tourist visa

Post by **maaka** » February 3, 2015, 7:58 am

sorry to bore you over these visa issues, but havent got my scone around this newish Tourist Visa thingy...the once was 30 day visa when arrive at border, to the now supposed 60 day Tourist Visa...am I right in thinking that if I rock up at Swanny in few weeks time, they will give me 60 days, or does one have to apply at embassy???

Post by **jackspratt** » February 3, 2015, 8:48 am

You will get 30 days if you arrive at an international airport, and 15 (?14) days if you enter Thailand via a land crossing eg Nong Khai.

If you have too many land crossing entry permits in recent times, you may be told to go back from whence you came, and get a visa from the closest Embassy.

If you want 60 days, I believe you must get a tourist visa from an Embassy.

Post by **Macca** » February 3, 2015, 9:13 am

November 2013 they changed the VoA rules from 15 days to 30 days for 7 nationalities entering Thailand at land crossings.
The list included Brits but not Aussies.

It seems however that yet again the rules have changed and now it's back to 15 days for all.
http://www.thaiembassy.com/thailand/new-visa-rules.php

Post by **BobHelm** » February 3, 2015, 9:16 am

I can remember reading a piece in one of the Thai papers towards the end of last year.
It said that Immigration Offices would be happy to grant a 30 day extension to a 30 day Visa exemption granted on arrival at an International airport.
It is not something that I have tried to do, nor, in all honesty, would try to do.
Personally I would go for the 60 day Tourist Visa obtained from a Thai Embassy before setting off.
It is just, in my opinion, the safest way of ensuring a trouble free 60 days in Thailand, even if it does cost £25..

Post by **rreddin** » February 3, 2015, 9:28 am

The immigration police at Udon Thani do give a 30 day extension to a permission to stay granted on arrival by air. I know this to be true because my son obtained such an extension last week. Of course, you do need a good reason to extend the permission to stay, which he had. The immigration police provided a quick and polite service.

Post by **BobHelm** » February 3, 2015, 9:33 am

rreddin wrote:I know this to be true because my son obtained such an extension last week.

I guess that cost him 1,900 baht though rreddin??

So if you suspect that you are going to stay longer than 30 days before you set out, the Tourist Visa is still a more cost effective measure..

Post by **rreddin** » February 3, 2015, 4:08 pm

It cost him exactly that amount. The point you make about the visa being more cost effective is valid save, such as in his situation, where the intended stay in Thailand has to be extend for good reason beyond his control. That is what the extension of the permission to stay is for, is it not?