Frank12

Being denied entry with marriage visa

79 posts in this topic

18 hours ago, possum1931 said:

It is possible for people around the OPs age to have property he is renting out. Thai immigration are just a bit too heavy handed at hassling younger people at times. I see the need to make sure people are not working illegally, so why not come down on the people who are employing them, schools, factories etc? Brown envelopes spring to mind again.

What you say is exactly right - if you have a rental property (or 2 or 3) in your home country you could easily be earning enough from that to float around Asia.  Some may claim this - and it would be easy to bring a few documents with you to show to Immigration officers, but how many do that.  And while so many whine about the requirement to carry 20,000 baht cash and show to an officer, do we really believe they have a lot of money?  If you have enough money to live the life of Reilly in Thailand, showing 20,000 baht to an Immigration officer is nothing.  It is peanuts.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JackThompson said:

On the contrary - I hate the harm being done to Thais and foreigners alike, by the persecution of law-abiding Farangs at airports.   Why they are behaving as jerks is up to debate - but based on the attitudes the OP experienced, it sounds like a culture of hate within certain groups of Immigration officials.  Who knows how far up this goes - but it Most Certainly does NOT refer to Thai people in general.

Are you serious when you say Immigration officers are behaving like jerks?  They are just doing their job!  The onus is on the traveller to prove that he has the means to be able to survive in Thailand and proof that he will leave.  Thailand's entry requirements set the bar very low and if you cannot show 20,000 baht for a 2-month stay and a ticket out of the country, seriously, they shouldn't allow you in.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, mstevens said:

If you have enough money to live the life of Reilly in Thailand, showing 20,000 baht to an Immigration officer is nothing.  It is peanuts.

I think what you are missing is that some immigration officials are not checking if people have sufficient funds to support themselves in Thailand. They are insisting that people who had no idea of the requirement should show 20,000 baht cash on the spot, and preventing them from visiting an ATM to draw the cash (while still allowing them to visit an ATM to draw much larger amounts of cash for air tickets back home). Being able to show millions of baht in the bank is insufficient.

 

When an immigration official wishes legally to deny entry (probably because suspicious about what someone is really doing in Thailand) there are only a few reasons they can give. I believe the 20,000 baht thing is an excuse, and pretty unfair to the affected individual if the official's suspicions turn out to be off base.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mstevens said:

Are you serious when you say Immigration officers are behaving like jerks?  They are just doing their job!  The onus is on the traveller to prove that he has the means to be able to survive in Thailand and proof that he will leave.  Thailand's entry requirements set the bar very low and if you cannot show 20,000 baht for a 2-month stay and a ticket out of the country, seriously, they shouldn't allow you in.

You are right when you say they are just doing their jobs, but they have a certain amount of discretion which means using common sense, and common sense is not compatible with Thailand in any way. I am not a Thai basher, I see the good in most things in Thailand, and the people also, but I will also say what I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Frank12 said:

 

Yes you are right and untill your post I didn't realize that I made it unclear. So yeah I was finally let in . The title of the thread was reffering to my visit back to my home country next month and me coming back whether there is a chance I am going to be denied entry? Anyway people are right and in fact I caused the harm to myself by being totally careless with the law etc. (like Thai people being caught when the Police finally stops them for driving without helmet)I would appreciate for the mod to either change the title or even close it because I unconsciously might spread wrong information because yeah I was let in .Anyway  I didn't realize that it is true I am on a wrong visa and having non immigrant doesn't allow me to stay long term and I should get the extension. I mean worst case scenario I will buy the Thai Elite visa because people write about it as a valid option. So yeah will just stay abroad at least 6 months/year from now on and get the marriage extension ASAP.

 

Thanks for all the info/Thread closed.

In the meantime, if you are still planning on attending your friends wedding outside Thailand before sorting out local banking, getting a extension based on marriage, an Elite visa or taking the wife back to Europe, use Suvarnabhumi airport as recommended by ubonjoe in the very first response to your OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, mvdf said:

I'm struggling to understand why you and others on this forum WONDER why IOs behave in a manner you deem inappropriate! 

 

I am Asian and when I travel to Schengen countries, the U.S., Australia etc I am occasionally interrogated, my travel history scrutinised, itinerary analysed...

 

Why is it that you think or expect westerners to be treated preferentially, kowtowed even, just because you come from first world countries? Immigration authorities in this region are entitled to interrogate, analyse, admit or expel, scrutinise all arriving human beings at ports of entry in the same exact manner we Asians are treated when we arrive at your airports!

