richard_smith237

Because they were desperately looking for a good excuse to deny entry, and she resisted their initial attempts to pressure her into buying a new ticket and leaving immediately. Your prejudice is that they were prejudice ???? But.. I agree... They saw a young female from a poor country who had been here repeatedly and staying for a long time on short visas, extensions and exemptions... with ticket in 30 days time?... I think any immigration officer in the world would question this.... In the UK she’d also have her baggage searched and be x-rayed.

It's likely they did profile her as that.... thats not a reason to deny entry, suspected of working illegally in Thailand is.... I think this is the difference between both sides of this debate: You feel immigration acted with prejudice where as others feel Immigration profiled the lady. The reality is profiling is using specific identifiers and prejudices to establish a conclusion... - In this case: Single, Young, long term stays, Short term Visa, from a poor country. It could be argued that Immigration operates in an unjust manner the roll itself requires a degree of unjustness when people are profiled and suspected, targeted.... In much the same way border hopping middle aged men are questioned as to whether or not they are working here, they are asked to show proof of funds, asked to show onward tickets etc.... they’ve been profiled, in some cases rejected because repeated back to back visa exempts not permitted etc...

Yet there are lots of people here working illegally... there are also lots of people turned around at point of entry. A fair comparison.... you wrote... 'because an official did not like the fact that he had spend a lot of time here’... you make it sound personal.... The official is just doing their jobs and IF someone is here for a long time on lots of different short term visas, exemptions and extensions further entry draws attention, just as it always has done for someone of any nationality... we’ve seen this time and time again on this forum and guys are questioned and told they have too many back to back Visa exempt entries or too many back to back tourist visas. Conversely, IF the girl (or guy in the hypothetical comparison) had a 5 year or 20 year Thai Elite Visa there would be no issues. IF they had an 1 year extensions of a Non-Imm O based on marriage or retirement there would be no issues.... IF they had a 1 year Extension based on Non-imm B work permit, there would be no issues. The issue immigration spotted is repeat longterm visas on short term visas and someone who fits the demographic of maybe working here.

So why doesn’t the Wealthy Boyfriend get her the correct visa ??? (i.e Thai Elite Visa). The lady can then enter on the correct visa and be profiled correctly as someone who has ‘means’ to stay here without working. You have made it crystal clear that this lady is with a wealthy sponsor 42 years her elder - good luck to them both. You previously said she ‘couldn’t go home because of covid’... now you mention they are living together for 5 years.... So you really mean.... Covid was provided a convenient way of extending her stay here. We all know she is gaming the system and using whatever visa is available to her to stay here. We all know that the 1 month return ticket is a ’throw away ticket' We all know that she was never going to return in 30 days at the end of her visa exempt permission. Nothing wrong with any of that... no judgement whatsoever, its what many people do. BUT... the judgement is on you for getting upset with immigration who are ‘doing their jobs’ to identify people who may be working here illegally or staying long term without using long term visas.

Gosh, do you think that would have helped? Possibly / possibly not, but she didn’t need it. She handled herself well and was permitted entry. The only issue seems to be that you became upset that Immigration did their job and profiled and questioned the lady.

You're getting upset by ‘quote’ marks ???.... Not end of.... Immigration did not know her ticket wasn’t fake until they checked. Why did they check ?.... because they had profiled her as some one who may be entering to stay longer than the validity of her ticket, so the ticket could just be a ‘fake’. No... You are missing the point... WE (many of us) already know exactly what immigration were suspecting when the saw a young, single, female from a poorer country who had repeated long term stays in Thailand.... They suspected her of ‘working’. Questioning her to get something out of her to back up or dismiss their profile - that their job. I'm just another human being... If you want to project entitled, thats your projection your world. It certainly seems that you feel that a ‘friend’ of yours is beyond profiling or suspicions... Entitled you say ??? Thai immigration treat everyone with contempt !!!.... it's their job to be suspicious of anyone, particularly those who fit specific criteria... that could be a combination of age, gender, amount of visits etc... ...... IF this were a family of 4 coming for a 1 week vacation in Bangkok, there would no or very little questioning.... why ????... because the profile is ‘clean'.

Yes... thats exactly what they were trying to do... Thats exactly what their [Immigration] job is. They profiled a young single lady from a poorer country who had repeat visits. This lady wasn’t a two-week tourist with a hotel booking on Samui who last came 5 years ago. You really seem to be struggling with the concept of what an Immigration officer actually does.

