Reporter: Egidius
Our experience with a 90-day visa application. We are going to Thailand on January 11 for 83 days. On Monday September 9, we applied for a visa. On September 13, we sent in another question about our finances. and on October 7, we received the visa. Unfortunately, it is only valid until January 4.
On an email to the embassy in Brussels a standard email returned how we should use the visa. Gone 160 euros.
So you have to apply again.
Reaction RonnyLatYa
A Non-immigrant O visa has a validity period of 3 months. This period normally starts when the visa is issued.
If the visa is applied for too early and is subsequently issued more than 3 months before departure, the validity period will have expired before you can enter.
In your case, you submitted the application 4 months before, on September 9, and it will have been issued on October 4 if you received it on October 7.
However, the website states that you may not apply more than 10 weeks before departure.
“Applicants are recommended to apply for the visa in advance, at least a minimum of 4 weeks but not more than 10 weeks before the expected date of arrival. "
https://brussels.thaiembassy.org/en/page/visa-informations
Now you might wonder why the embassy didn't issue that visa later. But maybe they can just hold it for 30 days and then the application automatically expires in the system and apparently repayment is not possible.
I will then continue with this text “In the case that applicants do not submit the additional documents requested by the Embassy within 30 days from the date of submission, the applications will be canceled without prior notice.”
*****
Note: “Reactions are very welcome on the subject, but limit yourself here to the subject of this “TB Immigration Infobrief. If you have other questions, if you would like to see a topic covered, or if you have information for the readers, you can always send it to the editors. Use only for this www.thailandblog.nl/contact/. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation”.
Note: “Reactions are very welcome on the subject, but limit yourself here to the subject of this “TB Immigration Infobrief. If you have other questions, if you would like to see a topic covered, or if you have information for the readers, you can always send it to the editors. Only use www.thailandblog.nl/contact/ for this. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation”.
In my opinion they don't need a visa at all for 83 days. Arrival in Thailand gives 60 days then extend with 30 days in the immigration office and voila there are 90 days available. Cost extension 1,900 baht per person. Simple right?
the question is whether you can check in with a return flight that exceeds 60 days.
EVA is difficult about this.
In the meantime, it is already known that EVA Air would have a “Release form” at check-in, which means that this problem no longer really exists at EVA.
See also the message from reader Jos on August 15, 2024
TB Immigration Infobrief No. 043/24: EVA Air – 'Release form' when departing on Visa exemption
https://www.thailandblog.nl/dossier/visum-thailand/immigratie-infobrief/tb-immigration-infobrief-nr-043-24-eva-air-release-form-bij-vertrek-op-visa-exemption/
That is a contract in which they transport you, but they have no responsibility whatsoever in the event of any problems in Thailand.
It could go well, but it could also go just as badly.
I have sent a letter to KLM (CEO) with clarification about this incident.
People don't know what a letter is anymore and the thing has been floating around somewhere for a month, only received an EMAIL yesterday.
The only clarification in the answer is that you will be denied check-in to Thailand if you do not have a visa. So it is linked flight and visa.
No visa, no flight.
Despite the fact that I had asked IATA if it was possible.
To this end, KLM was even introduced to fly with. IATA is the regulator for all airlines.
And IATA gives a positive answer, but KLM, with its own check, does not respond.
I also mentioned that in the letter.
You cannot order a return ticket with a timespan of 5 months without a visa.
OK, that's possible, but they won't take you. That's KLM's own rule.
So EVA air has another rule. What about all the other companies?
It's good that IATA exists, so not.
This is KLM's answer
In response to your letter of 8 September I am sending you this email. First of all, apologies for the late reply, we did not receive your letter earlier.
Airlines do not determine the rules regarding the travel documents that passengers need to travel to a destination. It is always the responsibility of the passenger to ask the embassy what is required to enter a country. The rules can change, so it may indeed be that something that was possible/allowed in the past is no longer possible.
We offer a link to traveldoc.aero on our website where you can fill out a checklist and receive advice on what is required for your trip.
If you check in and it turns out that you do not have the correct documents to enter Thailand, we as an airline will not be able to transport you.
Before you complete the payment on our website, you will see the following message:
Check your destination's entry requirements before you travel and make sure you have the necessary documents on hand at the airport.
Since we do not set the rules, we do not indicate when booking what documents you might need. You should inquire about this yourself at the embassy of the country you are travelling to.
I hope I have informed you sufficiently and wish you a pleasant weekend.
Yours faithfully,
Christine
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
Christine is, uses an AI? No idea.
The answer again gives several contradictions, like the answers on FB.
