JoseThailand

I have a proper visa for my purposes.

Falsifying the evidence by an official is a crime, even in Thailand.

It's okay if there is a real reason. For example, if a person with a tourist visa has a work-related papers in his baggage. But I'm not okay with a made-up reason, such as "no appropriate means" when you have enough cash on you.

Suvarnabhumi airport.

Yes, he gave me his contact and his schedule and of course you need to arrive during his shift.

Yes, that's what they cite. But the problem is that they falsify the facts. The individual may have enough funds in cash and still get denied entry as "having no appropriate means...".

But why does this tourist visa allow up to 3-month stay? That's way beyond the normal 2-week holiday tourism you're talking about.

That's a very useful clarification, thanks.

I asked because the guy said that Malaysia is the only country without the two-entries-per-year limit.

In Pattaya they ask for insurance. That's where my story happened.

In my case, she plainly refused to open an account for me without an insurance. That's why I had to complain and make her lose face.

I meet all the official requirements for a tourist visa or visa exempt. The law doesn't limit the number of entries by air. The corruption does.

If so, why do they falsify the evidence, citing "insufficient funds" for example?

And you try to keep your mouth shut and just take it in?

This can happen in any country if you are being pussy and don't care if your rights are violated.

But so many countries get it from bilateral agreements, not only Cambodia and Laos.

It doesn't mean that we need to bend over, spread our butt cheeks and try to enjoy the process.

Because it's corruption. The bank doesn't want to lose a customer because of a corrupt employee.

Sometimes reporting helps. I complained to the Bangkok Bank head office about a branch employee who tried to make me buy an insurance to open an account. The next day they they called me back from the branch, apologized and offered to open an account without an insurance.

Omg, did you read it all? I only glanced through in 20 secs.

We all read the horror stories about how people were denied entry and deported simply based on the fact that they "stayed in Thailand too long". But what are the legal grounds for that? From what I read, in these situations immigration officials falsify the reason for deportation, citing "insufficient funds" or similar, where the person clearly meets all the legal requirements (holds enough money on them, has an hotel booking, return ticket etc.). There is no official rule about "staying in Thailand too long", that's why they need to make up some false reason. Of course, not everyone who gets a hard time with immigration at an airport gets deported. Often they are allowed entry after an interrogation. I had a similar experience myself. I was allowed entry but was offered a "special service" for the future - a guaranteed entry for $100. The officer even showed me his phone with a lot of customers paying for this service. This means that they create these obstacles to make people pay them. What can we do in such situations? As law-abiding tourists, we don't overstay, we don't work in Thailand illegally. Our only "crime" is that we stay in Thailand too long, which is ridiculous. We need to assert our rights. There is an immigration hotline number, which we can call if our rights are violated. In case of unlawful deportation, we have time to file an appeal. And if we encounter a fact of corruption ($100 for entry), we should report it.

What about Cambodia, Laos?

That depends on his nationality. For some countries, there is no such limitation.

It depends on his nationality. For some countries, there is no such limitation.

Other articles mention that she was a prostitute herself, too. Of course, in Thailand it's nothing unusual, but still...