That depends on your ‘game’ and of course your age.... there are plenty of guys with well educated respectable women who are financially independent.... Such women are of course no longer interested in me, why would they be? (rhetorical), I am now too old, late-40s, married... Wife is still cool, arty, far more fashionable, funny etc than I ever will be... Three years younger, she looks fifteen years younger !.... Why me and not a Thai guy of similar socio-economic standing ???... I guess back in the day I had some game !!!! Never knock yourself... but if we’re the sort of guy who makes no effort at all, the sort of person who thinks 'why bother there is no need to converse with the locals' then for the most part their attitude already precludes them from any meaningful and mutually respectful friendship or relationship.... In many cases not at all.... In some cases its a hinderance.... ..... there is no quicker identifier of socio-economic status than a foreigner using ‘bar girl Thai’ and telling his new ‘middle-class bit of fluff’ that he will ‘dop-sallop-sallai’ her !!!! .... she’s cringing and already working on escape strategy !!!

I'd also like to ask you... Instead of a young Filipino lady, what if this were a 32 year old Nigerian male, with no offer of work, no business visa with a long history of being here on Visa Exempts, Ed Visas, Covid extensions ??? Should he be profiled and questioned ???.... Why is it wrong to profile and question either of them? and when going through the questioning and profiling process its not really good technique to make them feel welcome and at ease - the officer wants them on edge so they make a mistake.

Which is fine.. But don’t get upset and hurt when questioned... that too is part of the game. Additionally, the division of Immigration at the airport is no the same division that gives out Ed Visas - their job rolls are different.

Thailand sets up the system in such a way and allows the system to played.... people play it, fair enough. Many people do, they switch visas, border hop, plan extensions... its just the way Thailand makes some people ‘dance’ through their system. There’s nothing wrong with that... This lady most certainly is abusing the ‘Ed Visa’ and Thailand also knows that. Immigration officers will mostly likely be taking their cut and also ‘gaming the system’. But... When questioned, caught or refused entry etc... its all part of the same game. To avoid this, meet the specific requirements. In this case: IF the a person under 50 wants to stay long term here without working, then its either get married to a Thai or get a Thai Elite Visa.

No... She did not brake any Immigration rules which is why they let her in. But, she was profiled and thats why the questioned her to check she wasn’t breaking any rules. She wasn’t punished, she was questioned, perhaps too firmly for the liking of some people, but that is a technique to apply pressure. The Visa was not denied - she was permitted entry and is now continuing to play the game as she (and her sponsor) had planned it through out. Well Played I’d say. The only criticism of all of this that I have is the butt-hurtness of the Op in his belief that this lady should never have been questioned or was not treated nicely. The Op seems to think immigration are a welcoming committee and does not appear to know what the job of an immigration officer is.

Agree... Nothing is quite clear cut in Thailand. They had rules with no back to back exemptions, no more than 3 visa exempts in 180 days, no more than 3 tourist visas in 180 days and so forth. A lot of people were caught out... This happens in the UK... ‘on the balance of probabilities’.... I know this is not the UK, but on the balance of probabilities this lady was not going to travel back at the end of her 30 day extension, but that doesn’t mean she was breaking any immigration law. Though is ‘playing the system’ but the system is set up in such a way that it can be easily played. Thats part of Immigration questioning - they try to make the subject feel pressured so they crack and own up to whatever it is they are up to. They clearly believed they were correct about the ‘fake ticket’ and pushed that avenue of questioning until proven wrong. In these cases it would be simpler to allow freedom of movement of Asean nationals, but the huge economic disparity does not permit this freedom of movement that would see excess numbers of foreign workers in Thailand displacing the Thai jobs - preventing this is one of the primary rolls of immigration (protecting the Thai workforce). Where a poor female has a sponsor the waters become muddied... It can be proven she’s not here for work, then what visa ? perpetual Tourist ?... perhaps this is where a long term visa could come into play for someone who plans on being in Thailand for a number of years without working, but the options are limited... The long term visa is the Elite Visa of course, but I very much doubt any sponsor is keen to make that sort of financial commitment in similar circumstances.

I'm confused. Are you saying one needs to speak Thai in order to "bed" hi-so career women? I think he may have just assumed this is such a remote possibility the idea is off his radar !!!

Or over seas educated women of equal socio-economic status....

She may or may not have intended to use her return at the point Immigration let her in. Following advice from local immigration, she decided to go ahead with a Non Ed visa. It may or may not have been a perfectly reasonable change of mind. Regardless, I do not see that she is committing any immigration offence. From the unfolding of the story is very clear that there was no intention of using the return ticket in departing in 30 days - it was just insurance, which worked - well played. This lady was profiled accurately by Immigration (and posters on this thread drew the same conclusions) - she had her ducks in a row and stuck to her story.