 

That is a good answer, but Thailand depends on tourism and people settling here more than the US, UK Australia etc, and should be enforcing the rules where employers and illegal workers are concerned, and trying to encourage tourism and people who want to settle here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

That is a good answer, but Thailand depends on tourism and people settling here more than the US, UK Australia etc, and should be enforcing the rules where employers and illegal workers are concerned, and trying to encourage tourism and people who want to settle here.

Thailand does not depend on people settling here. In fact people settling here is the last thing they want unless they bring investment. This would dilute what they call "Thainess" and also bring radical ideas like 'democracy' and free speech. The US specifically requires immigration to keep GDP growth moving along and fund future needs as the birth rate is too low to sustain the country in the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, tonray said:

Thailand does not depend on people settling here. In fact people settling here is the last thing they want unless they bring investment. This would dilute what they call "Thainess" and also bring radical ideas like 'democracy' and free speech. The US specifically requires immigration to keep GDP growth moving along and fund future needs as the birth rate is too low to sustain the country in the long term.

So if every expat who lives here, who have wifes, families and regular incomes from their own country, suddenly upped and left at the first opportunity, it would not harm Thailand in any way, and the Thai government would be glad to see us go?:sad:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mstevens said:

Are you serious when you say Immigration officers are behaving like jerks?  They are just doing their job!  The onus is on the traveller to prove that he has the means to be able to survive in Thailand and proof that he will leave.  Thailand's entry requirements set the bar very low and if you cannot show 20,000 baht for a 2-month stay and a ticket out of the country, seriously, they shouldn't allow you in.

I think you need to re-read the things that have been said to people entering - very unprofessional.  "Jerk" is a 4-letter word I can use in this forum, though not nearly harsh enough, when it comes to playing with people's lives.  I was questioned for awhile once - but was treated professionally, and would not put the IOs I dealt with in this category.   I was never called a "liar," for example - an accusation that should only occur when accompanied by arrest and proof of such.

 

All the cases I have seen where the person was rejected for not having 20K baht in cash or travelers checks, they Could Have Shown It if allowed to go to an ATM - and in the airport-cases, accessed their funds for buying their emergency tickets out.  20K isn't enough for a 2-month stay, which is another reason it is a pointless rule.  A "throwaway" ticket is $30 or less, and proves nothing.

 

58 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

In the meantime, if you are still planning on attending your friends wedding outside Thailand before sorting out local banking, getting a extension based on marriage, an Elite visa or taking the wife back to Europe, use Suvarnabhumi airport as recommended by ubonjoe in the very first response to your OP.

He already has a Multi-O Visa based on marriage, I believe.  If so, he does not need a new visa.  He needs to enter somewhere that the IOs follow the law, and don't arbitrarily decide whom they subjectively think should or should not be in Thailand.  I would suggest flying back to Malaysia (a country where immigration follows their laws) and then do a land border-crossing.

 

46 minutes ago, tonray said:

Thailand does not depend on people settling here. In fact people settling here is the last thing they want unless they bring investment. This would dilute what they call "Thainess" and also bring radical ideas like 'democracy' and free speech.

Thailand does depend on foreigners living and spending their foreign-capital here, of which each contributes multiple Thai-salaries worth of investment.  That is why the retirement-system exists.  

Democracy is not considered radical at all - you should watch the Friday-evening speeches by the NCPO (has English subs).  But as in the USA, under The Thai Constitution, Democracy is contained within a framework to avoid 51%-mob-rule tyranny. 

I agree that cultural-dilution is a concern, and would support limiting foreign persons to specific, already "culturally compromised" areas - though the Internet and virtual-reality is going to undermine this eventually, in any case.

 

45 minutes ago, tonray said:

The US specifically requires immigration to keep GDP growth moving along and fund future needs as the birth rate is too low to sustain the country in the long term.

We have automation, now - do not need "more bodies".  Unemployment is about equal to the number of foreign-workers - so we could end poverty and the crisis in welfare-program funding in a few years, by simply returning the illegal persons in the country, and pausing immigration.  But ending "cheap human lives" is not what those in power desire. 

