Jump to content

elviajero

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    8,630
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,451 Excellent

About elviajero

  • Rank
    Titanium Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    UK/Central Thailand

Recent Profile Visitors

8,170 profile views
  1. elviajero

    Visa confusion.

    What is your rationale for making this change? You are almost certainly better off sticking with a ME non-immigrant visa 'O', or getting an extension of stay based on marriage. You do not need a category 'ED' visa to study.
  2. elviajero

    TM7 and TM8 Applications

    You put your passport details in that section. Where it asks for ‘kind of visa’ you write — Non-Immigrant O. Yes, you tick the Non-Immigrant visa box, and give the details of that original visa.
  3. A 1 year extension as already advised, OR it’s possible to extend any 90 day stay by 60 days giving you up to 150 days between exits, You don’t need to provide financials to get a 60 day extension. If you can meet the financial requirements a 1 year extension is the best option.
  4. That is not what I am arguing. I am simply confirming to you that immigration consider someones stay has ended when they leave the country. Section 39 has nothing to do with section 38. It doesn't say that. It says that the stay HAS ended, BUT if they buy a re-entry permit the remainder of the ended stay will be honoured on re-entry. On re-entry they receive a new temporary permit to stay for the remainder of the previously authorised stay. Someone leaving the country and returning to the same address is still required to be reported (TM.30) on their return. They left the country! The fact that they are returning to the same address is irrelevant. Yes. Otherwise how do immigration know where the person returning is living. They can assume it's the same address or the address given on the TM.6, but that isn't how the system works, or the law is written. TM.30 address reporting is Thailands way of tracking our whereabouts/movements. If you accept that you might start to understand the law/rules. Yes they do (but it's selectively enforced). Someone in the other province should have reported (TM.30) the person as staying at their address. From then system will show them as staying at that address until someone at another address makes a new TM.30 report. So someone at the address he's returning is required by law to submit a new TM.30 reporting that the person is staying at their address (has returned to the same address), otherwise the person will still show as staying at the last address reported. Also, FYI, if we stay more than 24 hours in another province we are supposed to report to the local police. It's the law, and guess what, they don't enforce it! It is very, very simple. When you arrive in the country for the first or Nth time someone is responsible for confirming to immigration that you are staying at their property, even if you've stayed there before; AND every time you stay (they mean overnight) somewhere else someone is responsible to report that stay. If you stay in 10 different hotels over 10 nights each hotel should report (TM.30) your stay. The same rule applies to private addresses. If the current place you're staying at haven't reported your new stay the system will show you at the last address reported. The increased enforcement of TM.30 reporting in recent years is a direct result of the Bangkok bombing. It is the authorities way of demonstrating that they are tracking the movements of foreigners better. A pointless and out of date law, which is why it is selectively and reluctantly enforced by some immigration offices.
  5. I would say they are doing both ? Section 38, the law, says that a responsible person must submit a TM.30 for a foreigner that has received temporary permission to stay within 24 hours of their arrival at an address. Even though it is clearly stated in the immigration act, Bangkok immigration, don't, generally, insist/expect TM.30's are submitted except by hotels/guesthouses. Are they interpreting the law OR selectively enforcing the law?
  6. Maybe you should read again what you quoted, it says "it is considered that his temporary entry permit has expired" it doesn't say something like "his stay as referred to in section 38 has ended", that it means this is just your own interpretation Wow! Words, almost, fail me! If you leave a country you have left the country. If you leave the country the immigration record shows that you have left the country, therefore, you are no longer staying at the last known address. When you re-enter the country a new entry record is created and they do not where you are actually staying until a responsible person submits a TM.30. The reason for the law is so that immigration receive confirmation (from a third party) of where you are staying. Someone that leaves the country and stays out 10 mins is under the same laws as someone that stays out 10 years. If believe someone returning to the same address after 10 years outside the country is exempt from the law, prove it. The law is crystal clear and black and white. It is simply the enforcement of the law that varies.
  7. Immigration are not interpreting the law, they are selectively enforcing it. Entirely different.
  8. "It in no way means the existing report ends when the permission to stay ends." Of course it does, they left the country! How can you still be staying at a property when you've physically left the country. The Act is not time specific so it doesn't matter if you stay outside the country for 10 mins or 10 days the same rules apply. I quoted section 39 because it spells out that someones temporary stay in the country ends when they leave. Section 38 applies to every foreigner with temporary permission to stay from the second they enter the country. No exceptions. It's purpose is to track the whereabouts of the foreigner after they have entered the country. Having made a new entry to the country, and received temporary permission to stay, the responsible person at the address the OP is staying at is responsible for notifying immigration. The only question is whether or not the local office enforce a law/rule most foreigners and property owners don't know about.
  9. I suggest it is you that is causing confusion. The OP clearly has an extension of stay OR time remaining on a visa entry they want to protect with a re-entry permit. It doesn't matter which it is, the answer to the OP's question is the same and given by UJ in post 2. My money is on them having a non-immigrant visa, that they used to get an extension of stay, that they are protecting with a re-entry permit. The non-immigrant visa in the old passport is still relevant (until the details are transferred to the new passport) even if used/expired, so the OP is correct to ask the question. Most people, rightly, consider the combination of the entry visa and subsequent stay permits (entry or extensions) to be their visa.
  10. elviajero

    non-o visa

    Yes, but it is not compulsory that you apply for the extension. You still have the option to leave. The reason it wouldn't make sense to go through the non 'O' application is because you have to provide the financials etc required for the extension -- and having provided the financials etc once, you might as we'll go through with the extension. Maybe, but there is nothing in the rules to stop the OP doing what they are asking about. It would be a waste of their own time and money.
  11. You should say "according to my interpretation of the law" ? Because the law is not clear about this topic it depends on the respective immigration office I am not interpreting the law. Just stating facts. And it is the enforcement of the law that varies between offices, which is why I told the OP to confirm with their local office. When you leave the country your stay ends ( Immigration Act. Section 39 : After having received permission for temporary entry into the Kingdom , if the alien leaves the Kingdom it is considered that his temporary entry permit has expired.). When you re-enter -- without a re-entry permit -- it is considered a brand new visit/stay and you are subject to the same law/requirements whether it's your first or Nth visit. The immigration system would show the OP arriving at an address (TM.30 report) and then leaving the country (effectively leaving that address). It would then show them arriving in the country again and would require confirmation of the address they are staying at form the responsible person at that address. Whenever or not that procedure is fully enforced is down to the individual office.
  12. elviajero

    non-o visa

    Probably yes, but it wouldn't make any sense to do that. If you are going to go to the bother of applying for the non 'O' you might as well apply for a 1 year extension of stay towards the end of the 90 days. If you need/want to leave during the year you can use a re-entry permit/s.
  13. When you enter using a non ‘O’ visa you’re granted permission to stay for 90 days. You must leave the country on or before the 90th day unless you extend your permission to stay. If you extend your stay by 1 year you can stay continuously in the country for the whole of that year. At the end of that year you must leave the country or apply for a new extension of stay.
  14. No. Bangkok immigration do not insist on the TM.30 being submitted to get an extension. I expect that it would be accepted in Bangkok, and surprised Pattaya denied it based on your age. I guess their logic was that not many 23 year olds have that level of genuine passive income and were suspicious that you are illegally working.
×