They eventually let her in because she was a strong character who stood up for herself. Based on my experience of young Asian women, I suspect 80% or so would have buckled to the pressure and departed in tears. I agree... She was permitted entry because she held firm and confirmed that her return ticket was valid. Immigration made her confirm that she will depart on said ticket - Why ?.... because both immigration and the girl know that this was just a ’throw-away’ ticket and that she intended to stay here longer with more covid extensions or whatever extensions she can obtain. There is no judgement on that - the immigration is a game to be played and lots of people find creative ways to stay here longer. I don't blame them, Thailand is a nice place to be. It's a far nicer place for a young lady with a sponsor to be in than back in the Philippines with no money and two children to feed. So.. good on her, she’s playing the game and succeeded.... But we shouldn’t get angry at Immigration for also playing by their rules... Their job is to profile such people. IF we must find flaws in the system, find flaws in the laws themselves - why not just let people in for 1 year at a time ???

Are you changing your tune to... Catch others, but not my friends GF ???

Philippine Citizens are allowed a 30 Day Visa Exempt entry in Thailand. They must have a return ticket. Anyone who spends a long time in Thailand on various visas, Education Visa, Tourist Visa’s, repeated Visa Exempt arrivals and yes returning recently after spending a long time on a Covid extension are going to raise eyebrows - especially if that person is young, of working age from a country who’s nationals traditionally earn less than in Thailand. Immigration suspected her of working here - they couldn’t prove that. So they profiled her, they questioned her, applied pressure, accused her of having a *fake ticket etc (as many are) - the ticket wasn’t fake so they let her in. You mean, the Immigration officers have nothing better to do than their jobs ??? Perhaps you should contact immigration each time you have a friend who is arriving and ask them not to do their jobs because you don’t like the way they profile and question some people... *On other threads there are comments about travellers entering Thailand Visa exempt on ‘fake onward tickets’... bought through websites. So that this was suspect of your ‘friends’ GF is not by any means unfair, wrong or terrible judgment.

You can do it via most insurance companies/agents online. As the car is over 7 years old, it needed to be inspected before it could be taxed. The tax needs to be shown to purchase the Por Ror Bor. Effectively, the Por Ror Bor and Tax are obtained together. ---- Online works for vehicles younger than 7 years. In this case the Por Ror Bor can be purchased along with the Tax. OR, the Insurance broker can do all when renewing 1st Class insurance.

Its not my ‘cloak and dagger’ theory... Its that presented by some of the guys who have pointed out their significant others don’t want them to know Thai, as pointed out by LaosLover (quote below). Regarding throwing out Thai phrases - I have great fun throwing out the most horrific and offensive swearwords in front of or even at my friends Wives.... who the gasp in shock and either punch me or punch their husband.... all rather amusing all around (no offence or seriousness taken by anyone, we’ve all known each other for years, holidayed together etc)...

Try ‘Crisps’ !!!.... equally so there are Thai words and tongue twisters that many Westerners struggle with.... Get an ‘unfamiliar’ foreigner to try and say ‘money’ (in Thai - Ngien) correctly...

That is the consensus from guys who have no idea that their significant other has no respect for them whatsoever and wants to talk about them behind their back. It's not true of those in relationships built on mutual respect and in those relationships solid communication is key. The near-universal ‘don’t bother’ response could be due to the demographic of those answering, retirees etc who just don’t want the hassle of learning a new language. The near-universal ‘don’t bother’ response is readily interpreted as laziness, but of course, no one wants to admit they’re lazy.

Agreed.... it was touched upon how a 32 year old single female from the Philippines with repeated long term visits to Thailand would be profiled by immigration and questioned.... even more so when it turns out the lady in question was staying with a 77 year old man who paid for everything..... But... We can’t discuss what immigration were 'probably' thinking and why the extra effort to question the lady was made because someone people became offended so the comments were removed.

That was merely the police and insurance guy following the path of least resistance... You weren’t really blamed, it was just easier for everyone involved to have your insurance pay for your car rather than chase up an uninsured poor person who’s not going to be able to afford to pay for the damage anyway. I’ve been in a similar situation with an uninsured vehicle, but refused to accept blame for the other vehicle too, only accepting 50/50 so my insurance would pay for my car. The other guy was feigning injury so I didn’t want there to be any doubt about my responsibility towards him or have to fight off any compensation claims. The other guy was ultimately shouted out of the police station !!...