Live In Thailand Long-Term On Triple-Entry Tourist Visas?

[thaitanic]

I am British, 46 y/o. Is it possible to live in Thailand long-term(ish, until I get to 50) on triple-entry tourist visas issued in the UK by Hull?

Basically I would do 2 short visa runs (after 60 days), then go back to UK for the next triple-entry tourist visa (approx twice a year) and stay 2-4 weeks in the UK each time.

Any hitches with this approach? I heard something about only being able to spend half the time in Thailand. Or does that just apply for those who show up without a visa?

Thanks!

[Mario2008]

That rule doens't exist any longer, so yes it is feasable as long as the consulate is willing to keep isuing you a tourist visa.

You do know you can extend a torist visa entry of 60 days by 30 days for 1,900 baht.

Another possibility is to go and study in Thailand. A curse of 4 hours a week would qualify you for an ED-visa if the school is qualified.

[thaitanic]

That rule doens't exist any longer, so yes it is feasable as long as the consulate is willing to keep isuing you a tourist visa.

Thanks! Does that rule not even exist anymore for those showing up without a visa?

You do know you can extend a torist visa entry of 60 days by 30 days for 1,900 baht.

I had heard that but the Hull consulate document says "Please note it is not generally possible to extend a stay in Thailand. Extensions of stay are granted only in exceptional circumstances and are at the discretion of the Thai immigration officer", but I guess money talks. Do you know roughly how long it takes to extend in Bangkok? A quick in-and-out or all morning? All day? Any "shenanigans" likely?

Another possibility is to go and study in Thailand. A curse of 4 hours a week would qualify you for an ED-visa if the school is qualified.

"Curse" lol. Very true, given my language ability. That sounds like a lot less hours than in the past. I can't find any reference to it in the documents on the Hull site. If you have one of those, do you still need to do 90-day visa runs, or can you just report at Bangkok immigration? And do you need to show evidence of on-going education each time you re-enter/renew?

[lopburi3]

Yes that rule is no more - was dropped when then changed to 15 day visa exempt entry by land.

Tourist visas can not be extended for other reasons - but you can extend for 30 more days of tourist travel.

Yes you must show school paperwork updated each time but do not have to depart - you extend for 1,900 baht every 90 days.

[thaitanic]

Thanks!

I'm still interested to know how many hours a typical visit to Bkk immigration takes for extending either tourist or ED visas, if any Bangnkokians are reading.

Also, just a quickie while I have you experts' attention... (planning in advance)... If you have a non-O over-50 retirement visa, do you have to do 90-day visa runs or can you just report at the immigration office?

[lopburi3]

You have a one year permitted to stay (extension) for retirement and have to report address (can be done by mail) every 90 days if you do not leave the country.

Extension time depends on queue time - actual process takes about 10 minutes but could be hour or more wait.

[Boyce]

I' seen all different priced Ed-Visas, there's one in Jomtien posted outside imigration anyone know the name of the company they were offering a good deal last time i read the poster.

[kjhbigv]

I am in a similar position to you, I used to get Multi Entry Non Imm 'O' Visa's (four in total) = 15mths each. Last year when I renewed at Hull, as expected they would not issue another, even though I did supply enough paperwork and evidence for one, with the one exception, I am not 50! Worth a try! Instead they gave me a Triple Entry Tourist Visa.

This is my first triple entry tourist visa and on each one I have extended for another 30 days at immigration with no problems at all, just a formality, cost is 1900baht. So this time I have had 60+30+60+30+60+30 days. I extend in CM and takes a few hours. normally.

I will now head back to UK and apply for another triple entry tourist visa and see no reason for them not to issue another.

Personally, I don't really understand the age 50 rule, I can prove everything a 50 year old can prove, including income derived from the UK, why exclude under 50's who are in the same financial position as someone over 50?

[lopburi3]

Because the extension is for retirement and the great majority of people under age 50 would not really be retired - it only lowered from age 60 to 50 a little more than a decade ago.