How to apply for the O-A Visa - Replacement Thread

[Robert333]

Hello,

I offer this corrected version, in replacement for my earlier Thread (of earlier today 12.1.2014), which I was unable to edit.

O-A Visa application:

As a recent applicant, I hope my comments which follow, will assist prospective applicants.

This applies to a UK citizen in the UK, applying for the O-A visa.

My comments regarding the "Required Documents" section, are in italics.

Please note that the requirements could change at any time, so you need to check the website and attend the Consular Section to ensure you have up-to-date information.

REQUIRED DOCUMENTS

http://www.thaiembassyuk.org.uk/?q=node/51

1) “Validity of passport at least 1 year”

This must be submitted when making the application. It will be returned to you when you collect your visa.

2) “Three (3) visa application forms and 3 passport size recent photographs”

Number of Photographs:

You will require a total of Four (4) passport size recent photographs, because you will need 3 photos for the Visa forms, and 1 for applying for the Police Certificate.

Type Of Visa Requested:

If you wish to apply for a Multiple visa (a visa which can be used for multiple entries into the Kingdom) ensure you place an “M” in the “Type of Visa Requested” box,

(that is within: Row: “Non Immigrant Visa, Column: “No. Of Entry”).

“Purpose of current visit”:

For the O-A visa ,you can put: “Retirement”.

“Evidence substantiating purpose of visit:

For the O-A visa, you can leave this blank.

“Duration of proposed stay”:

For the O-A visa, you can put: “One year”.

3) “Non-Immigrant “O-A” (Long Stay) Form”

“Monthly Income”:

For the O-A visa, you can leave this blank.

“Reference person in Thailand”:

You can here put “Self”.

4) “Copy of bank statement having in possession of annually income equivalent to Thai currency at
least 800,000 Baht or monthly income 65,000 Baht. (approximately GBP 14,000.00/annum)”

Warning:

The bank statement MUST be from your CURRENT account.

No other bank account is acceptable, even if you have instant access to it !

I was informed by the Consular Section that as long as this document is signed by a solicitor, you will not additionally need to send this for legalisation to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (but I decided to additionally send it to the F&CO anyway).

When submitting your visa application to the Consular Section, you will need to have a copy of the notarized document to submit together with the original.

5) “In case attached copy of bank statement, the original reference letter from the banking concerned is necessary.”

If you have the bank statement (4 above), then you do not need this letter.

6) “Criminal Record from own country and country of permanent residence with validity of at least 3 months. Applicants residing in the United Kingdom will need to have a police clearance issued only from the Scotland Yard.”

This means that you must apply for a “Police Certificate”, the application form for which, can be downloaded from the “Association of Chief Police Officers”, at:

http://www.acro.police.uk/police_certificates.aspx

On the application form ensure you include in the appropriate place, any previous name(s) that you have had. These previous names will then appear on the Police Certificate.

- - - -

[inserted note about the Visa Application form:

The Visa Application form has a section on it, for: “Applicant’s Father Name”.]

- - - -

Ensure you enclose the appropriate ACPO fee for the service you want from them.

If you want the ACPO “Premium Service” for faster processing, you must enclose the fee for this, plus ensure you use the special address shown on the form for the “Premium Service”!

Warning:

Ensure that the form you use is entitled:

“Police Certificate Application Form”.

Although there are other procedures for confirming you have no convictions, ONLY the “Police Certificate” confirmation is acceptable for this visa!

The application form requires a Counter-Signatory (in similar manner as applying for a passport).

The counter-signatory must do two things:

They must sign the back of the photograph, and also complete a section on the form.

When submitting your visa application to the Consular Section ,you will need to have a copy of the legalised document to submit together with the original.

7) “Medical Record proving applicant has never been infected with contagious disease with validity at least 3 months (in accordance with Immigration Act B.E.2522)”

Must be legalised.

8) “In case wishing to be accompanied by spouse, the marriage certificate will be attached. But spouse will be granted Non-Immigrant “O” instead of “O-A”(Long Stay)”

VISA FEE:

For an O-A Visa for Multiple entries, the current fee is £125 which must be paid in cash.

(The fee currently show on the Consular website has not yet been updated.)

(I would also recommend you take with a further amount in cash in case the fee changes.)

“Note: Documents as stated in 4 - 8 must be certified by Notary Public or from the competent authority concerned of the country of application.”

