Denied Tourist Visa at Vientiane , Laos Thai Consulate

[ALFREDO]

3 hours ago, David Walden said:

There are about 20,000 band new condos 2 or 3 years old between Cha-am and Hue Hin, never been occupied and never been sold,  rows and rows, some 10 stories high some 40 stories high they go for miles, I go past them often.  Thai investors and Thai banks have placed confidence in the powers that be in Thailand to help get the tourist market going to no avail.  It very much the same all over Thailand...perhaps millions of big and small holiday accommodations operating at about one third or less of their potential...when will they ever learn?  I really wish I could help.

"help get the tourist market going"  ?

Which normal Tourist buys a Condo - yes some - Time sharing lol, but normally? 

 

I was in Madeira, Mallorca, different Greek Islands, Seychelles, Caribbean Islands and so on - I was Tourist there, but did not buy a Condo, had no idea to do so. 

[hawker9000]

6 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

Please cite the immigration-law which limits how many times a person can enter, or how long a person can stay in Thailand on Tourist Visas.  Such rules exist to some extent on Visa-Exempt entries, but not Tourist Visas.

"Abusing" a Tourist-Visa would be violating its conditions - such as working a Thai job.  Following the rules the Thai Authorities wrote is not "abuse" of any sort.  Enough condos are empty already.  It's best for all to fill them back up.

It's thinking like this that practically ensures not only that you're going to have problems with immigration, but that those NOT abusing the system will be burdened as well.  I doubt this will penetrate, but it's not actually a question of "law" per se, as Immigration is entitled, and indeed expected, to act at its own discretion in applying and enforcing the law.   I'm the last person in the world to defend Thai Immigration's widely publicized abuses of discretion, but the fact is that you're on a fool's errand demanding to see these specific limitations on the use of tourist visas written up in the law books somewhere. It just doesn't work like that.

[Chou Anou]

58 minutes ago, hawker9000 said:

It's thinking like this that practically ensures not only that you're going to have problems with immigration, but that those NOT abusing the system will be burdened as well.  I doubt this will penetrate, but it's not actually a question of "law" per se, as Immigration is entitled, and indeed expected, to act at its own discretion in applying and enforcing the law.   I'm the last person in the world to defend Thai Immigration's widely publicized abuses of discretion, but the fact is that you're on a fool's errand demanding to see these specific limitations on the use of tourist visas written up in the law books somewhere. It just doesn't work like that.

Very well put, you really hit the nail on the head.  People are trying to game the system, to push their length of stay in Thailand as far as they possibly can without "technically" breaking the law...yet they can't step back and see that, by using tourist visas to accomplish what amounts to living in Thailand, they are very obviously abusing the law, since they most definitely are NOT TOURISTS.  And then they cry like <deleted>s when they get called on it.

[SicTransit]

Very well put, you really hit the nail on the head.  People are trying to game the system, to push their length of stay in Thailand as far as they possibly can without "technically" breaking the law...yet they can't step back and see that, by using tourist visas to accomplish what amounts to living in Thailand, they are very obviously abusing the law, since they most definitely are NOT TOURISTS.  And then they cry like s when they get called on it.

Stockholm Syndrome is what your case is called, sir, I believe. Foreign tourist citizens abusing the law without breaking the law? That’s a new word in jurisprudence.

Countries that don’t want long-term tourism (you can cry all you want about the definition) have established 90/180 rule long ago.

[David Walden]

In Malaysia you can get a 10 year retirement visa by putting about US $22000 in a bank account, about the same as Thailand.  The procedure is very simple and you can come and go as often as you like.  Not as good as Thailand for single men but really good for married couples.  PS you can buy a car each 10 years free of taxes...they want retirees.

 

I like to spend 3 months in Thailand and 3 months back in Australia, it suites me.  I'm a tourist, I'm happy with that.   Nice 2 or 3 star hotel, massages 3 times a week,  Bt150 evening meals and lots of social activity most nights (gotta have a rest some nights), cheap rum & cokes, and beer.  I have a budget of about Bt 80,000 per month.  My point is that after now making 6 visits over the last few years it takes a lot of time in applying for a 60 day + 30 day (re-application) tourist visa.  It could be and should be a piece of cake, simple and easy...like Malaysia and other places...it seems that the powers that be, are using Thai Immigration as a revenue collector to generate jobs for Thais.  That's OK but it's just not good business practice...Yes it's OK to expect bigger, better and more wealthy tourists but the powers that be, have to remember "big things will come when you get the little things correct."