So it also seems that they don't care that you make the booking, possibly and that they stop you at check-in and send you home again.
Answer and visa:
With a Tourist visa, you can stay in Thailand for no longer than 60 days. If you wish to stay in Thailand for more than 60 days, you can extend your stay with the Immigration Bureau. Suggestion : You may apply for visas at the following mission(s)
Royal Thai Embassy, The Hague
No notification about a return ticket, flight ban to Thailand.
After all, in Thailand you can extend! AND you would have a return ticket.
AND you know that after 60 days you have to renew or leave Thailand.
Furthermore, the site provides a suggestion, an option.
So when it comes to Thailand there is a choice.
The question is, how airlines have strange attitudes and can't explain why THEY decide as Thai IO. Because that is what is happening now, under the guise that Thailand demands it. ?
Only the Thai goers can tell about their new experiences.
Stopped by KLM? Visa after all?
IATA says nothing at all about whether or not you are allowed to board and it is not up to them to decide that. So they do not say "no visa, no flight".
They only provide visa information about the country you are flying to and what can happen if you do not comply and that is for Thailand, among other things.
“Passengers are allowed to enter if their stay will exceed the actual visa-free period as long as they hold a return/onward ticket.
Visitors who are visa exempt but do not hold return/onward tickets could be refused entry.”
In summary, this means that if you do not have a return/onward ticket, you can be refused ACCESS (enter) to the country (Thailand) by the IO and that if your stay is going to last longer than 60 days and you are going to extend it by 30 days, you must have a return/onward ticket.
That is information they got from Thai immigration because they only use official sources. Not something they invent themselves.
Moreover, it is not a return ticket as many think, but a return ticket or onward flight ticket.
So it is about entering Thailand that IATA provides information about and not whether or not the airline will allow you on the flight.
This decision lies with the airlines and they may decide not to take you on board if you do not meet this entry requirement.
That is stated somewhere on their website and you usually see it when booking a flight that it is the passenger who has to make sure he is okay. That is their decision based on the entry requirements and not a decision by IATA.
On the website of the Embassy in Brussels you can also find information about the conditions that immigration sets when leaving on a Visa exemption, although it is not entirely correct because they should also change that text to return/onward ticket instead of round-trip air ticket.
“Please make sure that you are in possession of a passport valid for at least 6 months, a round-trip air ticket, and adequate finances equivalent to at least 20,000.- Baht (500.- Euros) per person or 40,000.- Baht (1,000.- Euros) per family. Otherwise, you may be inconvenienced upon entry into the country.
https://brussels.thaiembassy.org/en/page/visa-exemption
As for KLM specifically. They also don't say "no visa, no flight" in their answer.
KLM writes: “If you check in and it turns out that you do not have the correct documents to enter Thailand, we as an airline cannot transport you.”
In other words, if you don't have a return/onward flight ticket, because that is part of the correct documents, they won't transport you. Still, that answer from them is clear.
Can that be stated more clearly everywhere about that through flight or return ticket and more clarity? Yes, that will be. Both at the embassies and at the airlines
But as I said I'll leave it at that. I don't feel like going over it all the time like last time.
Then you will have to sort that out with KLM...
KLM specifically, in their check, does not allow you to go exempt. (depending on time)
You can not buy a return of 5 months and get permission from KLM to fly. In red you will see the remark, you are not authorized to board.
If you adjust the time to 2 months, then it is fine.
So therefore no visa, longer than 2 months, no flight
I also indicated in my letter that when you were busy with a booking, you should get a clear pop up with the warning IN ADVANCE. So they are not going to do that.
The letter states that some kind of notification will appear at the end.
Just completed it and a blue box appears with check in travel conditions.
Not red but blue. You can't click on it and you have to go back to "information", "travel documents" and then you come to https://klm.traveldoc.aero.
Well, why make it easy for the customers.
It also surprises me in the letter (I didn't really notice it at first) that another site was brought up for verification, while KLM has its own subsite for verification, namely https://klm.traveldoc.aero/results. You can find this link as first indicated
Ridiculous to put it so far away.
Just fill in the values and see what the outcome is, if you don't believe me.
Do you see the IATA version (https://www.iatatravelcentre.com/home.htm) then there is no objection from Thailand.
However KLM does not allow it. You cannot fly with it, without a visa in a timespan of 5 months with a return ticket. It is not possible.
My conclusion is that KLM's rule is in conflict with Thai regulations (IATA finding) and is enforcing its own rule.
“If you check in and it turns out that you do not have the correct documents to enter Thailand, we as an airline CANNOT transport you.”
So an EVA air also appears to have its own rule.
