Options for Tourist visa's seem to be diminishing.

[Haljabra]

Hello Everyone,

 

Just looking for a bit of advice, I will soon have to get another tourist visa but I'm really not sure which embassy I should go to now.

 

1. In Vientiane I got the red stamp.

2. The last visa I got in Savannakhet, I was asked questions about why I've been here so long. proof of income (which I didn't have) things like that. I still got the visa no red stamp but they seemed pretty suspicious. So I didn't want to return there anytime soon.

3. The Latest visa I got from Penang, no problems, no questions asked. 

 

So should I return to Penang or dare go back to Savannakhet or are there any other options.

 

Anyway, whatever thoughts or advice would be appreciated.

 

 

 

 

[ubonjoe]

You should not have a problem in Penang.

[elviajero]

I'd of thought Penang would be the better choice.

[BritTim]

Penang or Hong Kong

[losworld]

Savannakhet no problem.  My understanding was you could get stamped about 3 times then he heat is on so people would switch between Savannakhet and Vientienne.

[BritTim]

4 hours ago, losworld said:

Savannakhet no problem.  My understanding was you could get stamped about 3 times then he heat is on so people would switch between Savannakhet and Vientienne.

 

Generally, Savannakhet is a great place to apply. However, I think they will tend to place some importance on a red stamp from their parent embassy. Once you have a red stamp from Vientiane, it is better to use some other jurisdiction.

[Global Guy]

Do you mean "options for tourist visa is diminishing" for people who want to live permanently in Thailand but on a tourist visa?

 

Or in other words, Thailand is finally enforcing the purpose of a tourist visa...for it to be used by tourists? Not residents?

 

Just looking for clarification.

[Haljabra]

Ok, It looks like I try Penang again.

 

Thanks everyone for your input, it's really appreciated.

[notmyself]

6 hours ago, Haljabra said:

Ok, It looks like I try Penang again.

 

Thanks everyone for your input, it's really appreciated.

 

I'm going down there next week for an SETV and will report on the trip when I get back.

[notmyself]

8 hours ago, Global Guy said:

Do you mean "options for tourist visa is diminishing" for people who want to live permanently in Thailand but on a tourist visa?

 

Or in other words, Thailand is finally enforcing the purpose of a tourist visa...for it to be used by tourists? Not residents?

 

Just looking for clarification.

 

An interesting point when I first heard it but that was more years ago than I care to remember. Rather than take the word of others I did actually go into it with various embassies because holiday does not mean the same thing as tourism. Every time I was told that I needed to obtain a tourist visa because what I did during the time was meaningless. It was up to me if I wished to go look at a new hill every other day or visit various temples or spend the entire time sitting on a beach reading books or painting pictures. You see, I 'holiday' for between 9 and 10 months a year so I'm happy to tick the 'holiday'  box on the rear of the TM6 landing card where it asks 'purpose of visit. Perhaps all those people who tick this box and then engage in tourism should be arrested for a false declaration? Just for clarification.

[jerojero]

Try living on the country legally, instead of a perpetual tourist. If you don't qualify, welcome to a world that majority of people abide. Rule of law applies to you now and you don't like it.

[BritTim]

7 hours ago, jerojero said:

Try living on the country legally, instead of a perpetual tourist. If you don't qualify, welcome to a world that majority of people abide. Rule of law applies to you now and you don't like it.

 

Would you care to quote the article(s) of Thai law he is in violation of by spending long periods of time in Thailand on tourist visas. What is the prescribed penalty for those illegal activities? Why do the Thai authorities have a problem preventing it? Do the immigration officials at the airport have a problem finding out how often he visits Thailand on tourist visas?

 

My own opinion is that changes to the regulations governing tourist entries may well be in the offing. Until that occurs, there is nothing "illegal" about spending 12 months a year in Thailand on tourist entries should you so desire, and if you are willing to go through the hassle of getting many tourist visas.

[LongTimeLurker]

11 hours ago, jerojero said:

Try living on the country legally, instead of a perpetual tourist. If you don't qualify, welcome to a world that majority of people abide. Rule of law applies to you now and you don't like it.

 

There are some circumstances where there is no applicable visa that can be issued so a tourist visa is the only option.

 

For example, immigration do not allow both parents of a minor to have a visa thereby forcing the family to live apart , or for 1 parent to get tourist visas every couple of months.

[ubonjoe]

11 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

For example, immigration do not allow both parents of a minor to have a visa thereby forcing the family to live apart , or for 1 parent to get tourist visas every couple of months.