 

On my next trip to Thailand (soon) I'll just use the 2 months tourist visa, forget about the extension, catch a train from Hue Hin and go to Malaysia for a month or so on my way back to Australia...I just can't be bothered trying to get the 30 day extension and all the stuffing around it requires...but I will be back perhaps with a retirement visa.  With all the current bullshit that may take about 5 years to get the procedure correct.  Hear is hoping!!!

[observer90210]

1 hour ago, David Walden said:

In Malaysia you can get a 10 year retirement visa by putting about US $22000 in a bank account, about the same as Thailand.  The procedure is very simple and you can come and go as often as you like.  Not as good as Thailand for single men but really good for married couples.  PS you can buy a car each 10 years free of taxes...they want retirees.

 

I like to spend 3 months in Thailand and 3 months back in Australia, it suites me.  I'm a tourist, I'm happy with that.   Nice 2 or 3 star hotel, massages 3 times a week,  Bt150 evening meals and lots of social activity most nights (gotta have a rest some nights), cheap rum & cokes, and beer.  I have a budget of about Bt 80,000 per month.  My point is that after now making 6 visits over the last few years it takes a lot of time in applying for a 60 day + 30 day (re-application) tourist visa.  It could be and should be a piece of cake, simple and easy...like Malaysia and other places...it seems that the powers that be, are using Thai Immigration as a revenue collector to generate jobs for Thais.  That's OK but it's just not good business practice...Yes it's OK to expect bigger, better and more wealthy tourists but the powers that be, have to remember "big things will come when you get the little things correct."

 

On my next trip to Thailand (soon) I'll just use the 2 months tourist visa, forget about the extension, catch a train from Hue Hin and go to Malaysia for a month or so on my way back to Australia...I just can't be bothered trying to get the 30 day extension and all the stuffing around it requires...but I will be back perhaps with a retirement visa.  With all the current bullshit that may take about 5 years to get the procedure correct.  Hear is hoping!!!

You are so right!...why give your money to a country that makes life difficult for quality retirees?...Wish you a great time in Malaysia, have fun and keep safe!

[tonray]

2 hours ago, David Walden said:

In Malaysia you can get a 10 year retirement visa by putting about US $22000 in a bank account, about the same as Thailand.  The procedure is very simple and you can come and go as often as you like.  Not as good as Thailand for single men but really good for married couples.  PS you can buy a car each 10 years free of taxes...they want retirees.

 

I like to spend 3 months in Thailand and 3 months back in Australia, it suites me.  I'm a tourist, I'm happy with that.   Nice 2 or 3 star hotel, massages 3 times a week,  Bt150 evening meals and lots of social activity most nights (gotta have a rest some nights), cheap rum & cokes, and beer.  I have a budget of about Bt 80,000 per month.  My point is that after now making 6 visits over the last few years it takes a lot of time in applying for a 60 day + 30 day (re-application) tourist visa.  It could be and should be a piece of cake, simple and easy...like Malaysia and other places...it seems that the powers that be, are using Thai Immigration as a revenue collector to generate jobs for Thais.  That's OK but it's just not good business practice...Yes it's OK to expect bigger, better and more wealthy tourists but the powers that be, have to remember "big things will come when you get the little things correct."

 

On my next trip to Thailand (soon) I'll just use the 2 months tourist visa, forget about the extension, catch a train from Hue Hin and go to Malaysia for a month or so on my way back to Australia...I just can't be bothered trying to get the 30 day extension and all the stuffing around it requires...but I will be back perhaps with a retirement visa.  With all the current bullshit that may take about 5 years to get the procedure correct.  Hear is hoping!!!

The Malaysian requirements you stated I believe to be way under what is actually required. Can you post where you found that number of 22000 US in a bank acct? 

 

Current Malaysian requirements in their MysecondHome program:

 

Financial requirement[edit]

Applicants aged below 50 years are required to show proof of liquid assets worth a minimum of RM500,000 and offshore income of RM10,000 per month.[1] Applicants below 50 years old are required to open a fixed deposit account in Malaysia of MYR300,000.00 at any bank with a local branch. This includes local branches of international banks such as HSBC, Standard Chartered, etc.

