Vientiane consulate rejections

[Khun Robert]

2 minutes ago, Freespirit said:

You are missing the point. Why should there be any limit to how long a tourist wants to stay. Why 60 days. They used to have triple tourist visas 60 + 60 + 60 with 3 x 30 day extensions. Total 270 days. You can be a genuine tourist for however long you like. Its only now they are trying to eliminate that. If an individual likes to travel that's his or her free choice. They are just making it harder to do so in Thailand. 

There is the new Multiple Entry Tourist Visa for 6 months which if correctly used also give you 270 days.

 

[chrisinth]

1 hour ago, dentonian said:

If your employed and can only take a few weeks away from work, then the Visa exempt allows 30 days for most, the TV allows 60 days extendable to 90 days. How much longer do you think an employer would keep his job open.

 

If you can afford to take two years out, you can afford the Thai Elite.

 

I believe the authorities are making a statement by saying get the correct Visa for the purpose of your visit.

Could you explain why it is stipulated that you need to be employed for a METV? Given your own question as above.

 

IMO, they made a mess of this visa by restricting it to be issued only in your home country (for most, I know there are a few exceptions) and by the restriction of proving employment. Extract those two things out of it and they can save face while giving people the option of a longer stay in-country.

 

As you rightly state, how many employers would keep the job open for someone utilizing the METV to the max?

Edited February 20, 2017 by chrisinth

[dentonian]

12 minutes ago, Freespirit said:

You are missing the point. Why should there be any limit to how long a tourist wants to stay. Why 60 days. They used to have triple tourist visas 60 + 60 + 60 with 3 x 30 day extensions. Total 270 days. You can be a genuine tourist for however long you like. Its only now they are trying to eliminate that. If an individual likes to travel that's his or her free choice. They are just making it harder to do so in Thailand. 

Because people abused the system.

 

I know of a few retired barstool alcoholics that have stayed in Thailand for years on TV's and Visa exempts.

Could they be classified as contributing to the Thai economy?

One thing they are not, are tourists.

The message is simple for these types, get on the correct Visa or extension, or get out.

 

Incidentally, two of these were refused another TV at Savannakhet last week because they couldn't provide any proof of funds or tickets out of Thailand.

I guess they'll revert to paying unscrupulous agents to get TV's for them now.

Edited February 20, 2017 by dentonian

[Destiny1990]

Yes simply offer a one year long stay tourist visa without border runs hassle for a 12,000 bht?with one rule only to show money in bank account for being able to finance your stay.Several Asian countries offering less over regulated Visa deals

[Freespirit]

5 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

Could you explain why it is stipulated that you need to be employed for a METV? Given your own question as above.

 

IMO, they made a mess of this visa by restricting it to be issued only in your home country (for most, I know there are a few exceptions) and by the restriction of proving employment. Extract those two things out of it and they can save face while giving people the option of a longer stay in-country.

Yes they ruined the METV by limiting it to 2 x 60 days and requiring proof of full time employment and a hefty bank balance. Why? So what company is going to give  4 months off plus extensions? Not many. Long term travellers who need long term visa's won't be working in a company will they?

[Destiny1990]

2 minutes ago, dentonian said:

Because people abused the system.

 

I know of a few retired barstool alcoholics that have stayed in Thailand for years on TV's and Visa exempts.

Could they be classified as contributing to the Thai economy?

One thing they are not, are tourists.

The message is simple for these types, get on the correct Visa or extension, or get out.

Many long term tourists that like spend 1-2 years in Thailand.Yes of course they contributing to Thai economy.Hotels, food taxi ,massage, drinks, hairdresser, hospital visits..dumm troll u are!

[Freespirit]

3 minutes ago, Destiny1990 said:

Yes simply offer a one year long stay tourist visa without border runs hassle for a 12,000 bht?with one rule only to show money in bank account for being able to finance your stay.Several Asian countries offering less over regulated Visa deals

Yes, great idea. It would be very popular, eliminate the need for border runs, and help by paying the 12,000 to Thai immigration instead of to other countries. It's such a good idea, and money maker for them, that I can't understand why they don't do it.

