for dragging this off topic. But very interesting, nonetheless. Thanks for the info Arcady!

[tropo]

Lucky I love my wife! Or more to the point, she loves me.

;-)

...well so you think anyway. Plenty of foreigners come to grief thinking that. I doubt you'll ever get deep inside their heads.

The only way to test your theory is to see how long she would support you if you were totally broke.

Edited February 12, 2011 by tropo

[appropriate]

^ ^ If you love your wife, go for it.

Just remember, don't invest more in Thailand than you can walk away from.

Edited February 12, 2011 by appropriate

[Maestro]

Changed "Vientane" to "Vientiane" in the topic title to facilitate searches.

[Madivad]

So less visits to thailand with the wife.... = less visits with the in-laws....

This could have saved my marrriage

Hahahahahahaha

[Madivad]

^ ^ If you love your wife, go for it.

Just remember, don't invest more in Thailand than you can walk away from.

Sound advice. But I think I'll be investing it at home. Seems a little safer!

[Madivad]

I know this thread is about tourist visas, but what are the neighboring countries rules in o-types? I know that KL gives yearly if you have 100K in a thai bank account, but what about Lao and Cambodia? Just curious

Edit: forgot to mention, o-type based on marriage

Edited February 13, 2011 by Madivad

[Mario2008]

Neighbouring countries are not willing to provide a multiple non-O, only single entries. They want you to apply for an extension of stay in Thailand.

There are some good signs about Indonesia (Bali) but to few to be sure.

[soloman]

I cannot find it in here, and I would like to know... is there an Official Position for How Many Tourist Visa page stickers a person can have in their passport? Maybe someone who can fluently speak Thai knows, or can ascertain, the answer. I assume the 'Official Position' relates to ALL Embassies/Consulates, and not just Vientiane. Once we know the 'Official Position', then we will know that over and above this number is up to the flexibility of the particular Officer dealing with it.

[Richard4849]

Soloman...you haven't been around Thailand long, have you? LOL.

[Arkady]

Clear as mud. Actually I do get most of it. Intereting. The main part that concerns me here:

We want to buy house/land but we have to sign a declaration that it's her money we buy it with. We have no other choice, basically we (and everyone else) has to lie about it. No problem. I'm happy to brin the money into the country.

But then, in the unfortunate demise of the relationship, if we decide to sell the property she has to consent. Otherwise it just remains her property (since it was her money that bought it). But even if you sell under these circumstances then any proceeds would probably remain hers too since it was hers to begin with. Yeah?

I'm suspecting there are ways I can be somewhat protected, but darn. This is risky.

Lucky I love my wife! Or more to the point, she loves me.

;-)

Anyway sorry for dragging this off topic. But very interesting, nonetheless. Thanks for the info Arcady!

Actually, although indeed off topic, this is an interesting point. The declaration was clearly a stop gap thought up by ministry mandarins to ease the workload of the Land Dept in dealing with the increasing numbers of Thai-foreign couples buying land, without reference to smart lawyers. The ministry's idea was clearly that, in the event of divorce, the foreign spouse has already conceded that the property is the personal property (Sin Suan Tua) of the Thai spouse and that it counts as if the Thai already owned it before marriage and therefore does not need to divide it on divorce. However, there has already been a case that went to the Supreme Court where a foreign husband showed evidence to prove that he had remitted the funds to buy the house from abroad and transferred the entire purchase price to his wife just before the transfer. The Supreme Court found in the foreigner's favour and ordered the property to be divided. I can't find out if the couple actually signed the declaration or whether the wife omitted to tell the Land Dept she had a foreign husband. Anyway the concept of the declaration goes against the concept of division of property acquired after marriage enshrined in the Civil and Commercial Code. It is also possible to argue under the CCC that any contract made between man and wife is null and void (on the grounds that marriage is an emotional relationship). If you are about to marry a Thai and buy landed property in Thailand, you can weigh up whether you want to marry before the purchase and possibly benefit from the Supreme Court ruling in the event of divorce, or marry after the purchase and rest assured that your usufruct agreement cannot be nullified by a court as a contract between man and wife. Between a long shot at half the value minus legal costs and a good shot at life long possession without ownership, the latter is probably a better bet. Going the Supreme Court route there is also a risk of criminal prosecution of both spouses under the Land Code on the grounds the Thai acted as nominee for the foreigner in buying land as well as being charged with lying to a government official.

The fact that the declaration is a leaky quick fix that lawyers could run horses and carts through implies for me that it will not last indefinitely and that sometime in the future Thai spouses might have to prove that they earned the money to buy the land, unless, of course, they allow foreigners with Thai spouses to buy land, as was proposed for the 1999 Land Code amendment but shot down in Parliament.

[thaigold]

I guess the question begs; why should Thailand open its borders to long stays simply because they have expired their visa options? The only legitimate reason for a long-stay is; work; study; the monk hood; or retirement. Thailand is a proud and sovereign nation. It does not have open borders. Case in point - the UK. Lax immigration controls and thousands coming in on the dole, and unwilling to assimilate.

I know many Farangs who have lived here for years and neither read nor speak the Thai language. This a cultural slight that is not missed by the Thai authorities. Would any sane person emigrate to France and not learn French? Of course not.