The State of Sarawak does not allow applicants below 50 years of age, with the exception of individuals over 30 years of age who have children enrolled in schools or undergoing long term medical treatment in Sarawak. http://www.sarawak.gov.my/web/home/article_view/221/279/

After a period of one year, the participant can withdraw up to MYR150,000.00 for approved expenses relating to house purchase, education for children in Malaysia and medical purposes. However, a minimum balance of MYR150,000.00 must be maintained from the second year onwards and throughout stay in Malaysia under this program.

Note: Fixed deposits (similar to time deposits), in Malaysia are a conservative form of investment with interest rates ranging from 3% to 4% per annum (p.a.).^[3] MM2 program announced that effective from first of year2017 requirement for cancellation of surety bond withdrawn and amount be refunded through e transfer ^[4] 'Except for the State of Sarawak Applicants aged 50 and above' are required to show proof of liquid assets of RM350,000 and off shore income of RM10,000 per month. For those who have retired, they are required to show proof of receiving pension from government of at least RM10,000 per month.[2]

Applicants 50 years old and above can either choose to:

• Open a fixed deposit account in Malaysia of MYR150,000.00 with a local branch; OR
• Show proof of monthly off-shore government pension of at least MYR10,000.00.

Note : In addition to the above, all applicants are required to show that they have sufficient funds to maintain themselves for the duration of the 10-year visa. In practice this means showing at least MYR150,000 in the bank, and a monthly income of MYR10,000.

After a period of one year, the participant who fulfills the fixed deposit criteria can withdraw up to MYR50,000.00 for approved expenses relating to house purchase, education for children in Malaysia and medical purposes. However, a minimum balance of MYR100,000.00 must be maintained from the second year onwards and throughout stay in Malaysia under this program.

For Sarawak Applicants must be over 50 years of age, but the financial conditions are less onerous than the Peninsular Malaysian program.

Edited August 3, 2017 by tonray

[David Walden]

5 hours ago, Chou Anou said:

Very well put, you really hit the nail on the head.  People are trying to game the system, to push their length of stay in Thailand as far as they possibly can without "technically" breaking the law...yet they can't step back and see that, by using tourist visas to accomplish what amounts to living in Thailand, they are very obviously abusing the law, since they most definitely are NOT TOURISTS.  And then they cry like <deleted>s when they get called on it.

There is a Western type saying "don't throw the baby out with the bath water".  Yes there are people in every country who will break immigration laws.  It seems to me that Thailand's approach to policing this problem is to punish everyone and that way you will get the bad ones...usually this being lazy.

[JackThompson]

8 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

It's thinking like this that practically ensures not only that you're going to have problems with immigration, but that those NOT abusing the system will be burdened as well. 

I do understand that "knowing the law" will do minimal good in the face of a particular office or checkpoint whose supervisor doesn't believe in "rule of law." 

The only "abuse" are IOs denying entry to people who were following the law, and those here on Tourist Visas who take Thai jobs . 

Both claim to be doing a lawful thing, while actually doing something else.  Both should be held accountable.   Neither is held accountable under the current policies.

 

When the rule-of-law is replaced with arbitrary policies then, yes, there are many "unintended victims" of the arbitrary-policy.  That's the point in having rule-of-law and specificity in the law - to minimize unintended harm to those who are not "the problem" the law seeks to address.

 

Quote

I doubt this will penetrate, but it's not actually a question of "law" per se, as Immigration is entitled, and indeed expected, to act at its own discretion in applying and enforcing the law.  

Actually, they aren't.  "Tourist" = "Not working a Thai job" + "has enough money to support themselves."  Under Thai law, to legally deny-entry, Immigration officers must cite a particular rule which the applicant has violated - usually either "doesn't have the money" (which does not specify 'cash') or "came here to work" (which does not include 'suspicion').  And then there is a specified appeals process.  

 

Quote

I'm the last person in the world to defend Thai Immigration's widely publicized abuses of discretion, but the fact is that you're on a fool's errand demanding to see these specific limitations on the use of tourist visas written up in the law books somewhere. It just doesn't work like that.

It has worked like that.  Specific, published changes to the rules were made concerning Visa Exempt entries - many times over the years.  They don't seem shy about new police-orders, but in this case they are perhaps unable to reach a consensus on what the new rules should be.  I suspect there is great disagreement on what (if any) new limits would have more beneficial vs harmful effects on the country.   I would guess that, at some point, the conversation usually comes down to something like:

 

"Ok, so you propose we create a new-rule limiting foreigners from Western countries to 180 days/yr.  We will exclude neighboring countries (as with the 2-land-border crossing visa-exempt rule), so the illegal cheap labor supply is still plentiful for corporations.  This policy will deny entry to 'X' self-funded farang per year, which will, in turn, un-employ 'Y' Thai citizens. 