This means you must go to a solicitor who is a notary.

Notaries are solicitors who specialize in certifying the genuineness of a document.

The Foreign & Commonwealth Office also have a similar function called “legalisation”.

Warning:

According to the Consular section you do not need to send your bank statement to the Foreign & Commonwealth Office if you have already had it notarized, (although I decided to send it to the F&CO anyway).

If you decide to have your Bank Statement legalized by the F&CO, the F&CO will NOT legalise it unless it has FIRST been signed by a notary!

- - - - - - - -

Getting documents “legalized” by the Foreign & Commonwealth Office:

The Medical Certificate and the Police Certificate need to be legalized by the F&CO.

(The Bank Statement must be notarized by a notary.)

You can commence the Foreign & Commonwealth Office Legalization procedure by downloading and completing the F&CO application form and paying their fee, at:

https://www.gov.uk/get-document-legalised

I would recommend you use their system for paying Online, and then thereafter send in your documents to them.

(They do NOT accept personal cheques.

They do accept business cheques.)

Warning:

When paying the F&CO online, you MUST take a copy of some sort (I used a screen capture) of their Confirmation of Payment page showing their Payment Reference Number.

You are required to enclose a copy of this, with your documents and application form!

You CANNOT deliver the documents in person to the F&CO.

I would recommend sending your documents to them by “Special Delivery”

(NOT “by Recorded Delivery”),

or use a courier.

I would recommend you pay the F&CO their additional fee for Courier delivery.

Notarizing the Bank Statement:

I used De Pinna notaries, of 35 Piccadilly, London W1J 0LJ.

Tel: 020-7208 2900.

(This is an example. Other notaries are available.)

Warning:

Although De Pinna also have an address at Canary Wharf, London E14, do NOT go there, as they do NOT accept documents for notarizing at their Canary Wharf address!

Estimate of the costs of obtaining the documents:

Note:

This is an estimate of the costs for obtaining the required documents, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the fee to be paid to the Thai Consular Section.

These costs will change with time.

Medical Certificate:

Doctor £25 (Each doctor has their own scale of charges).

Foreign &Commonwealth Office £30 (a per document fee).

Bank Statement:

De Pinna £90 for the bank statement (each notary will have their own scale of charges).

Police Certificate (ACPO):

£54 (comprising “Standard Service” £45 plus “Next Day Delivery” £9).

Note:

ACPO also have a “Premium Service” for quicker processing, for a higher fee.

Foreign &Commonwealth Office £30 (a per document fee).

Additional:

Foreign &Commonwealth Office Courier delivery fee £6.

Total: £235.

Summary of Procedure:

Act swiftly with notarizing / legalizing – Remember the documents to be submitted have a validity of not more than 3 months (and also double-check this period, as it may change).

Obtain your documents and get them legalized / notarized.

The Visa application requires the address in Thailand at which you will initially be staying and also your flight numbers.

I therefore recommend you attend the Consular section to check your documents, BEFORE you book your trip.

If the Consular Section say your documents are okay, book your trip taking into account that you must use the visa once issued, within 3 months (but you MUST first double-check this period as it may change).

Complete the two Visa forms.

Warning:

Be aware when the Consular Section is open, by doing:

Check for both the Embassy Holidays and also their hours of opening, at:

http://www.thaiembassyuk.org.uk/?q=node/36

Edited January 12, 2014 by Robert333

[JAS21]

Why bother getting an O-A when getting an O is so easy and the extending requirements are the same ... Years ago I extended mine due to retirement before 3 months ... so no visa runs required. To me that was the preferred way.

Still everyone to their own I suppose.

Edited January 13, 2014 by JAS21

[Tafia]

The main advantage of the OA is that no funds need to be in Thailand for almost 2 years.

An acceptable period to finally make up your mind if staying full time is for you.

[roquefort]

Robert, thanks for this very useful information.

I will going back to UK in August to apply for the same visa.

Did you apply at the London embassy or at a consulate and how long did it take to process your application? Did you have to make an appointment?

Thanks

[Mario2008]

You must apply at the embassy.

[vitp4145]

I am in the process of applying for the O-A (Long Stay) Visa and I am very thankful for the information contained in this thread.

Currently, I have my Medical Certificate and my Police Certificate, but am experiencing a very frustrating delay as my bank says it will take 10-15 working days to post me a paper statement for my current account.