[mstevens]

3 hours ago, ThaiWai said:

So don't issue any visas just in case some of the applicants may possibly being doing something wrong?  Really?  That's the best strategy you think they came up with for blocking illegal workers? Really??  

No, that is not what I said at all.  I think that their systems should be beefed up so that after a certain number of days in Thailand per year - let's say 180 - that the onus is on "the traveller" to prove that they are a bona fide tourist and not working illegally as tens of thousands are.  This is hardly a radical idea and most countries would have started asking questions well before someone spent 6 months there as a tourist.

[Freespirit]

9 minutes ago, dentonian said:

Because people abused the system.

 

I know of a few retired barstool alcoholics that have stayed in Thailand for years on TV's and Visa exempts.

Could they be classified as contributing to the Thai economy?

One thing they are not, are tourists.

The message is simple for these types, get on the correct Visa or extension, or get out.

They are actually contributing to the economy, they buy their drinks which come from Thai companies, importers and distributors, they also have to sleep somewhere  so pay for accomodation, and eat food too. I do drink occassionally but in moderation, so am in no way an alcholic. But those that choose to be will probably end up visiting a hospital in the long run, so another contribution to the economy. So your ideas are flawed again. You need to look at the bigger picture. I know we often encounter the less desirable and often obnoxious drunks but we don't now what made them that way. I do know of one who is dying of cancer so who can blame him for drinking.

[rkidlad]

If this about stopping people from coming to Thailand to work illegally, fair enough. But there's surely an easier answer. What job would come to mind when thinking about illegal foreign workers? (Westerners) I'd say teaching. So why not go after the core of the problem; the schools. If you're deadly serious on stopping unqualified teachers, impose harsh penalties on schools/agencies who employ illegally. Simple, right? Hell, you could walk into the first 5 schools in Bangkok with foreign teachers and I'd guarantee you'd find at least one who was illegal. This is not happening, so this suggests to me that they're not that serious on foreign teachers. So why the big show?

 

Tourists are essentially customers. Sure, there are bad ones. But most come and spend money. 10 years ago I was a backpacker for a year. Travelled to many places. Came in and out of Thailand many times with no problem at all. If I tried to do that now as a genuine tourist, I wouldn't be able to. I'd be a bit bummed, but I'd end up just going to Vietnam and Cambodia more. I'd tell other tourists on my travel that Thailand is unpredictable for visas so probably best going else where. This is all very counterproductive. 

 

You can't have the tourist dollars without the tourists. 

 

 

[dentonian]

25 minutes ago, chrisinth said:

Could you explain why it is stipulated that you need to be employed for a METV? Given your own question as above.

 

IMO, they made a mess of this visa by restricting it to be issued only in your home country (for most, I know there are a few exceptions) and by the restriction of proving employment. Extract those two things out of it and they can save face while giving people the option of a longer stay in-country.

 

As you rightly state, how many employers would keep the job open for someone utilizing the METV to the max?

Nope, I'm guessing it was aimed at frequent visitors who may be doing business in Thailand on behalf of their employer without actually doing any manual labour that could be construed as working.

They offer the APEC business card for Asian countries for the same circumstances.

[chrisinth]

3 minutes ago, dentonian said:

Nope, I'm guessing it was aimed at frequent visitors who may be doing business in Thailand on behalf of their employer without actually doing any manual labour that could be construed as working.

They offer the APEC business card for Asian countries for the same circumstances.

That is what a non-B visa is for, not just for the issue of work permits and extensions.

 

How could they legally do business on a tourist visa? Unless they are just attending seminars or exhibitions? Labour doesn't have to be manual to be construed as work as you well know....................

Edited February 20, 2017 by chrisinth

[alocacoc]

2 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

If this about stopping people from coming to Thailand to work illegally, fair enough. But there's surely an easier answer. What job would come to mind when thinking about illegal foreign workers? (Westerners) I'd say teaching. So why not go after the core of the problem; the schools. If you're deadly serious on stopping unqualified teachers, impose harsh penalties on schools/agencies who employ illegally. Simple, right? Hell, you could walk into the first 5 schools in Bangkok with foreign teachers and I'd guarantee you'd find at least one who was illegal. This is not happening, so this suggests to me that they're not that serious on foreign teachers. So why the big show?

