@Stuart ********

yes, I meant the date on the stamp, I just got it but didn't do the math properly, so my flight out lands exactly on that date. Thanks!

I would get one if I was eligible. It seems you must do the 30-day extension before that.

@Alan ******

you are contradicting yourself in your first two sentences, but again, I don't really care that it's inaccurate, just the practical application.

@Stuart ********

in terms of entry requirements in early covid days, even for Western European countries, I've had embassies say "we're not quite sure, so do this and that just in case". There is also the chance that the immigration rules are disparate depending on the passport.

@Alan ******

I have no doubts that you can stay up to 9 months. My point is that, in that case, the wording is incorrect.

Of course, you could say that:

1. The reality of it is in contrast with the legal wording.

2. This is specific to the Thai Embassy for the UK.

But what it says is plain and simple regarding the limitations of the visa.

@Alan ******

again, saying that you can get 9 months contradicts the official wording. It is pretty clear that what the visa here says you're being granted is within a 6-month window. Not to mention that even if you enter on day one and somehow get the best out of the 6 months, 9 months would always assume an extension requested outside a 6-month window.

@Alan ******

, it's not. Whatever the number of days (in this case, 60), it says must take place "within the period of 6 months". A literal interpretation is that however many times you enter or whatever you do must take place in a 6-month window.

@Stuart ********

yes, I found that out after I went there.

@Stuart ********

I was referring to a message exchange with you, Stuart, but couldn’t find it anywhere, or any comments from you in any post, which I thought was odd.

If that’s the case, their wording is simply incorrect. Not ambiguous, plain incorrect.