 

"The worker/foreigner ratio of jobs created by the Chinese visitors is tiny, the additional infrastructure cost to handle foreigner-volume is high, and we have to give them 'free' visas just to get them to come, so that won't solve the problem.  We aren't stopping the Cambodians and Burmese from coming in, so no jobs for Thais in sectors like construction will be created - because powerful people don't want to pay Thai min-wage.

 

"Most of these farangs who currently stay here more than 180 days/yr will put down roots in Cambodia, Vietnam or The Philippines and never return, leading to tens-of-millions of Baht per-each farang, in lost 'free-money to Thailand,' over the decades of their remaining lives.  The crackdowns on Visa Exempts have already pushed many out, who now live in other SE Asian countries.  This is not just a short-term effect, but will continue to damage our economy for decades.  The economic harm from actions thus far, would be multiplied by the proposed change. 

 

"So who is going to pay for the needs of the Thais and their families whose jobs go to another country with the farangs we send away?  The jungles are gone - replaced with rubber-trees, so the food they used to get from the jungle is now only available for cash in the market.  They can't subsist on their family-farms any more, and even if they could, they want to buy modern-consumer products like phones and washing-machines.  To meet these needs and desires, every village now depends on family-members making money from tourist-related business. 

 

"Do you propose starting a very expensive social-welfare system to buy off the poor to shut them up, as is done in the West?   What level of new-taxation and/or internal conflict, is worth the price of keeping out these farangs?"

Edited August 3, 2017 by JackThompson

[ubonjoe]

It time to get back on topic. Time to end the discussion about visas for other countries tourism number and etc that has nothing to do with what this topic is about.

Any further off topic posts will be removed without notice.

[David Walden]

15 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

Please cite the immigration-law which limits how many times a person can enter, or how long a person can stay in Thailand on Tourist Visas.  Such rules exist to some extent on Visa-Exempt entries, but not Tourist Visas.

"Abusing" a Tourist-Visa would be violating its conditions - such as working a Thai job.  Following the rules the Thai Authorities wrote is not "abuse" of any sort.  Enough condos are empty already.  It's best for all to fill them back up.

The Thai Consul in Perth Australia tells me I can have as many 60 day + 30 day extension Thai Tourist Visas over and over again with no limit, provided they are issued in Australia (my home country).  It's quite cheap to come back to Perth from Thailand and then back to Thailand.  It's just the 30 day extension bit that is a pain in the neck. 

[kurtmartens]

23 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

I am not sure that is a MFA policy. I am sure it is not in effect at the main office in Bangkok.

If you can get married before your 30 days end you could apply for a 60 day extension to visit your bride.

Immigration in Chiangmai will only give 30 day extensions - I tried to "argue" about being here to visit the wife, but ... 30 days only.  Twice so far.

[hawker9000]

3 minutes ago, David Walden said:

The Thai Consul in Perth Australia tells me I can have as many 60 day + 30 day extension Thai Tourist Visas over and over again with no limit, provided they are issued in Australia (my home country).  It's quite cheap to come back to Perth from Thailand and then back to Thailand.  It's just the 30 day extension bit that is a pain in the neck. 

You absolutely CAN have as many tourist visas as your little heart desires.   They don't guarantee you permission to enter the country, but if your object is simply to collect visas which may be unusable, by all means go for it.

 

I really didn't think what I said about getting all "legalistic" about tourist visas and Immigration declaring a sort of moratorium on the abusers trying to live on them would penetrate, and of course it hasn't.  So they'll just keep on keepin' on, and the rest of us will have pay a certain portion of the price for these losers who actually don't comprehend that Immigration tolerance for what they're doing is on the wane.  Life's just kind o' like that.   They don't care about the rest of us who have to live with some of the pain they cause; the rest of us really don't care if they end up playing jailhouse lawyer in a detention center whining and weeping. 

[ubonjoe]

4 minutes ago, kurtmartens said:

Immigration in Chiangmai will only give 30 day extensions - I tried to "argue" about being here to visit the wife, but ... 30 days only.  Twice so far.