The Social-Security ponzi-scheme is the only area where the "more people" rule holds - because it literally is a Ponzi Scheme by definition, so requires exponential growth to maintain the illusion of solubility; this will need to be replaced by a different system, eventually.  Royalties from public land, ocean, and underground resources would make the most sense, as it does not involve stealing what someone else created/earned to fund it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

So if every expat who lives here, who have wifes, families and regular incomes from their own country, suddenly upped and left at the first opportunity, it would not harm Thailand in any way, and the Thai government would be glad to see us go?:sad:

You overstate the importance of expats to the Thai economy, it is a benefit but hardly what keeps the country economically stable. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, tonray said:

You overstate the importance of expats to the Thai economy, it is a benefit but hardly what keeps the country economically stable. 

Also think of all the empty hotel rooms all over Thailand even in the so called high season, mainly because of Thailands attitude to tourists, because they are supposed to be anxious that no one gets the chance to work illegally, yet they will not put the emphasis on the employers or the illegal workers themselves, they are just too lazy to get off their backsides and raid the factories and schools, and dare I say it, opening brown envelopes.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Yes you are right and untill your post I didn't realize that I made it unclear. So yeah I was finally let in . The title of the thread was reffering to my visit back to my home country next month and me coming back whether there is a chance I am going to be denied entry? Anyway people are right and in fact I caused the harm to myself by being totally careless with the law etc. (like Thai people being caught when the Police finally stops them for driving without helmet)I would appreciate for the mod to either change the title or even close it because I unconsciously might spread wrong information because yeah I was let in .......
 
Thanks for all the info/Thread closed.



Seems to be a lot of that lately. Mis-titling of threads to get attention.

I just had a 2 friends (one over 60 and 1
I've heard of people putting a little extra ฿notes, and that was mainly for multiple VE entries. But never outright denials for having correct visa.

I concur that thread should be re-titled and locked to avoid further misinformation/trolling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 63   Posted (edited)

13 hours ago, elviajero said:

How does the IO know the visa holder is married. All they see is someone living in Thailand for 3 years using visas rather than an appropriate extension of stay.

9 hours ago, JackThompson said:

It appears he had a Non-O Visa based on Marriage.  That is all they should need to see.  Showing "proof" was done to get the visa.  If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (who issue visas at consulates), they can take it up with them - not hassle people who did Absolutely Nothing Wrong At ALL!!

 

 

Your missing elviajeros valid point Jack.

A Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained based on marriage, visiting a child or being in receipt of a state pension (depending on Embassy/Consulate requirements).

There is absolutely nothing on that Visa to suggest to an IO it was issued based on the OP being married to a Thai.

The OP must leave every 90 days to re-enter and receive another 90 days, so is putting himself under scrutiny and questioning, albeit due to his younger age.

 

If the OP deposited 400,000THB in a Thai bank and obtained an 'extension of stay' based on marriage, then;

1. He could make local 90 day reports without the need to exit/re-enter every 90 days and face scrutiny.

2. An extension clearly states the basis of issue, either 'retirement' or 'marriage'.

3. It tells an IO the OP has already met the financial requirements in order to obtain an extension.

 

They are also aware a Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained from Savannakhet with no financial proof required.

 

Edited by dentonian
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dentonian said:

 

Your missing elviajeros valid point Jack.

A Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained based on marriage, visiting a child or being in receipt of a state pension (depending on Embassy/Consulate requirements).

There is absolutely nothing on that Visa to suggest to an IO it was issued based on the OP being married to a Thai.

The OP must leave every 90 days to re-enter and receive another 90 days, so is putting himself under scrutiny and questioning, albeit due to his younger age.

 

If the OP deposited 400,000THB in a Thai bank and obtained an 'extension of stay' based on marriage, then;

1. He could make local 90 day reports without the need to exit/re-enter every 90 days and face scrutiny.

2. An extension clearly states the basis of issue, either 'retirement' or 'marriage'.

3. It tells an IO the OP has already met the financial requirements in order to obtain an extension.

 

They are also aware a Non Imm O ME Visa can be obtained from Savannakhet with no financial proof required.

 

Maybe you are correct on this - but their attitude (in some areas - including most airports) seems to be that Thais who marry foreigners are traitors, and both they and their husbands "are not wanted here" and should leave (see the other thread - 'Denied Entry' at Swampy).  We are dealing with people who literally tore-up a Thai-child's Thai passport, because they saw he had a 2nd one (different thread).  That's just hate - plain and simple. 

 

The OP will be leaving and returning soon - not sure if a re-entry permit on a Marriage extension would yield better results at the airport - but maybe it would.  In any case, it Should Not Be Necessary, as he already has the correct legal visa for entry.