So every airline can enter its own interpretation, what is that based on?
So arbitrariness?
Just looked at Qatar, no restrictions at all for flying, could follow IATA rules and because you have a return, no problem.
Emirates no restrictions, only warning about not having a return/onward ticket and IO approval then, Lufthansa gives a link to IATA rules and thus the same rules as Emirates and that again via IATA settings. The hot item is then, you have a return/onward flight proof.
With all of them you have to search a bit before you get it. BUT you can fly with them!
Then just look at EVA air and see there also a link like KLM and the same content. Where you are not allowed, unauthorized. https://evaair.traveldoc.aero/
KLM appears to be the only one to say, without mercy, brutally, “no go”,
EVA air makes an extra contract with you, no accountability. AND that is evident from calls from readers, to EVA air.
It is important to me to have a return or an onward, according to IATA.
But KLM? Letter doesn't help and just unforgiving, brrr.
Flown with them for many years, but this is a slap in the face, especially compared to other airlines.
Was busy anyway, so immediately sent emails to Immigration Thailand and the embassy about this. Immediately mentioned the name Naruchai Ninnad and his point of view.
Have to wait a moment because it's Remembrance Day.
Perhaps KLM could be shaken up a bit with its findings.
Definition
return ticket
noun
A ticket granting permission to travel to a place and back again.
A ticket to a place and back (usually over the same route).
Dutch ditto and there is no return ticket, only return ticket.
return ticket;
ticket for the outward and return journey
It is a choice setting, either you have an onward or a return ticket.
As long as it proves that you are going to leave Thailand.
So I hope you finally see that it is not an IATA measure, but that the companies decide what to do with it.
And that will probably have to do mainly with the instructions and fines that came with getting their landing rights from Thailand.
If that were not the case and there were no consequences, no company would care how you leave.
IATA only says what the entry requirements are to ENTER Thailand and yes each airline is then free to decide what to do with it.
Most will follow that as a guideline for transporting you to Thailand.
EVA Air then decided to use a “Release form”.
QATAR or EMIRATS then nothing and may think the fines are negligible or rather exceptional.
I know ETHYAT asks for proof at check-in. I happen to know because my wife recently flew with them and she made the mistake of only showing her Belgian passport at check-in in Brussels. When she later also put her Thai passport next to it, it was of course fine.
But all decisions of the companies themselves. Not of the IATA.
And KLM follows the rules anyway. Maybe brutal for you but no less correct in my opinion.
A return ticket of 5 months is not enough for them if you do not have a visa, because that means that you want to enter on a Visa exemption and then you have to meet the entry requirements of a Visa exemption.
KLM will then decide not to transport you and that is their right.
Where they and most other airlines that apply this do make a mistake, is that they should also allow someone who leaves without a visa if he can prove with a ticket that he leaves Thailand within 90 days and not only within 60 days. The embassies also clearly indicate that extension is possible.
The fact that it is not certain that you will get that extension is indeed just a lame excuse.
And as I said, it could all be better publicized by airlines or even embassies.
Yes, that is indeed what one should do.
But I'll close it here as I said before.
I have already said that I think it is a nonsense measure, but that is how it is now and by bringing it up again on TB every opportunity will not change anything.
But if you want to continue talking about it, do so with the companies, they can adjust it.
The airlines are indeed not playing immigration officers here, but they are right to want to limit their risk.
If you want to meet the entry requirements without applying for a visa, you will need to make other arrangements.
This can be any ticket that allows you to travel within 60 days.
So you can also just buy a return ticket for up to 60 days, which you can adjust. Of course that is a more expensive choice, but that is completely voluntary because you save on the costs and hassle of a visa.
You also have to see that you cannot save the goat and the cabbage.
And as far as visas are concerned, KLM is one of the few companies that, even for cheap non-changeable tickets, will fully refund you if you have applied for a visa on time and it is refused.
And maybe applying for a visa is worth it after all and will cost you less than all that ticket hassle.
That's why I said it.
“But in the end, everyone decides for themselves whether to leave with or without a visa during such a period. They can also have their reasons for doing so.”
And this one might also be an option, although I have no experience with it
https://verifiabletickets.com/?msclkid=3defea15e80b1909a83a8d121df89d8d
Yes that's right.
But everyone ultimately decides for themselves whether to leave with or without a visa during such a period. They may also have their reasons for doing so.
Furthermore, I think I have written enough about the possibilities of a Visa exemption to bridge such a period that this should be known as a possibility by now.
And it is also stated otherwise on the embassy's website
https://brussels.thaiembassy.org/en/page/visa-exemption
Isn't it true that the 90 days start as soon as they report to immigration after landing? Then there wouldn't be a problem, right?