Crucially, though it seems rather odd, you are required to have booked your flight prior to making your visa application itself. What if - for some reason - they rejected your application? For that reason, I am going to follow the advice given in the original post and visit the Consular Section (London) to make sure my documentation is correct. Am I right in assuming they will verify the "correctness" of my documents prior to my spening big bucks to have all three document sets notarised?

I am hoping that they will be happy with just a statement of my current account as sit stands this month (July) and will not require statements that cover the last "x" number of months, as the local notaries here charge £120 per document paper.

[ubonjoe]

There is no requirement to have a ticket when you apply. http://thaiembassyuk.org.uk/?q=node/51

They should verify your documents if you go there.

[vitp4145]

There is no requirement to have a ticket when you apply. http://thaiembassyuk.org.uk/?q=node/51

They should verify your documents if you go there.

But they ask for your flight number on the application form. Might they not also possibly request a look at your e-ticket when you hand in the application forms?

[ubonjoe]

The visa application form is for all types of visas some require you to show a ticket out of the country.

For any non immigrant visa there is no requirement to show a ticket out of the country.

[vitp4145]

The visa application form is for all types of visas some require you to show a ticket out of the country.

For any non immigrant visa there is no requirement to show a ticket out of the country.

Well, thank you for that info. That would be more logical, as I had always thought it a bit odd to abook the flight first, as I have always assumed visas were gotten prior to booking flights/trips.

[moto77]

I came in with 4 copies (in Bangkok), and the immigration official nearly laughed me out of the office. She said 1 copy is sufficient, so don't waste your time making copies if you are applying locally.

Edited July 28, 2014 by moto77

[vitp4145]

I am applying for the O-A Visa from the UK, prior to travelling to Thailand.

I might as well ask here, as you never know what might be acceptable. I have to provide a bank statement to show I have B800,000 or more in a UK current account. I meet that requirement with no worries, but my account has been run online for years now, and the bank stopped sending me printed paper statements in 2012.

I can get a statement printed out at my local branch, which they refer to as a "mini statement". It shows my current balance and my last ten transactions. I queried the Thai Consulate in London as to whether that would be acceptable, or whether they would require a "regular" printed statement ... they replied by copying the text on the website and didn't answer my question at all.

So, does anyone know if a "mini statement" printd out at my local branch would be sufficient? Or do I have to wait for my bank to get their act together and send me a regular printed statement. I've instructed them to send me one, but that was two weeks ago and they say that it could take up to three weeks.

[ubonjoe]

I am not sure but it seems they sort of said yes. If you can get the mini statement stamped and signed by the bank that should be alright.

[vitp4145]

I am not sure but it seems they sort of said yes. If you can get the mini statement stamped and signed by the bank that should be alright.

My bank are none too co-operative, in that today I was told I could have a mini statement, but they would not sign/stamp it. Looks like I am going to have to wait until the printed regular statement arrives in the post.

I find it incredulous that it takes them between 2-3 weeks to furnish a customer of 20+ years with a printed statement.

[vitp4145]

The OP states that 3 visa application forms and three photographs are required ... but the requirements posted on the Thai Consulate website cite only one visa application form with two photographs.

Could anyone with recent experience of this please clarify the contradiction? I'm due to hand in my visa application tomorrow.

[ubonjoe]

The OP states that 3 visa application forms and three photographs are required ... but the requirements posted on the Thai Consulate website cite only one visa application form with two photographs.

Could anyone with recent experience of this please clarify the contradiction? I'm due to hand in my visa application tomorrow.

If you are looking at a consulate website that would be for a non-o because they cannot issue a OA visa only the embassy can do them.

Info here on embassy website. http://thaiembassyuk.org.uk/?q=node/51

[Craig krup]

The whole thing's a bit of a nightmare, isn't it?

So - it seems, unless I'm missing something - people with criminal records can apply for the retirement visa inside Thailand and so avoid the problem of a police check. I doubt that the Thais have got access to the kinds of systems that would allow them to do a check of the same rigour as (say) British criminal records, or they'd do this all the time.

There's also a bloke on the web claiming that if you leave Thailand and fly back in before your O-A expires they'll stamp it and give you another year from that entry date, without showing funds or anything else.

Opinion, and I'd guess experience, also seems to differ when it comes to re-entry permits. Some people say that your O-A allows multiple re-entries within the year of issue and other people say that you need a re-entry permit to protect that visa before you leave.