Perhaps you should show them clause 2.24 of Police Order 327/2557  basis for extension of stay or have your wife show it in Thai Police Order 327/2557 Thai text.

[BritTim]

3 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

I really didn't think what I said about getting all "legalistic" about tourist visas and Immigration declaring a sort of moratorium on the abusers trying to live on them would penetrate, and of course it hasn't.  So they'll just keep on keepin' on, and the rest of us will have pay a certain portion of the price for these losers who actually don't comprehend that Immigration tolerance for what they're doing is on the wane.  Life's just kind o' like that.   They don't care about the rest of us who have to live with some of the pain they cause; the rest of us really don't care if they end up playing jailhouse lawyer in a detention center whining and weeping. 

I am really curious. If immigration has specific policies about what constitutes acceptable use of tourist entries, what is the objection to publishing those policies? Really, I am inclined to agree with Jack. I think the normal consensus is that log term tourism should not be discouraged, but some immigration officials disagree with that consensus and (the rule of law being easily ignored here) decide to enforce their own unofficial policies rather than the official ones.

 

I am not disagreeing with your point that the negative attitude of those officials who creat their own rules is fueled by what they view as exploiting the published rules (again, leaving aside the fact that the general consensus is to allow long term tourism) but it creates a really ridiculous situation. It basically means that (sanctioned) long term tourists need to research where officials who disagree with the standard rules are located so as to avoid them.

[sanemax]

3 hours ago, David Walden said:

The Thai Consul in Perth Australia tells me I can have as many 60 day + 30 day extension Thai Tourist Visas over and over again with no limit, provided they are issued in Australia (my home country).  It's quite cheap to come back to Perth from Thailand and then back to Thailand.  It's just the 30 day extension bit that is a pain in the neck. 

I do think that they meant that THEIR Embassy will issue you as many tourists visas as you want , for the reason being that they cannot guarantee that any other embassy will issue you with a tourist visa .

   That isnt too say that any other Embassy will deny issuing you a TV , its just that Perth cannot guarantee this .

[David Walden]

17 hours ago, darrendsd said:

 

Very few tourists buy Condos so I fail to see your point?

 

The majority of Condos owned in Hua Hin (I live here) are owned by weekend Bangkok Thais and that is the market they are aimed at

 

Tourists who come here for a couple of weeks a year are not likely to buy them are they?

 

 

If you study up a bit about economics you would be able to see my point.  Trying to explain it all to you would take up about 500 pages on this site, that's just for a start.

[sanemax]

11 hours ago, Chou Anou said:

Very well put, you really hit the nail on the head.  People are trying to game the system, to push their length of stay in Thailand as far as they possibly can without "technically" breaking the law...yet they can't step back and see that, by using tourist visas to accomplish what amounts to living in Thailand, they are very obviously abusing the law, since they most definitely are NOT TOURISTS.  And then they cry like <deleted>s when they get called on it.

It really isnt abusing the law, its living within the law .

The discussion about what a tourist is has been done numerous times in TV threads

[David Walden]

2 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I do think that they meant that THEIR Embassy will issue you as many tourists visas as you want , for the reason being that they cannot guarantee that any other embassy will issue you with a tourist visa .

   That isnt too say that any other Embassy will deny issuing you a TV , its just that Perth cannot guarantee this .

 

Nothing complicated here for me.  I go to Thailand on a tourist visa have fun, meet nice people Thais and all, stay 3 months with the 30 day extension (the extension is a dogs dinner)).  After this period and spending about Bt 200,000 I go home to Perth.  Any free medical or business I need done is done in Aus.  My only complaint is that I would like to see the visa process simplified, perhaps like Malaysia has.  Being able to get cheap fares and taking into account that my pension is restored to the full benefits when I am home in Aus. and getting the almost free medication I need in Aus, the Air fare to and from Thailand is really actually free.

 

There a thousands of Australian retirees on a Govt pension that this option is available for in there senior years.  Anyone with modest promotional skills should be able to see that here is a way in improve 2 and 3 star hotel bookings in Thailand whilst at the same time providing comfortable living in Thailand.  Aussie Govt pension recipients can live in Thailand very comfortable...trying to live in Australia if you don't own a house on the Aus. pension is a disaster!!! 