Not exactly correct. It is possible for the other parent to get a non-o visa. Many embassies and consulates will issue a multiple entry non-o visa that would allow 90 day entries.

[LongTimeLurker]

3 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Not exactly correct. It is possible for the other parent to get a non-o visa. Many embassies and consulates will issue a multiple entry non-o visa that would allow 90 day entries.

 

Can you give me some examples of nearby embassies or consulates that will?

 

HCMC and Liverpool won't

[ubonjoe]

5 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

 

Can you give me some examples of nearby embassies or consulates that will?

 

HCMC and Liverpool won't

Did you try for single single entry? Getting single entries would be better than tourist visas.

Perhaps try at the embassy in London. With enough supporting documents you might get one there (copies of your child and spouses extension and school paper work).

 

[darrendsd]

4 hours ago, BritTim said:

 

Would you care to quote the article(s) of Thai law he is in violation of by spending long periods of time in Thailand on tourist visas. What is the prescribed penalty for those illegal activities? Why do the Thai authorities have a problem preventing it? Do the immigration officials at the airport have a problem finding out how often he visits Thailand on tourist visas?

 

My own opinion is that changes to the regulations governing tourist entries may well be in the offing. Until that occurs, there is nothing "illegal" about spending 12 months a year in Thailand on tourist entries should you so desire, and if you are willing to go through the hassle of getting many tourist visas.

 

You are wasting your time with people like the poster you quoted who seem to think they are special because they are here on retirement or marriage extensions

 

What they don't seem to realize is that they are guests like we all are here and the rules could be changed at any time meaning they could face the same problems that people who live here on TV's do

 

I bet their attitudes change towards people who do live here on TV's change then

 

 

Edited November 20, 2016 by darrendsd

[LongTimeLurker]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

Did you try for single single entry? Getting single entries would be better than tourist visas.

Perhaps try at the embassy in London. With enough supporting documents you might get one there (copies of your child and spouses extension and school paper work).

 

 

They both will only give non-Os to foreigners with a Thai spouse. Edit: and only single entry.

 

Why would single entry non-O be better than single entry tourist visa? They will both give me the same time won't they?

 

No plans to be back in UK for over a year so I could do with some nearby embassies / consulates that are likely to issue multi entry non-O in my circumstances.

Edited November 20, 2016 by LongTimeLurker

[ubonjoe]

30 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

They both will only give non-Os to foreigners with a Thai spouse. Edit: and only single entry.

Why would single entry non-O be better than single entry tourist visa? They will both give me the same time won't they?

No plans to be back in UK for over a year so I could do with some nearby embassies / consulates that are likely to issue multi entry non-O in my circumstances.

Surprised Liverpool did not do at least a single entry. The multiple entry would of needed to pre approval by the embassy so they were probably reluctant to try. Now only the embassy can issue multiple entry visas. No surprise about HCMC (not the best place to get a visa).

A single entry non-o allows a 90 day entry without the need for an extension like a tourist visa. Non-o costs 2000 baht. Tourist visa and extension 2900 baht. Also you would be getting the visa for a valid reason other than tourism.

You might want to try Penang for a multiple entry non-o but you would likely have to show financial proof (500k baht in the bank perhaps).

[dbrenn]

Things seem to have gone full circle. In the late eighties and early nineties, before Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia opened up, Penang was where everyone went for visas. I used to take the train there with friends and have a great time. There was an Indian guy who used to visit the guesthouses and (for a modest fee) would take completed visa application forms & passports to the Consulate and bring back your passport with a visa the next day. It was a good service, and meant that all I had to do was hang around Penang.

 

The only wildcard (at that time) was whether the Consulate would issue a single or double entry.

 

[Maestro]

8 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

...immigration do not allow both parents of a minor to have a visa thereby forcing the family to live apart , or for 1 parent to get tourist visas every couple of months.

 

The situation you describe is rather unusual:

1. The child lives in Thailand.
2. Both parents, non-Thai nationals, live outside Thailand.

So that the family will not live apart, the parents would normally take the child to live with them in their residence.

 

Nevertheless, I believe that a Thai consulate, or in the case of the UK the Thai embassy, in the parents' country of residence will have no problem issuing non-O visas to both parents for the purpose of visiting their child in Thailand as often as they have the time and opportunity to make the trip. If the parents are not married to each other, they may need to show evidence of parental rights for the child.