It's just a porridge. I think you always get this if a system wasn't devised from the outset with a clear view of what you're trying to achieve. The Thais - for example - let anybody and everybody into the country from the UK, so they can't systematically exclude people with medical problems. If they want to exclude long-stay retirees with these problems rather than give them a system they can defeat - notarized documents - why not take a look at them yourself with your own doctor as part of the process?

My head's bursting with the whole thing. Crete's looking a lot easier.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Craig krup

[ubonjoe]

All OA long stay visas are issued as a multiple entry now and are valid for one year from the date of issue.. You can use it up to the enter before date on it and get a one year entry every time. If you use it to do on or before enter before date you will get a new one year entry. After the enter before date you need a re-entry permit to keep that last entry valid if you want to travel.

[Craig krup]

All OA long stay visas are issued as a multiple entry now and are valid for one year from the date of issue.. You can use it up to the enter before date on it and get a one year entry every time. If you use it to do on or before enter before date you will get a new one year entry. After the enter before date you need a re-entry permit to keep that last entry valid if you want to travel.

Right.....I think I understand. When they give you it it'll say something like "Enter before 15th December 2015". If you enter (say) on the 3rd November you've got a year from then, and if you leave and come back in on or before the 15th December you get 12 months from that date. After (in this case) the 15th December if you leave you'll need a re-entry permit so that you've still got the right to come back in and use your remaining portion of the 12 months.

So it kind of is and isn't multiple entry? Before the "use before" it really is multiple entry, and after that you need a re-entry permit. So the visa itself doesn't really allow multiple entry in and of itself, but with a re-entry permit you can come in and use what's left of the twelve months you were initially granted.

There's a bloke on the web who - I think - used his visa before the "enter before" and has inferred that you get twelve months every time you fly out and come back in so long as you do both before the visa expires. Here's what he says,

"The big plus for getting an OA Visa in Australia is that if you leave Thailand during your initial 12 months and then return before its expiry Immigration will stamp your passport at the airport for another 12 months from the date of arrival. That is you don’t need to go through the whole process of proving income/deposit in Thai bank to renew. You automatically get another 12 months".

Now that doesn't sound right to me. I'd like it to be right: my mother would nag without the chance do give me some burdensome and inappropriate gift - like knitted pants and an anvil - every ten months, so I'd like "Tony" to be right, but it doesn't sound right.

[Maestro]

It is true that you get another permission to stay for one year every time you enter before the expiration of the validity period of your visa. The only thing wrong in the text you quoted from another website is the word "renew". The non-O/A visa you have in your passport does not get renewed, nor do you get a new visa. You simply get one more time a one-year permission to stay on the basis of the still valid visa you have.

[Craig krup]

It is true that you get another permission to stay for one year every time you enter before the expiration of the validity period of your visa. The only thing wrong in the text you quoted from another website is the word "renew". The non-O/A visa you have in your passport does not get renewed, nor do you get a new visa. You simply get one more time a one-year permission to stay on the basis of the still valid visa you have.

That's just mental. Why don't more people make more of this? I'm guessing that most retired folk very rarely leave the country.

The implication seems to be:

1) If you get the first visa and fly out and back once a year you avoid ever having to show a baht account.

2) The Thai authorities seem to be assuming that if you can afford to fly out and back you must have money.

Or am I missing something?

Would crossing a land border before expiration do it, or does it have to be a air border? If land why does anyone in (say) Udon ever go through the correct process? If an air border - any air border - why aren't cheap flights to Kuala Lumpur and the like booked solid? It can't be that easy, surely? There was an old Dutch bloke - divorced with two Thai kids, 70 - travelling to Bangkok on the sleeper to fly to KL, moaning about the 800,000B rule. Was he avoiding the problem by flying in and out?

[Maestro]

You are missing the difference between a visa and a permission to stay.

You can make an unlimited number of entries during the one-year validity period of the visa and on every arrival get permission to stay for one year.

Once the visa has expired, you can, with a multiple-entry re-entry permit, make an unlimited number of re-entries during the remaining period of your permission to stay.

[partington]

It is true that you get another permission to stay for one year every time you enter before the expiration of the validity period of your visa. The only thing wrong in the text you quoted from another website is the word "renew". The non-O/A visa you have in your passport does not get renewed, nor do you get a new visa. You simply get one more time a one-year permission to stay on the basis of the still valid visa you have.