 

Unless a  visa is invalid / fake / forged, or the person is a national-security threat, it is not their business whether he is married, retired, whatever.  Their job is to process his entry.  If the rules say he must have 20K Baht to enter , they can ask for that.  They should not in any way be unprofessional, insulting, degrading, etc at Any Point in the process.

 

If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vis-a-vis Savanahket, they need to deal with them directly - not by harassing people who followed the rules and obtained legal, valid visas.  Let's hope they don't, as that would break up thousands of Thai / Farang mixed families - though I suspect some would think that is a good thing.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Maybe you are correct on this - but their attitude (in some areas - including most airports) seems to be that Thais who marry foreigners are traitors, and both they and their husbands "are not wanted here" and should leave (see the other thread - 'Denied Entry' at Swampy).  We are dealing with people who literally tore-up a Thai-child's Thai passport, because they saw he had a 2nd one (different thread).  That's just hate - plain and simple. 

 

The OP will be leaving and returning soon - not sure if a re-entry permit on a Marriage extension would yield better results at the airport - but maybe it would.  In any case, it Should Not Be Necessary, as he already has the correct legal visa for entry.

 

Unless a  visa is invalid / fake / forged, or the person is a national-security threat, it is not their business whether he is married, retired, whatever.  Their job is to process his entry.  If the rules say he must have 20K Baht to enter , they can ask for that.  They should not in any way be unprofessional, insulting, degrading, etc at Any Point in the process.

 

If Immigration has a problem with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs vis-a-vis Savanahket, they need to deal with them directly - not by harassing people who followed the rules and obtained legal, valid visas.  Let's hope they don't, as that would break up thousands of Thai / Farang mixed families - though I suspect some would think that is a good thing.  

I agree that in certain situations IO's overstep the mark either due to the fact they are ignorant of their own laws (Dual nationality as one example) or believe they have the authority to do as they wish.

They are Police at the end of the day and have the right to ask questions if suspicious.

 

Because of the OP's personal situation, being younger, holding a Non Imm O ME which doesn't state the basis on which it was issued and making frequent border runs, I too would be suspicious of how he can financially remain in Thailand without working illegally.

 

The OP needs to either continue as present, expect some scrutiny, but carry a copy of his Thai marriage certificate and proof of a  sufficient source of funds (bank statement) that he doesn't need to work in order to satisfy their curiosity, OR

Obtain an extension based on marriage, where his proof of marriage and funding has already been approved by Immigration.

 

How often do we read 'Denied entry on Marriage extension'?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dentonian said:

I agree that in certain situations IO's overstep the mark either due to the fact they are ignorant of their own laws (Dual nationality as one example) or believe they have the authority to do as they wish.

They are Police at the end of the day and have the right to ask questions if suspicious.

 

Because of the OP's personal situation, being younger, holding a Non Imm O ME which doesn't state the basis on which it was issued and making frequent border runs, I too would be suspicious of how he can financially remain in Thailand without working illegally.

 

The OP needs to either continue as present, expect some scrutiny, but carry a copy of his Thai marriage certificate and proof of a  sufficient source of funds (bank statement) that he doesn't need to work in order to satisfy their curiosity, OR

Obtain an extension based on marriage, where his proof of marriage and funding has already been approved by Immigration.

 

How often do we read 'Denied entry on Marriage extension'?

Agree on carrying proof - I have a binder of stuff to prove I am financially-independent, condo-lease, etc, for TR entries.  Now it appears Non-O folks need "proof," too. Thing is - we never heard of any threatened denials of entry on Non-O-Multiples until very recently.  First, some warnings at Poipet, a very strict entry-point  - and people there were told to "use the airport."  Seems that was a trap, with IOs in the airports lacking the civil-professionalism I experienced at Poipet.

 

I am a big supporter of border-security - keeping out the "real bad guys."  I like the lack of street-anarchy here, as compared to the lawlessness and relative-crime-danger I saw in Latin America.  It is the lack of consistency - a sort of border-police-anarchy, which I find objectionable.  If Non-O folks need "proofs" to use their visas for entry, those need to be clearly stated in a public forum.  Same for all other visa-categories.  Spell it out, then enforce it.

 

If Thailand chooses move in a "Bhutan" direction on immigration, that is their choice, however sad for the Thai people.  These random episodes at entry-points neither clarify the rules of entry, nor provide notice of when someone needs to leave retirement and take a Thai's job in order to get a B-Visa (until one turns 50), or pack it up, or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ID: 67   Posted (edited)

4 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Agree on carrying proof - I have a binder of stuff to prove I am financially-independent, condo-lease, etc, for TR entries.  Now it appears Non-O folks need "proof," too. Thing is - we never heard of any threatened denials of entry on Non-O-Multiples until very recently.  First, some warnings at Poipet, a very strict entry-point  - and people there were told to "use the airport."  Seems that was a trap, with IOs in the airports lacking the civil-professionalism I experienced at Poipet.