[David Walden]

The skills you mention are not my skills they belong to Adobe (Photoshop). I was a professional photographer for for 50 years, if you would like me to take a photograph of you I can make you look 20 years younger and 20 kilos lighter, give you a polka dot shirt and restore hair if required, the same can be done with legal documents.  I am sorry if I have upset you.  You miss my point, I don't have to use any forgery skills, I qualify in all respects to get a tourist or retirement visa in Thailand, it's just about getting the message across  Thailand just needs to get rid of all their immigration palaver and get back to basics.

 

This post and my previous posts are to bring attention to the inconsistencies for people seeking 60 day +30 day Thai Tourist Visas....like sending application forms, to the Thai Consul in Perth Australia, including your passport, extra passport photos less then 6 months old, photocopies of your personal information page of your pass port, being precise about you arrival date in Thailand and departure date (E-ticket copy required) a confirmed printout of a hotel booking, a current copy (no more then 3 days old) of a bank statement showing you have Aus $800 in an account (Aus $8,000 for a multi entry tourist visa). All his mostly takes a week and in my case when they changed some rules  a few times back it took 18 days (they had my passport for 18 days).  If you want to extend your visa in Thailand for the additional 30 days you will spend the best part of the day doing this all over again at a  immigration office.  Oh! I forgot  $45 application fee in Aus, Bt 1900 + a day stuffing around for the 30 day extension in Thailand.  In Malaysia and many other countries  this whole procedure takes about  one (1) minute only and it's free, you just arrive and it all happens. 

 

The amusing part about all this is when your Tourist visa is granted it states that you can arrive on any day you like during the next 90 days. The arrival date is optional so the E-ticket and hotel booking is irrelevant but Australian Consuls will not issue the visa unless you are precise about you arrival date.  Thousand of inexperience tourists apply for these everyday with never ending confusion......When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn...TIT

 

 

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by ubonjoe
Changed to default font, Forum Netiquette 1. Please do not post in all capital letters, bold, unusual fonts, sizes or colors. It can be difficult to read.

[Asiantravel]

it would seem to me that what happened to the original poster can't really be called a trend yet because surely there would have been other reports of similar incidents? As with the other extraordinary events that have happened recently such as the two people being detained there don't seem to be any follow-up cases.

this suggests that these are all isolated incidents and they may have happened because of extraneous circumstances that weren't mentioned in the description of events.?

Edited August 4, 2017 by Asiantravel

[JackThompson]

4 hours ago, Asiantravel said:

it would seem to me that what happened to the original poster can't really be called a trend yet because surely there would have been other reports of similar incidents? As with the other extraordinary events that have happened recently such as the two people being detained there don't seem to be any follow-up cases.

this suggests that these are all isolated incidents and they may have happened because of extraneous circumstances that weren't mentioned in the description of events.?

Vientiane regularly rejects applicants with "This person travels to Thailand frequently..." extra-stamps placed on used tourist-visas.  In the past, as soon as they gave you one of those, it was either "get a new passport" or don't go back there, again.  Vientiane's particular variety of the extra-stamp mentioned showing residence and proof-of-income - but I never saw a report where they allowed showing either of these.  I showed both a few months back, and they didn't care - "with this remark" they can't give a new TR-Visa - so "get a new passport," I was told.  

 

The one recent-change (or maybe has been this way awhile), is they won't issue a TR-Visa even when it was another consulate who added the extra-stamp to a TR-Visa that was not from a Laos consulate.  In the past, an extra-stamp from one consulate would not necessarily block you at another.  I got a TR-Visa at Savanahket to spite the extra-stamp from Phnom Penh without incident - though showing money and proof of where I was staying is always required to apply at Savanakhet.

Edited August 4, 2017 by JackThompson

[Asiantravel]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Vientiane regularly rejects applicants with "This person travels to Thailand frequently..." extra-stamps placed on used tourist-visas.  In the past, as soon as they gave you one of those, it was either "get a new passport" or don't go back there, again.  Vientiane's particular variety of the extra-stamp mentioned showing residence and proof-of-income - but I never saw a report where they allowed showing either of these.  I showed both a few months back, and they didn't care - "with this remark" they can't give a new TR-Visa - so "get a new passport," I was told.  

 

The one recent-change (or maybe has been this way awhile), is they won't issue a TR-Visa even when it was another consulate who added the extra-stamp to a TR-Visa that was not from a Laos consulate.  In the past, an extra-stamp from one consulate would not necessarily block you at another.  I got a TR-Visa at Savanahket to spite the extra-stamp from Phnom Penh without incident - though showing money and proof of where I was staying is always required to apply at Savanakhet.