 

 

 

 

I agree. I give you a second example. Here in Pattaya are many real estate offices with Russian employees. Most of them are on Tourist Visas or ED Visa. For the ED visa, they bribe an offi** at the immi******* to not get checked if they attend the lessons. Many people do that. It would be easy fort the authorities to check such offices.

 

As you said, it doesn't happen. We would read it on daily news.

[Khun Robert]

Also lot of people working in the Scuba Diving are on Tourists Visa.

I know it is not the most reliable source, but in this overview from de Department of Tourism and Sports

the average stay of tourists. The longest stayers are Europeans with an average of 16.85 days, one SETV

should be enough.

http://www.thaiwebsites.com/tourism-income-Thailand.asp

 

[alocacoc]

From all that posts I red, I can't find any evidence that Vientiane did tighten their rules. The very few reports didn't mention details /backgrounds of their history. Ubonjoe mentioned, he got an PM from an OP which said, he got a mark / warning stamp at another consulate. This might be an reason. Maybe as well too many visa exempt entries combined with ED visas and whatever.

 

We only know that the consulate in Savannakhet now is asking for proof of finance and a ticket out of the Kingdom.

 

I'm still convinced, that a bank statement as well at the consulate in Vientiane will be helpful, which i will provide next time again.

[Destiny1990]

So they somewhat ban out the visa for all long term staying tourists especially under 50 years  In order to prevent a couple of farang teachers and dive instructors to abusing it ?

[NoshowJones]

4 hours ago, dentonian said:

You mean backpackers who have the time to explore because they don't hold down any employment and travel on the benefits their paid from the taxes I paid. Yeah right!

If that's the case, they are sure getting too much in benefit, and I would be agreeing with you, assuming you are from the UK, I cannot see anyone traveling to Thailand on benefits unless these benefits are over and above any other money they get.

[natway09]

Why would Thailand want bacpackers for a year? come on get real

[modafinil]

Yes, I suspected that SETVs would suddenly become much harder to get when they made them "free".

 

Thailand shooting itself in the foot again. Cancel the free visas, if somebody cannot afford 1000 Baht they should not be in Thailand anyway. A lot of people are tired of immigration's "games" and constantly changing rules, and have left.

 

Hint to Thailand: People staying in the country for 13 weeks spend more foreign currency than people who stay for 1 week. Maybe you should factor that into your tourism stats instead of relying on "number of arrivals", many of which are people from Laos and Malaysia who hop across the border for a few days and then go home, spending almost nothing.

[alocacoc]

2 minutes ago, modafinil said:

 many of which are people from Laos and Malaysia who hop across the border for a few days and then go home, spending almost nothing.

Sure. The last visarun I did with a visa company was packed with Laotian girls. Back in Pattaya, the driver let them out at a massage studio. So, all these girls are working and we can be sure, they will save every Baht they can to send it back home.

 

I agree with you, this guys who define the rules lost the big picture.

[Hedghog]

Imagine how Thais feel.

Difficulty getting a tourist visa to many western countries.

Plus the cost.

Maybe a tourist visa here should be in the Baht 20,000 region.

Restrictions on length of stay,no hopping the border for a renewal.

Then there would be some complaints

Westerners coming here have it sooooo easy.

Some folk on here are so full of their own entitlement.

[alocacoc]

It's annoying that such topics always ends in debates about who is entitled for apply a TV. I guess, these posts comes mostly from old grumpy farts.

 

Imo, posts from members like "Get Real" should be considered as off-topic and hereby deleted to keep the topic interesting for members who want to get informed.

 

Btw, just contacted my visa agency, nobody got rejected today in Vientiane.

Edited February 20, 2017 by alocacoc

[metisdead]

Inflammatory bickering posts and replies have been removed.

[ThaiWai]

5 hours ago, mstevens said:

No, that is not what I said at all.  I think that their systems should be beefed up so that after a certain number of days in Thailand per year - let's say 180 - that the onus is on "the traveller" to prove that they are a bona fide tourist and not working illegally as tens of thousands are.  This is hardly a radical idea and most countries would have started asking questions well before someone spent 6 months there as a tourist.