Like many others, you are confusing two things.
This is the validity period of a visa (visa validity) and the period of stay that you obtain.
You mention the period of stay in your response. That indeed starts upon arrival and is 90 days in this case.
Granted by the immigration officer based on the visa you have. A Non-immigrant O in this case.
On the other hand, you have the validity period of a visa. That is the time you have to enter Thailand with your visa. With this Non-immigrant O visa, that is 3 months.
However, since they applied for that visa too early, those 3 months will have already expired when they enter Thailand. This means that they no longer have a valid visa and therefore cannot obtain a 90-day stay with it.
However, they will still be given a 60-day Visa Exemption Period of Stay upon entry in exchange, which they can extend by 30 days.
Or of course they had to decide to first reapply for a Non-immigrant O if they wished to do so.
That is all clearly explained on the embassy website and people should read it more often.
“Please note the following:
the period of visa validity is NOT the permitted period of stay. Visa validity, as indicated on the e-visa (“Valid until …”), is the period during which a visa can be used to enter Thailand. It does not indicate the length of time the holder of the visa may stay in Thailand. In general, the validity of a visa is 3 months, but in some cases, visas may be issued to be valid for 6 months, 1 year, 3 years or 5 years from the date of issuance/grant. The validity of a visa is granted with discretion by the Royal Thai Embassy or Royal Thai Honorary Consulate-General and is displayed on the visa sticker.
On the other hand, the permitted period of stay in Thailand which is the maximum length of stay per entry. For example, the maximum length of stay for a transit visa is not exceeding 30 days, for a tourist visa is not exceeding 60 days and for a non-immigrant visa is not exceeding 90 days from the arrival date.
HOWEVER, the actual period that visa holders are permitted to stay in Thailand is decided by an immigration officer upon arrival at the port of entry in accordance with the type of visa and relevant laws. The period of stay granted by the immigration officer is displayed on the arrival stamp.”
https://hague.thaiembassy.org/th/page/42922-general-information?menu=5d81cce815e39c2eb8004ef1
“Please note the following: The period of visa validity is NOT the permitted period of stay.
Visa validity, as indicated on the e-visa (“Visa must be used by”), is the period during which a visa can be used to enter Thailand. It does not indicate the length of time the holder of the visa may stay in Thailand. In general, the validity of a visa is 3 months, but in some cases, visas may be issued to be valid for 6 months, 1 year, 3 years or 5 years from the date of issuance/grant. The validity of a visa is granted with discretion by the Royal Thai Embassy.
Permitted Period of Stay: This is the maximum amount of time you're allowed to stay in Thailand for each entry. It's indicated on your e-visa as “Length of stay in Thailand”. For example, a transit visa allows up to 30 days, a tourist visa allows up to 60 days, and a non-immigrant visa allows up to 90 days from your arrival date.
If you want to stay longer or change your visa type, you need to apply for an extension at the Immigration Bureau in Bangkok or at an immigration office in other provinces. The extension is at the discretion of the immigration officer. For more details, visit the Immigration Bureau's website at http://www.immigration.go.th
https://brussels.thaiembassy.org/en/page/visa-informations
That's correct, but the applicant arrives on January 11, and the visa is only valid until January 4.
If they flew a week earlier it would not be a problem and they would be given 90 days upon arrival
Called EVA AIR Schiphol and asked if there could be any problems with checking in if you stay longer than 60 days (after the 60 days you are free on arrival)
Answer: no problem, just sign a release form when checking in.
The annoying thing in these kinds of cases is that statements made over the telephone are not always followed through at the counter.
Often it is not even looked at, I have also gone without a return flight, and nothing was said about that either.
But it is good to be prepared for questions, if necessary in case of emergency book a ticket online before 60 days are up to Kuala Lumpur, for example, then you do not need a visa, you have a day out and your problem is solved.
Just to add, the chance of problems at check-in is especially present if you do NOT have a visa and do not have a return flight or a return flight that is not on time
If you do have a visa, then even if you do not have a return flight or if your return flight is not on time, this is usually not a problem because the airline calculates the risk that entry will not be granted, which is very small if you have a valid visa.
Without a visa and without a flight out of the country within 60 days, you do not meet the requirements of the visa exempt program, and are therefore more likely to be denied entry by immigration, and the airline will then have to take you back.
With a valid visa, the airline assumes that you meet the immigration requirements and are therefore allowed into the country. Normally, immigration will also not quickly do all kinds of extra checks if you have a visa because it has already been determined that you have access.