[LongTimeLurker]

6 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Surprised Liverpool did not do at least a single entry. The multiple entry would of needed to pre approval by the embassy so they were probably reluctant to try. Now only the embassy can issue multiple entry visas. No surprise about HCMC (not the best place to get a visa).

A single entry non-o allows a 90 day entry without the need for an extension like a tourist visa. Non-o costs 2000 baht. Tourist visa and extension 2900 baht. Also you would be getting the visa for a valid reason other than tourism.

You might want to try Penang for a multiple entry non-o but you would likely have to show financial proof (500k baht in the bank perhaps).

 

Not had a problem with HCMC so far but was planning to maybe try Penang the trip after next and the financial proof is no problem, always have it ready for HCMC and they never ask to see it (for tourist visa)

 

Edit: don't need the tourist visa extension as I leave every 2 months anyway.

Edited November 20, 2016 by LongTimeLurker

[LongTimeLurker]

18 minutes ago, Maestro said:

 

The situation you describe is rather unusual:

1. The child lives in Thailand.
2. Both parents, non-Thai nationals, live outside Thailand.

So that the family will not live apart, the parents would normally take the child to live with them in their residence.

 

Nevertheless, I believe that a Thai consulate, or in the case of the UK the Thai embassy, in the parents' country of residence will have no problem issuing non-O visas to both parents for the purpose of visiting their child in Thailand as often as they have the time and opportunity to make the trip. If the parents are not married to each other, they may need to show evidence of parental rights for the child.

 

More unusual than that

 

1. The child lives in Thailand

2 Both parents, non-Thai nationals, both live in Thailand

 

but only 1 of them can get a 'legitimate' visa to do so.

[Maestro]

36 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

 

More unusual than that

 

1. The child lives in Thailand

2 Both parents, non-Thai nationals, both live in Thailand

 

but only 1 of them can get a 'legitimate' visa to do so.

 

In this situation it is not unreasonable for immigration to expect that at least one of the parents would be employed in Thailand to earn the necessary money to cover the family's cost of living and have a work permit and one-year extensions of stay for this reason or, if independently wealthy without the need of employment, qualify for another type of extension, eg for the reason of investment. Failing that, both parents are indeed tourists or holidaymakers and as such have no valid reason under Thai laws and regulations to live in Thailand but merely to visit the country at their pleasure, with an appropriate visa or visa-exempt if qualified.

[ubonjoe]

 
In this situation it is not unreasonable for immigration to expect that at least one of the parents would be employed in Thailand to earn the necessary money to cover the family's cost of living and have a work permit and one-year extensions of stay for this reason or, if independently wealthy without the need of employment, qualify for another type of extension, eg for the reason of investment. Failing that, both parents are indeed tourists or holidaymakers and as such have no valid reason under Thai laws and regulations to live in Thailand but merely to visit the country at their pleasure, with an appropriate visa or visa-exempt if qualified.

If the child is attending school and is on an extension based upon that one parent can get an extension as their parent by having 500k baht in a Thai bank. The other patent should be able to get non-o visas.

Sent from my SM-T231 using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[LongTimeLurker]

I agree ubonjoe that the other parent should  get a non-O, but finding a place that will issue one is another matter if they narrowly interpret the requirements to live with a child / spouse as only for a Thai national, not foreign.

[notmyself]

On ‎19‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 10:52 PM, notmyself said:

 

I'm going down there next week for an SETV and will report on the trip when I get back.

 

Got back this morning and missed the free visas by one day. Easy trip and did not have to provide anything at all.

 

 

[Maestro]

On 11/20/2016 at 2:49 PM, LongTimeLurker said:

I agree ubonjoe that the other parent should  get a non-O, but finding a place that will issue one is another matter if they narrowly interpret the requirements to live with a child / spouse as only for a Thai national, not foreign.

 

Interpreting the requirements listed on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs narrowly, strictly the way they are written, any consulate should issue the non-O visa to a parent for visiting his or her child of any nationality in Thailand.

 

Quote

 

3. NON-IMMIGRANT VISA     
     1. REQUIREMENT
     This type of visa is issued to applicants who wish to enter the Kingdom for the following purposes:
     ...

     - other activities (Category "O") as follows:
    to stay with the family...

 

Source: http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15398-Issuance-of-Visa.html

 

In the requirements quoted above, there is no limitation whatsoever regarding the nationality of the child or spouse being visited in Thailand.

[Maestro]

In the case of LongTimeLurker, the basic question is whether immigration is correct in limiting the extension under clause 2.11 to only one parent of a child that is attending school.

[juice777]

Sorry wrong thread lol