That's just mental. Why don't more people make more of this? I'm guessing that most retired folk very rarely leave the country.

The implication seems to be:

1) If you get the first visa and fly out and back once a year you avoid ever having to show a baht account.

2) The Thai authorities seem to be assuming that if you can afford to fly out and back you must have money.

Or am I missing something?

Would crossing a land border before expiration do it, or does it have to be a air border? If land why does anyone in (say) Udon ever go through the correct process? If an air border - any air border - why aren't cheap flights to Kuala Lumpur and the like booked solid? It can't be that easy, surely? There was an old Dutch bloke - divorced with two Thai kids, 70 - travelling to Bangkok on the sleeper to fly to KL, moaning about the 800,000B rule. Was he avoiding the problem by flying in and out?

Yes you are completely missing the point that an O-A visa is valid ( can be used to enter the country at a border) for one year only. A visa is a permission to enter the country.

Attached to each entry is a period of permission to stay. For O-A visas this period is one year. So If you enter on the last day your visa ( entry permission) is valid you etill get a year permission to stay. But your visa (permission to enter) is expired. So once your permission to stay (one year) has elapsed, you cannot leave and re-enter because your permission to enter (visa) has expired.

Instead you apply for the period that you have been allowed to stay on your last entry to be extended, and for this to be successful, you must have the 800 000 baht. That means you can stay, but you still have no visa. You can apply for the permission to stay on that old expired visa to be extended indefinitely by applying for an extension of permission to stay every year. But you never get a new visa (permission to enter) by doing this.

Edited August 8, 2015 by partington

[Craig krup]

You are missing the difference between a visa and a permission to stay.

You can make an unlimited number of entries during the one-year validity period of the visa and on every arrival get permission to stay for one year.

Once the visa has expired, you can, with a multiple-entry re-entry permit, make an unlimited number of re-entries during the remaining period of your permission to stay.

Why introduce new words if they don't signal differences. As Hobbes said, words are but wise men's counters, but they're the money of fools. As Charles Caleb Coulter said, a difference that makes no difference is no difference.

Tony from Pattaya has a "thing". It doesn't matter whether we call it a shmisa, freeza, beeza, or deeza. Let's call it a "deeza".

Tony's deeza allows him to come into Thailand on 1st January 2016 and stay for a year - i.e. he has to leave on or before the 31st December 2016.

If Tony leaves Thailand on the 15th December and returns on the 29th December 2016 - both dates within the twelve months he was originally granted - he'll get another "thing" (whatever we call it) which allows him to stay in Thailand until 28th December 2017.

Now you've assented to this: you've said it's true. The problem is that it's flatly contradictory to every other thing which is said on this issue.

[Craig krup]

It is true that you get another permission to stay for one year every time you enter before the expiration of the validity period of your visa. The only thing wrong in the text you quoted from another website is the word "renew". The non-O/A visa you have in your passport does not get renewed, nor do you get a new visa. You simply get one more time a one-year permission to stay on the basis of the still valid visa you have.

That's just mental. Why don't more people make more of this? I'm guessing that most retired folk very rarely leave the country.

The implication seems to be:

1) If you get the first visa and fly out and back once a year you avoid ever having to show a baht account.

2) The Thai authorities seem to be assuming that if you can afford to fly out and back you must have money.

Or am I missing something?

Would crossing a land border before expiration do it, or does it have to be a air border? If land why does anyone in (say) Udon ever go through the correct process? If an air border - any air border - why aren't cheap flights to Kuala Lumpur and the like booked solid? It can't be that easy, surely? There was an old Dutch bloke - divorced with two Thai kids, 70 - travelling to Bangkok on the sleeper to fly to KL, moaning about the 800,000B rule. Was he avoiding the problem by flying in and out?

Yes you are completely missing the point that an O-A visa is valid ( can be used to enter the country at a border) for one year only. A visa is a permission to enter the country.

Attached to each entry is a period of permission to stay. For O-A visas this period is one year. So If you enter on the last day your visa ( entry permission) is valid you etill get a year permission to stay. But your visa (permission to enter) is expired. So once your permission to stay (one year) has elapsed, you cannot leave and re-enter because your permission to enter (visa) has expired.