 

is there any significance  that elviajero in his post on page 1 of this thread seem to think that the OP would have received this stamp from the immigration authorities upon his exit from Thailand?

because I have always had the impression that the embassies and consulates issued these stamps just based on seeing lots of visa stickers in someone's passport.

But surely immigration wouldn't be interested in how many visa stickers you have - and particularly when someone is exiting the country?

so I'm wondering if they based their decision to issue this stamp from data they had in front of them on their computer screens.

 

[JackThompson]

55 minutes ago, Asiantravel said:

is there any significance  that elviajero in his post on page 1 of this thread seem to think that the OP would have received this stamp from the immigration authorities upon his exit from Thailand?

because I have always had the impression that the embassies and consulates issued these stamps just based on seeing lots of visa stickers in someone's passport.

But surely immigration wouldn't be interested in how many visa stickers you have - and particularly when someone is exiting the country?

so I'm wondering if they based their decision to issue this stamp from data they had in front of them on their computer screens.

I've never heard of it, but it could have happened before I got here, a few years ago.  He has spoken of the old-days of unlimited Double-Entry TR-Visas from Vientiane, without ever needing a passport-change. 

Edited August 4, 2017 by JackThompson

[David Walden]

On 8/3/2017 at 3:34 PM, sanemax said:

I do think that they meant that THEIR Embassy will issue you as many tourists visas as you want , for the reason being that they cannot guarantee that any other embassy will issue you with a tourist visa .

   That isnt too say that any other Embassy will deny issuing you a TV , its just that Perth cannot guarantee this .

The Perth and Sydney Consulates (different states same country) have different requirements, I make my 60 day +30 day visa application by post as I live away for the Consul (200km).  Perth is very strict, Sydney much easier, Sydney does not require E-ticket or hotel booking or proof of money in Bank...they have now stopped Perth people from sending applications to Sydney, they tell me they will be returned unprocessed if I send it to Sydney.  The Consuls in Sydney returned my $45 application fee on my previous application with a comment "it's free we are trying to get more tourists to Thailand, you are very welcome". also a note to remind me that I can go to Thailand anytime I like in the next 90 days...big difference to other Thai Consuls in Australia...when will they ever learn?

[stevenl]

13 hours ago, Asiantravel said:

 

is there any significance  that elviajero in his post on page 1 of this thread seem to think that the OP would have received this stamp from the immigration authorities upon his exit from Thailand?

because I have always had the impression that the embassies and consulates issued these stamps just based on seeing lots of visa stickers in someone's passport.

But surely immigration wouldn't be interested in how many visa stickers you have - and particularly when someone is exiting the country?

so I'm wondering if they based their decision to issue this stamp from data they had in front of them on their computer screens.

 

"is there any significance  that elviajero in his post on page 1 of this thread seem to think that the OP would have received this stamp from the immigration authorities upon his exit from Thailand?"

 

That is not what Elviajero wrote or as far can tell implied.

[alocacoc]

I didn't read all pages. Is it now clear why the OP got denied a new visa?

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, alocacoc said:

I didn't read all pages. Is it now clear why the OP got denied a new visa?

Yes, he had the "extra stamp" on a previous TR Visa - "This person frequently..." - so time for a new Passport.

[alocacoc]

Yes, he had the "extra stamp" on a previous TR Visa - "This person frequently..." - so time for a new Passport.

Good to know. Maybe I do another TV visa in Vientiane before I leave Thailand for good. Have 1 metv from homecountry, 2 TV from Vientiane and 2tv from Savannakhet. No via exempt entries and no warning stamps. I will show them rental contract and proof of finance. Shouldn't be a problem to get a new visa I guess.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[JackThompson]

26 minutes ago, alocacoc said:

Good to know. Maybe I do another TV visa in Vientiane before I leave Thailand for good. Have 1 metv from homecountry, 2 TV from Vientiane and 2tv from Savannakhet. No via exempt entries and no warning stamps. I will show them rental contract and proof of finance. Shouldn't be a problem to get a new visa I guess.

In my experience, Vientiane doesn't have any interest in rental-contracts or proof-of your income or money in the bank (I attempted to present this).  Their policy is, "No extra stamp - no problem" - and - "got an extra stamp - get a new passport and come back."  Very different from Savanakhet, who absolutely wants to see you have the money (20K+ Baht bank-statement), rental-contract or hotel-booking, and ticket-out.