 

I am a big supporter of border-security - keeping out the "real bad guys."  I like the lack of street-anarchy here, as compared to the lawlessness and relative-crime-danger I saw in Latin America.  It is the lack of consistency - a sort of border-police-anarchy, which I find objectionable.  If Non-O folks need "proofs" to use their visas for entry, those need to be clearly stated in a public forum.  Same for all other visa-categories.  Spell it out, then enforce it.

 

If Thailand chooses move in a "Bhutan" direction on immigration, that is their choice, however sad for the Thai people.  These random episodes at entry-points neither clarify the rules of entry, nor provide notice of when someone needs to leave retirement and take a Thai's job in order to get a B-Visa (until one turns 50), or pack it up, or whatever.

Well there's always the guys that live here on extensions and don't need to hop in and out of the country to maintain a facade of living here. They tend to whine a lot about 90-day reporting though.

 

Then there's those with multiple entry O's who are a bit economical with truth when it comes to reasons for having such a visa and need to 'leave the building' frequently. One upside is no 90-day reports to whine about.

 

Then there's those with TR, SETV and METV who aren't (never were) tourists.

 

To be honest, it is well over a year since many people started reporting being advised either by Immigration or regional Thai embassies that they only need a single entry O visa based on having a Thai spouse and they should get that converted to the appropriate long-stay enabling extension on their return to Thailand. Now, if people chose to ignore this, then they can hardly start complaining about actual enforcement. Nobody is being blind-sided or misled but most are maybe guilty of being lulled into a sense of false security with 'TiT' and mai bpen rai. However, considering that there's a new sheriff in town who's not about to lighten up anytime soon, some have been remiss in keeping their priorities straight.

Edited by NanLaew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, possum1931 said:

So if every expat who lives here, who have wifes, families and regular incomes from their own country, suddenly upped and left at the first opportunity, it would not harm Thailand in any way, and the Thai government would be glad to see us go?:sad:

You are expecting logic.  This is the country that removes street foods, despite it being one of its main tourist attraction.  The country that removes beach loungers/areas despite it being a main attraction.  Their actions may not be at all realated to their goals, and the goals of one department may be at odds with another.

 

Immigration does not get a pat on the back when Tourism figures go up.  They get a kick in the rear when they let someone in who they shouldn't. 

 

Tourism does not get a pat on the back when they stop someone undesirable from coming in.  They get a kick in the rear when they don't increase the # of people who come in.

 

No one is in charge that co-ordinates the two goals appropriately.  (This is a country that can not even introduce a seat belt enforcement policy correctly).

 

 

Stop thinking too much and you may start to see why things are done the way they are done :)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, JackThompson said:

No where does is it written - that I have seen - that a Multiple-Entry Non-O based on marriage visa is for "short visits only."  If documentation of such exists, someone please reference it.  The same for anyone who can show a limit on how long per-year a person can visit on Tourist Visas.  Where is it written - English or Thai?

Here's a clue. You are only allowed to stay for 90 days. That is a short visit. If you want to stay beyond that you must apply for an extension of stay. Surely you must understand that a visa that limits your stay, and requires you to leave the country, is not meant as a means to live in the country.

 

A tourist is limited to a maximum stay of 90 days after which they have to leave the country. The fact that you can apply for back to back visas is not a green light that you can live in the country. They clearly don't have a problem with tourists visiting several times over the year, but equally, like other countries, they expect tourists to return home between visits.

 

Why you would want them to start enforcing limits is beyond me. It's like a turkey voting for Christmas!

 

20 hours ago, JackThompson said:

If the OP had a Non-O Multiple Entry Visa - that is the "correct visa," and what happened only shows that foreigners are being treated in an unprofessional manner at airports, even when they have valid visas, and are following Thai law. 

It is the correct visa for someone living outside Thailand that goes home between visits. If you are living in the country you have no need for a multiple entry visa (any visa), and should apply for an extension of stay. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason! Thai officialdom is not stupid and as married expat numbers grow the stricter they will become to ensure those living in the country are vetted by local immigration.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Here's a clue. You are only allowed to stay for 90 days. That is a short visit. If you want to stay beyond that you must apply for an extension of stay. Surely you must understand that a visa that limits your stay, and requires you to leave the country, is not meant as a means to live in the country.