Edited February 14, 2011 by thaiphoon
Fonts changed to standard format for better reading

[orang37]

I just got back from VTE with a fresh double TV. I had a new passport so it was not a problem. ... snip ... I would just plan on possibly less than a double before March 31th and afterward I would not be at all surprised if back to easy doubles again.

Sawasdee Khrup, Khun CobraSnakeNeckTie,

Thanks for the thorough report, and congratulations on getting the visa with no hassles ! I think your hypothesis re "no doubles now," to pump up the revenue stream after March 31 is quite reasonable, but hope we'll hear other comments on that, as well.

Like you, I have a new passport: mine has only a second entry validation entered into it at Mae Sai, but I note that below the Thai entry stamp is written the number (and that it's a Laos visa) of the previous Laos double-entry visa, and the number of the old passport.

Wondering if your new passport was also issued in Chiang Mai, and also had a similar notation on whatever stamp was in it: or, if not, what was the difference ? My paranoia whispering to me that if they notice the previous Laos visa, and they do a computer search on the number: bingo.

My 2nd. entry is up March 24: with a one month extension for 1900 baht, that puts me into the "zone" for renewal sometime around April 23 (a Saturday), past Songkraan (April 13-15), which is good (hopefully the slaughter on the highways will have abated ?), and past March 31 ...

So, a choice I have to make would be:

1. go around March 21-23 (before Songkraan would be good, but also possibly more pollution than in April ?) taking a chance on getting a new double free, thus saving the cost of a one month extension (1900 baht), and the possible 2k baht fee after March 31. But, with more risk of arbitrary denial or having to pay a tout ?

2. or, get the one month extension, and, in April, perhaps with more certainty, paying the 2k baht for a double.

My innate paranoia after living here too long (used to be able to get one year non-immigrant visas in Amsterdam easy as pie), is that some new kink in the rules, or their random application to any one individual, will appear: of course this forum, and particularly comments by Lopburi3, and other visa-veterans, is the best place to stay updated on the quivering jello of Thai immigration "interpretations" of the Visa rules !

Re appearance: last time I was in Vientiane there were some amazingly skanky looking critters I always go looking extremely "clean cut."

thanks, ~o:37;

Edited February 13, 2011 by orang37

[Madivad]

This report doesn't actually specify what "she did get". Despite the count of previous stamps, did she at least get the single entry tourist visa?

But if you read the replies you would see what she dud get. Single entry (I think it was 60 days, but it was back a few pages)...

Actually, although indeed off topic, this is an interesting point....

Thanks for the excellent reply, once again.

[Madivad]

This report doesn't actually specify what "she did get". Despite the count of previous stamps, did she at least get the single entry tourist visa?

Yes blake... if you read the whole thread, around the middle, the lawyer lady that the OP is talking about contributed with the notice that she did indeed get a single entry in lieu of the double she requested.

So, in reality, nobody was too badly inconvenienced or forced to stay in Laos or prevented from entering Thailand.

Dammn. Beaten to the punch. :-)

[MaxYakov]

I guess the question begs; why should Thailand open its borders to long stays simply because they have expired their visa options?

Did someone advocate opening the borders to 'long stays' because of 'expired' visa options by an individual?

The only legitimate reason for a long-stay is; work; study; the monk hood; or retirement.

This must be the 'short' list or are you ignoring minor things such as a lower cost of living, female companionship, temperate climate, interesting folks such as yourself, etc.?

I know many Farangs who have lived here for years and neither read nor speak the Thai language. This a cultural slight that is not missed by the Thai authorities.

You're sounding to me like you could be one of those alleged 'authorities' that have been slighted. I can think of at least one good reasons for not learning the Thai language - an unwillingness to invest the time required to become fluent. There is also the cost/benefit issue, depending on one's situation and this should not be taken as a 'slight' in my opinion.

Would any sane person emigrate to France and not learn French? Of course not.

Would one compare apples to oranges? Of course not. How many freeway signs in France are bilingual, as an example? A better question would be: Why would any sane person immigrate to Quebec, Canada (where there is also language-schizophrenia) and not learn French? An even better question might be: Why would any sane person immigrate to France (or Quebec, for that matter)? ... but I digress?

[jazzbo]

Re: Kuhn A's post #321 which references Section 96 of The Land Code, the High Priests of Usufruct will not be happy by your suggesting the gift>purchase>usufruct transaction may not 'hold water' especially when the usufruct is granted for zero or token consideration.

Edited February 13, 2011 by jazzbo

[Richard4849]

Does anyone know the Thai word for "usufruct"? In Thai script, please, if possible.

[appropriate]

I cannot find it in here, and I would like to know... is there an Official Position for How Many Tourist Visa page stickers a person can have in their passport? Maybe someone who can fluently speak Thai knows, or can ascertain, the answer. I assume the 'Official Position' relates to ALL Embassies/Consulates, and not just Vientiane. Once we know the 'Official Position', then we will know that over and above this number is up to the flexibility of the particular Officer dealing with it.

The official position:

All visa applications are at the discretion of the officer.

This is the law.

[jazzbo]

this dual language template for usufruct may better help:

http://www.thailandlawonline.com/usufruct-sample-text-contract.html