Instead you apply for the period that you have been allowed to stay on your last entry to be extended, and for this to be successful, you must have the 800 000 baht. That means you can stay, but you still have no visa. You can apply for the permission to stay on that old expired visa to be extended indefinitely by applying for an extension of permission to stay every year. But you never get a new visa (permission to enter) by doing this.

Okay.

So "Tony from Pattaya" can put off showing the dough for (nearly) two years. He (say) has a visa which allows him to enter and stay from the 1st January 2016 to 31 December 2016. Once he enters the country he can leave and re-enter - correct? He has a visa - a permission to enter - until 30 December (maybe he could enter and turn around on the 31st, but let's leave that to one side). So if he's cute he can leave on (say) 20th December and return on the 23rd 2016: still within his visa. When he enters on the 23rd the immigration official stamps his passport "leave to remain 22nd December 2017", or words to that effect. But as the 31st December 2016 passes Tony can no longer leave and return - he doesn't have a visa. He does, though, have a right to remain until (in this case) 22nd December 2017. He's managed to squeeze nearly two years out of his initial visa.

Is the above broadly right?

Let's suppose he shows the 800,000 and is allowed to stay into 2018: he extends his leave to remain. He (presumably) still doesn't have a visa: he can't leave and come back, but for the purpose of staying in the country he doesn't have to.

I'm guessing that if you have a right to remain because you've showed the 800,000 and filled in the forms there must be a procedure that allows you to go out and come back - given that you've a right to be in the country. That - presumably - is where a travel visa or a re-entry permit comes in, correct?

So, a case study. Davy Smith has an O-A visa and he's flying into Bangkok on 1st January 2016. His backside needs to be out of the country by 31st December 2016 (say). He flies to Kuala Lumpur on 27th December 2016 and comes back on the 28th. Thai immigration stamp his passport, give him twelve months to remain, and he has another happy (almost) year. September 2017 hoves into view and he deposits the 800,000, fills in the forms and at some point in November/December applies to be allowed to stay. This is granted. He does this every year, and he's perfectly happy. In March 2022 he has leave to stay until December 2022, but his mother dies. He has to fly back to the UK. There has to be some way for him to do that and come back to Thailand, show the dough in December, fill in the forms, and continue with his air-conditioned existence. Correct?

[partington]

Yes, as you rightly surmise this is what a "re-entry permit" is.

A visa (permission to enter at a border) can only (except under specialised and specific circumstances) be obtained outside the country. When you are inside the country without a current visa, but with a valid permission to stay and you wish to leave, you buy a "re-entry permit". You can now see the logic behind the terminology. When you leave and return you have a permission to come back in, with your permission to stay period intact, that substitutes for a visa, and can be obtained inside the country.

If you turn up without a re-entry permit under these circumstances you can be admitted, but they will give you a visa waiver entry. For most EU countries this means permission to stay for 30 days. Even if you previously had a year's permission to stay, most of which is still unused, the visa waiver entry stamp for 30 days would supercede, and thus cancel out, your previous permission to stay.

The system is quite logical, given bureaucratic rules are not designed for the ease and advantage of the users of the bureaucracy, but for its administrators.

[Craig krup]

Yes, as you rightly surmise this is what a "re-entry permit" is.

A visa (permission to enter at a border) can only (except under specialised and specific circumstances) be obtained outside the country. When you are inside the country without a current visa, but with a valid permission to stay and you wish to leave, you buy a "re-entry permit". You can now see the logic behind the terminology. When you leave and return you have a permission to come back in, with your permission to stay period intact, that substitutes for a visa, and can be obtained inside the country.

If you turn up without a re-entry permit under these circumstances you can be admitted, but they will give you a visa waiver entry. For most EU countries this means permission to stay for 30 days. Even if you previously had a year's permission to stay, most of which is still unused, the visa waiver entry stamp for 30 days would supercede, and thus cancel out, your previous permission to stay.

The system is quite logical, given bureaucratic rules are not designed for the ease and advantage of the users of the bureaucracy, but for its administrators.

Cheers, thanks a lot.

If you forget the re-entry you're plunged into administrative hell - trying to re-establish what you had. Definitely worth whatever it is - about £20 I think - to avoid that.

Quite excited. Some BA flights were really cheap yesterday .

[Others were cheaper admittedly, but by the time you get out of Abu Dhabi on the stopover you're fluent in Arabic].