 

A tourist is limited to a maximum stay of 90 days after which they have to leave the country. The fact that you can apply for back to back visas is not a green light that you can live in the country.

The fact that there is no published limit means there is no limit.  "Live here some of the time" or "half of the time" or "67% of the time" - what is the rule?  At this point, there isn't one.  If they decide to impose a limit, no Farang is stopping them, though perhaps the predicted economic results give them pause.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

They clearly don't have a problem with tourists visiting several times over the year, but equally, like other countries, they expect tourists to return home between visits.

I assume you mean "go somewhere else" between visits - my passport country is in no way "home" to me - it's far down the list.  Though some do report that going "home" for visas has some significance / legitimacy to the immigration people - an anachronistic idea, such as the notion of "work" being tied to "going to a physical location," I presume - or maybe just an assumption of what we think, that they think.  It gets confusing when nothing is written down, and all we have to go on are scattered reports and offhand remarks by lower-level persons which may reflect their prejudices more than any official policy.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Why you would want them to start enforcing limits is beyond me. It's like a turkey voting for Christmas!

I don't wish for limits - but if they are going to have limits that could bite me in the backside, I would like to know precisely what those limits are, in advance.  That way, I can comport to the rules, and we can be "all smiles," relaxed, and happy when I come and go - a "win-win" result for everybody.

 

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It is the correct visa for someone living outside Thailand that goes home between visits. If you are living in the country you have no need for a multiple entry visa (any visa), and should apply for an extension of stay. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason! Thai officialdom is not stupid and as married expat numbers grow the stricter they will become to ensure those living in the country are vetted by local immigration.

Some report their immigration offices are unfriendly, or they said the wrong thing and are now effectively blacklisted, etc.  Others say they like the "break from Thailand."  Others likely don't make enough money to qualify for an annual-stay - though perhaps more than a median Thai income, so a net-benefit to their families - and want to live here with their wives and/or give their kids a "dad."  It was my impression that this is why Savanakhet doesn't require financial proof - to provide a way for those families to stay intact. 

 

But, again, if there are going to be rules for these or any types of visas - "stay out a week before returning," or whatever - they simply need to publish those rules.  At that point, they can enforce them to their hearts content, and no one gets blindsided.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, elviajero said:

. Why would anyone want to do a border run every 90 days unless they were dodging local immigration for some reason!

1. Ignorance of how to apply for an extension. (Lazy/Stupid).

2. Can't meet the financial requirements.

3. Not a bona fide dejure and defacto marriage.

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

The only issue I have is that a person who has a multiple Non O based on marriage should be allowed  entry without questions.  It is true that person may be living in Thailand and normally should be getting an extension of stay. However, what if the person just cannot meet the financial requirements because they have purchased a home or a vehicle. Should they be denied entry to stay with their family? they may have an income below the requirements or their spouse maybe working.

The Universal Declaration of Rights states a person has a right to marry.However, governments have set up income levels which are arbitrary and in some cases are inhibiting a person's right to be with family. Of course, on a practical level- that person whould become employed and get a work permit or return to their home country and work and send support money.  Separation is tough.  Try it sometime and see how you feel.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple.

 

Go to your local immigration office and get a 12 month Extension of Temporary Stay.

 

Done. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dentonian said:

1. Ignorance of how to apply for an extension. (Lazy/Stupid).

2. Can't meet the financial requirements.

3. Not a bona fide dejure and defacto marriage.

 

How about having an excuse to leave your wife or go somewhere together? Thai people are lazy wife don't like to go anywhere unless forced to so having a legitimate reason to leave the country can be a good thing. And if she doesn't want to go no matter what still having 3-4 days when you don't have to be  a family guy isn't bad neither. On top of that local immigration no explaining really that there is any advantage of the other option. Not to mention that if you just search thai visa forum most searches end up with the marriage visa option so if not in the know you would assume that it is the preferable option (maybe that's stupid but several year of traveling the world teached me that if doubt follow what long term expacts in the country do instead of trying reinventing the wheel they are usually well informed about potential hickups)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Frank12 said:

Thai people are lazy wife don't like to go anywhere unless forced to

That was enough dribble for me......I can understand why your wife doesn't want to go with you!

I'll say no more in response, less I receive a 2 week holiday.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

BANGKOK 30 April 2017 19:59
Sponsors