Hi all, after a bit of advice from you all! Partner and I live in Thailand and we are going to try and get my parents (who have been vaccinated and are from the UK) out to Thailand for several months but we have a bit of a dilemma with the visas.
We are debating between the Non O-A or the Non O based on being over 50.
As I understand it, the Non O-A has a year stamp on entry. You can use your own insurance, but if you do you can't extend in country? You also need a medical and a police check (does the embassy do the police check?). Is this correct?
The Non O on the other hand has no insurance, medical or police check requirement and has a 90 day stamp on entry. Is this correct?
Now, the reason we were leaning towards the Non O-A was it was for a year's stay, so it gives some flexibility if my parents want to stay longer than 90 days if they are enjoying it or if things change regarding quarantine going back to the UK. Can the Non O be extended in country (I've heard of the yearly extension with the 800k baht requirement), if it can be extended how long can it be extended for?
Is my understanding of the visas correct and which one do you think they should go for? or would a normal 60 day tourist visa be a better option?
Thanks for any input!