Popular Post delgarcon Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 If the Thais want to keep track of us, why can't we just pop into the local immigration office or police station every 3 months to get a stamp and maybe pay for the privilege? This would create revenue for the underfunded economy and save us risking life and limb with some lunatic minivan driver, not to mention the loss of revenue afforded to those of us that are in business. I don't know about you lot, but I for one could do without the stress and unnecessary expense of this total waste of my time! Is there any way that we can be represented here or do we just carry on regardless? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieP Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 That is what the "Extension of Stay" is for. As you probably know the extension is available for a number of purposes such as employment or supporting a wife / family. The visa merely provides initial permission to enter the country and allows time for the extension to be applied for. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 It is because of the immigration act of 1979 that only allows for 90 day entries from a visa. A OA visa for retirement is an exception to the rule. If you can get an extension of stay you don't have to leave every 90 days you just report to immigration. Most people that can get a multiple entry visa could qualify for an extension if they wanted to. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 A off topic inflammatory post has been removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delgarcon Posted March 2, 2014 Author Share Posted March 2, 2014 It is because of the immigration act of 1979 that only allows for 90 entries from a visa. If you can get an extension of stay you don't have to leave every 90 days you just report to immigration. Most people that can get a multiple entry visa could qualify for an extension if they wanted to. Tell me more Joe. I am due to leave by the 9th March (90 days after my arrival with a 1 year multiple entry "O" visa) and I live here. Apart from a retirement extension what other options are there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post JLCrab Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 The authorities realize that the OP and others must endure stress, unnecessary expense, and a total waste of their time in their continuing supply of tourist and non-Imm visas and that may exactly be their intent as to discourage others who might be considering a prolonged stay in Thailand on such a basis. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 It is because of the immigration act of 1979 that only allows for 90 entries from a visa. If you can get an extension of stay you don't have to leave every 90 days you just report to immigration. Most people that can get a multiple entry visa could qualify for an extension if they wanted to. Tell me more Joe. I am due to leave by the 9th March (90 days after my arrival with a 1 year multiple entry "O" visa) and I live here. Apart from a retirement extension what other options are there? If you can qualify for a retirement extension that is the way to avoid leaving the country. If you are married to a Thai you can get an extension with lower financial requirements. There is the option of going to school and get extensions for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 The authorities realize that the OP and others must endure stress, unnecessary expense, and a total waste of their time in their continuing supply of tourist and non-Imm visas and that may exactly be their intent as to discourage others who might be considering a prolonged stay in Thailand on such a basis. The immigration act as I said sets the number of days and the reasons that an extension can be obtained. A lot of the problem that the act is 35 years old and thus out of date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delgarcon Posted March 2, 2014 Author Share Posted March 2, 2014 Well, thanks for your efforts joe, but the bottom line is that I have to leave the country again. My question had nothing to do with extension, I'm aware of the options but I guess that my question was a rhetorical one and that there is no reply. JL Crab is probably the nearest to the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 The authorities realize that the OP and others must endure stress, unnecessary expense, and a total waste of their time in their continuing supply of tourist and non-Imm visas and that may exactly be their intent as to discourage others who might be considering a prolonged stay in Thailand on such a basis. The immigration act as I said sets the number of days and the reasons that an extension can be obtained. A lot of the problem that the act is 35 years old and thus out of date. Of the 26+ million visitors to Thailand 2013, the average length of stay (based on past data) was probably around 10 days. For some who want to stay long-time in Thailand but who cannot comply with the existing extension of stay categories the rules may indeed be out of date. I have a feeling that -- given that segment represents such a small component of the overall arrival base -- there are those in authority who are happy to have the regulations just as they are today. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Somtamme Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 It's a good question, leaving a country whilst your still there is no justification for simply to re-new or extend a visa. The Act is old and there is ample case for review to allow more effective method or policy for control. It also has something to do with lack of effective representation for migrants and current restrictive policies for Thai citizenship. The end of the day if someone is extremely unlikely to be a financial burden and during their stay significantly contributes to the economy should be sufficient reason for acceptance into this community. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 So as to this topic as to many topics before, there seems to be the tone "Don't they realize ...?" to which I reply "Yes .. they realize." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Somtamme Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 " It's not just authorities or political viewpoint that has to change, the Thai families that many are part of could also help bring a change to an archaic policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Like Thai Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Do you have to leave every 90 days when you have a work permit ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Do you have to leave every 90 days when you have a work permit ? Only if the company you are working for and/or your salary does not meet the requirements for an extension of stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 " It's not just authorities or political viewpoint that has to change, the Thai families that many are part of could also help bring a change to an archaic policy. Great -- next time you visit Chaeng Wattana look for this: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Gsxrnz Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 The Thai specific brand of xenophobie requires that foreigners are not allowed to own land, become a Thai Citizen (irrevocable), have permanent (irreevocable) residency status, vote, run for electoral office, practice law, or hold any position of administrative authority. Yeah, yeah, there are possible technical exceptions to this, but using "irrevocable" means that there are very few. Foreigners are therefore reminded that they are here at the whim of the Thai government, can be expelled without notice, and can never gain the rights and priveleges afforded a Thai National by being required to visa runs, 90 day reporting, annual extension renewals etc. I'm not complaining about the situation, just stating that the visa and residency laws (and dozens of other laws restricting foreign involvement) simply reflect their feelings of historical independence, sovereignty, and xenophobia. 14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Maestro Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 Well, thanks for your efforts joe, but the bottom line is that I have to leave the country again. My question had nothing to do with extension, I'm aware of the options but I guess that my question was a rhetorical one and that there is no reply. JL Crab is probably the nearest to the mark. With your visa, you have to leave Thailand at the latest 90 days after every entry because this is the visa you applied for and received. The multiple-entry non-O visa is designed for people who need to visit Thailand several times a year, for one of the purposes for which this visa is offered. It is not for the purpose to live in Thailand for one year at a time. It is for people who live outside Thailand and visit Thailand for a short period at a time. Therefore, since you say that you live in Thailand, it seems that you applied for the wrong visa to suit your purpose. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario2008 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 The Thai specific brand of xenophobie requires that foreigners are not allowed to own land, become a Thai Citizen (irrevocable), have permanent (irreevocable) residency status, vote, run for electoral office, practice law, or hold any position of administrative authority. Yeah, yeah, there are possible technical exceptions to this, but using "irrevocable" means that there are very few. Foreigners are therefore reminded that they are here at the whim of the Thai government, can be expelled without notice, and can never gain the rights and priveleges afforded a Thai National by being required to visa runs, 90 day reporting, annual extension renewals etc. I'm not complaining about the situation, just stating that the visa and residency laws (and dozens of other laws restricting foreign involvement) simply reflect their feelings of historical independence, sovereignty, and xenophobia. You can get Permanent residency and you can even become a Thai national. You cannot be expelled without notice and have a right to appeal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gsxrnz Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 The Thai specific brand of xenophobie requires that foreigners are not allowed to own land, become a Thai Citizen (irrevocable), have permanent (irreevocable) residency status, vote, run for electoral office, practice law, or hold any position of administrative authority. Yeah, yeah, there are possible technical exceptions to this, but using "irrevocable" means that there are very few. Foreigners are therefore reminded that they are here at the whim of the Thai government, can be expelled without notice, and can never gain the rights and priveleges afforded a Thai National by being required to visa runs, 90 day reporting, annual extension renewals etc. I'm not complaining about the situation, just stating that the visa and residency laws (and dozens of other laws restricting foreign involvement) simply reflect their feelings of historical independence, sovereignty, and xenophobia. You can get Permanent residency and you can even become a Thai national. You cannot be expelled without notice and have a right to appeal. Read my post again and you will see I am not in disagreement with you. "Very few" was the operative phrase I used in regard to those that have gained permanent residency or become a Thai National. And are they truly irrevocable anyway? Permanent Residency even in NZ (and I suspect the majority of countries), can be revoked in specific circumstances. Regarding expulsion without notice (with reference to foreigners), I'm sure there is a right of appeal of sorts. But let's face it, if one official has decided to expel you, it's unlikely another official is going to rescind that decision. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post ubonjoe Posted March 2, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted March 2, 2014 There are more people than you think that have permanent residency than you believe. The same for citizenship. For permanent residency to be cancelled requires the approval of the the immigration committee and final approval by the interior minister. It is not as easy as you think. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario2008 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Not many people chose to apply, as to irrevocable that is as you say in many Western countries also not the case. The Thai rules are harsher than others in that respect. A single official can not expel you, those decisions are made at high level and appeal is at the highest level. No official want to give as reason that he doesn't like you. He will have to show a very good reason, supported by his superiors. Only in case of a criminal conviction can it be almost automatically. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davejones23 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 The OP should be thankful that it's so easy to come and live here. It's much more difficult in Western countries. Apart from the EU, Thailand is one of the easiest options for British people if they want to live abroad. Try going to live in somewhere like USA for a year and see what they say. If you don't like the rules, then choose another country where the rules are more to your liking. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EBlair48 Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 (edited) ^ Interesting article in the Bkk Post Magazine this week about this subject that contradicts your post- essentially how easy it is for Thais to go to US and work, legally or not. Plus all a Thai couple have to do is give birth to a baby and Voila , they can apply for citizenship to care for their new US citizen baby. Sorry, I've been hassled too many times at the immigration office for under table money, even when I am 100 % compliant to buy any of the " it's so easy, blah blah go home if you don't like it " BS . I refuse to pay, so I go on 90 day, life- threatening stamp runs. Edited March 2, 2014 by EBlair48 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancelot Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Most countries grant visas for specific time periods and require tourists/expats to leave after a certain number of days/months. Personally, I think it makes it easy for immigration authorities to track/control aliens residing in their country. And they really don't care if it is inconvenient for the alien 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delgarcon Posted March 3, 2014 Author Share Posted March 3, 2014 Well, thanks for your efforts joe, but the bottom line is that I have to leave the country again. My question had nothing to do with extension, I'm aware of the options but I guess that my question was a rhetorical one and that there is no reply. JL Crab is probably the nearest to the mark. With your visa, you have to leave Thailand at the latest 90 days after every entry because this is the visa you applied for and received. The multiple-entry non-O visa is designed for people who need to visit Thailand several times a year, for one of the purposes for which this visa is offered. It is not for the purpose to live in Thailand for one year at a time. It is for people who live outside Thailand and visit Thailand for a short period at a time. Therefore, since you say that you live in Thailand, it seems that you applied for the wrong visa to suit your purpose. Ok Maestro, I don't want to get married and I don't want a retirement extension, I just want to spend most of my time in Thailand, please tell me what Visa I should have applied for. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineconehead Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Very interesting points being made here all of which likely have a piece of the picture, I'll add mine. Visa run companies must make a pretty darn good amount of money to spread around. Even though the whole practice could be done away with so the 'visitor' would have more money to spend locally. I also think that the control aspect of this is VERY important. Realistically, the Thai authorities probably figure that the type of person that engage in the 90 day shuffle, probably aren't the type they really want around for more than one or two (or is it three) 90 day periods (hence the recent posts about red stamping that I've seen here). They don't want the problems anymore than they have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masuk Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 As Lancelot states, it makes it easier for Immigration authorities to keep track of us 'aliens'. I once read that Immigration do this to keep track of criminal elements. As you can see, it's a huge success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLCrab Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 Query: I'm not interested in complying with any of the conditions that the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs / Thai Immigration Bureau have established for a long-term stay in Thailand so how can I stay long-term in Thailand? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minnehaha Posted March 3, 2014 Share Posted March 3, 2014 So as to this topic as to many topics before, there seems to be the tone "Don't they realize ...?" to which I reply "Yes .. they realize." maybe... but I think it is more likely... they don't care. They have a bureaucracy to support (employ). Government agencies are not in the business of getting rid of their employees... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now