[Maestro]

You are missing the difference between a visa and a permission to stay.

You can make an unlimited number of entries during the one-year validity period of the visa and on every arrival get permission to stay for one year.

Once the visa has expired, you can, with a multiple-entry re-entry permit, make an unlimited number of re-entries during the remaining period of your permission to stay.

Why introduce new words if they don't signal differences. As Hobbes said, words are but wise men's counters, but they're the money of fools. As Charles Caleb Coulter said, a difference that makes no difference is no difference.

Tony from Pattaya has a "thing". It doesn't matter whether we call it a shmisa, freeza, beeza, or deeza. Let's call it a "deeza".

Tony's deeza allows him to come into Thailand on 1st January 2016 and stay for a year - i.e. he has to leave on or before the 31st December 2016.

If Tony leaves Thailand on the 15th December and returns on the 29th December 2016 - both dates within the twelve months he was originally granted - he'll get another "thing" (whatever we call it) which allows him to stay in Thailand until 28th December 2017.

Now you've assented to this: you've said it's true. The problem is that it's flatly contradictory to every other thing which is said on this issue.

You asked a question: "am I missing something?"

I took the time and trouble to answer your question as best I could.

Your ungratefulness has been noted, but it will not deter me from continuing to answer questions in this forum.

[SpokaneAl]

The visa application form is for all types of visas some require you to show a ticket out of the country.

For any non immigrant visa there is no requirement to show a ticket out of the country.

Well, thank you for that info. That would be more logical, as I had always thought it a bit odd to abook the flight first, as I have always assumed visas were gotten prior to booking flights/trips.

I just applied for a non Imm o-a in the U.S. and where the form asked about flight info, date etc I just responded with an on or about date and they issued my visa with no problems.

[Craig krup]

You are missing the difference between a visa and a permission to stay.

You can make an unlimited number of entries during the one-year validity period of the visa and on every arrival get permission to stay for one year.

Once the visa has expired, you can, with a multiple-entry re-entry permit, make an unlimited number of re-entries during the remaining period of your permission to stay.

Why introduce new words if they don't signal differences. As Hobbes said, words are but wise men's counters, but they're the money of fools. As Charles Caleb Coulter said, a difference that makes no difference is no difference.

Tony from Pattaya has a "thing". It doesn't matter whether we call it a shmisa, freeza, beeza, or deeza. Let's call it a "deeza".

Tony's deeza allows him to come into Thailand on 1st January 2016 and stay for a year - i.e. he has to leave on or before the 31st December 2016.

If Tony leaves Thailand on the 15th December and returns on the 29th December 2016 - both dates within the twelve months he was originally granted - he'll get another "thing" (whatever we call it) which allows him to stay in Thailand until 28th December 2017.

Now you've assented to this: you've said it's true. The problem is that it's flatly contradictory to every other thing which is said on this issue.

You asked a question: "am I missing something?"

I took the time and trouble to answer your question as best I could.

Your ungratefulness has been noted, but it will not deter me from continuing to answer questions in this forum.

Sorry about that. When I read it I regretted the tone. It's just that if you search "O-A" or "retirement visa" using the search function you get an incredible number of hits, and it's nearly all generated by 1) the lack of a plain vanilla statement by the Thai government dealing with all of the obvious exigencies and possibilities, and 2) the use of technical terms by people who know their use, but where the use isn't transparent.

Imagine if the Thai government offered the following -

Once you have your O-A visa two major issues or questions are likely to arise. 1) Can I leave the country and return during the twelve months I have been allowed to remain in the kingdom after first entering it? 2) What need I do if I wish to remain in the kingdom in the long-term, i.e. well beyond the twelve month stay which my O-A visa initially entitles me to?

Leaving and returning to the kingdom

You are free to come and go as you please up to the last day on which you visa is valid. This will essentially be twelve months after you first entered the kingdom. So if you entered on the first of January 2017 you can leave and return without let, hindrance or any need to make any arrangement with immigration until the 31st December. You cannot......

Basically the government needs to employ someone truly bilingual - like that ginger bloke on Thai TV who is trying to teach English to Thai folk - and pay him for a day of his time. He could grill the civil servants on the rules and then produce web pages and documents free of all ambiguity. That would eliminate 99% of the visa-related traffic on this website.

But, as I say, sorry about the tone. It's hard to read intention from written text. I'd basically gone into teacher-mode.