Yes, it is what you said.  You continue to purport that the reason Vientiane is issuing less visas because of some relation to illegal workers in Thailand with no evidence to support your claim.  It's obviously your private beef.  It is impossible to prove a negative.  

Applicant: "I don't work in Thailand"

Embassy Staff: "Prove it"

Huh?  If you are to be accused of something the onus is not on you to defend yourself.  It is on the accuser to prove their claim.  

[alocacoc]

In case some "newbies" are confused. Stick to Ubonjoe. He is the most reliable person on this forum related to visa stuff. He is always kind and very skilled.

[MobileContent]

In November I posted already that the Thai consulates will be under stricter guidance from early 2017 and report directly to the Embassies.

 

It will not take to long and then the Thai's will follow Schengen. 6 months in and 6 months out.

 

 

[MobileContent]

6 hours ago, chrisinth said:

Could you explain why it is stipulated that you need to be employed for a METV? Given your own question as above.

 

IMO, they made a mess of this visa by restricting it to be issued only in your home country (for most, I know there are a few exceptions) and by the restriction of proving employment. Extract those two things out of it and they can save face while giving people the option of a longer stay in-country.

 

As you rightly state, how many employers would keep the job open for someone utilizing the METV to the max?

 

Its the same when Thais want to apply for a tourist visa to the West such as Schengen. They need to show property many times and a stable job. Their are many farangs in Thailand that do not have a stable job and they work under the radar because those companies that employ them don't have enough paid-up capital. I know plenty of them and just meet a few last week on a beer. 

 

A METV is the best option for most people that want to stay longterm in Thailand and that are willing to fly back to their home country to get it.

 

If they are not emplyed but can show they have cash in the bank account most embassies will issue that METV.

[alocacoc]

3 minutes ago, MobileContent said:

 

If they are not emplyed but can show they have cash in the bank account most embassies will issue that METV.

And that's the case now at Savannakhet (for SETV). They want see some funds. Even those 20k Baht are ridiculous.

 

I'm quite convinced, people may get more visas in a rowat local consulates as long they have proof of funds (preferably comes from abroad).

 

Other member mentioned that Savannakhet accepted even foreign bank account statements. If it's this the way to go, it shouldn't be a problem for the most. Only applicants who indeed working illegally here and don't have any funds at home could face a problem.

 

I still believe, the goal of  Thai authorities is not to limit down the time which someone staying here by TVs. They want to be sure, that the applicant is able to finance himself and that his income comes from abroad.

[muzmurray]

13 hours ago, MobileContent said:

 

Its the same when Thais want to apply for a tourist visa to the West such as Schengen. They need to show property many times and a stable job. Their are many farangs in Thailand that do not have a stable job and they work under the radar because those companies that employ them don't have enough paid-up capital. I know plenty of them and just meet a few last week on a beer. 

 

A METV is the best option for most people that want to stay longterm in Thailand and that are willing to fly back to their home country to get it.

 

If they are not emplyed but can show they have cash in the bank account most embassies will issue that METV.

 

This only has to be on paper, not actual cash, so I find your statement hard to believe.

[chrisinth]

14 hours ago, MobileContent said:

 

Its the same when Thais want to apply for a tourist visa to the West such as Schengen. They need to show property many times and a stable job. Their are many farangs in Thailand that do not have a stable job and they work under the radar because those companies that employ them don't have enough paid-up capital. I know plenty of them and just meet a few last week on a beer. 

 

A METV is the best option for most people that want to stay longterm in Thailand and that are willing to fly back to their home country to get it.

 

If they are not emplyed but can show they have cash in the bank account most embassies will issue that METV.

 

I do agree that proof of funds is certainly a valid requisite to prove.

 

My major point was that it wouldn't be likely (in general) for an employer to hold open a job for the employee that was maximizing the length of stay allowed by the METV, hence Thailand not maximizing the potential numbers of people utilizing it.

 

If embassies/consulates are flexible with the 'employed' part of the requirements and proof of funds is enough, fair enough, although i do believe a lot of embassies will stick to the checklist.