Mattd

2 minutes ago, Will27 said:

You have to declare if you've had any criminal convictions on your incoming passenger card.

It's an honour system.

Yes, after I did further research then I do think this is the case, except in serious cases and where somebody has applied for a certain visa type or migration, where this info may be requested.

10 minutes ago, Bartman1369 said:

Applying at his local embassy first should clarify if he is ableto enter the country or not.

Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case, the Thai embassies / consulates issue a visa without any external checks.

1 minute ago, partington said:

Yes they can, but this does mean you have to go into bank  on the day of the application, and wait for your letter/update and some days at CW there are 70+ people waiting before the doors open to get numbers for the extension counters.

 

However I am tempted to try this same day update/letter at CW.

Yes, this I can see as an issue, others will know better, but I would have thought that there would be no problem to have a bank letter dated from the day before applying with an update passbook or ATM slip showing the actual balance on the day of applying, especially considering the usual long queues in CW and the percentage of those there early would also be applying for an extension and therefore have to provide the same info?

14 minutes ago, chang50 said:

I'd like to know that as well,I always thought they had to tally now I'm not so sure.

I honestly do not know myself, logic says that it should not matter, however, given how pedantic some IO's can be, then who knows!

The important information to satisfy is that the account exists and has a balance in excess of the required amount and that it has been for xx amount of time. 

Is it a requirement that the bank letter is actually dated on the day of the application, surely K Bank can write a letter that is dated on the day of the application, with the balance stated from the previous day, with either an update of the passbook or an ATM slip that shows the balance on the day of application?

Some interesting reading here regarding PNR (Passenger Name Records) sharing agreement between the EU & Australia, seems this was only agreed and introduced relatively recently.

https://www.asktheeu.org/en/request/information_on_pnr_agreements#incoming-588

Would it actually matter if the balance in the passbook and the letter are different, so long as the balance is above the required amount on the day of applying and has been above for the needed length of time??

42 minutes ago, crazygreg44 said:

go outside and withdraw 500 Baht and show them the slip, which will state the up-to-date balance of the account.

Why not just request the balance and print out, there should be no need to actually make a withdrawal?

23 minutes ago, Seanbhoy said:

If whatever crime you have committed could be deemed serious enough to be a constant threat to minors or vulnerable people then I think its due diligence that your home nation informs which ever country you are visiting.

I would agree with you, the trouble is this is not happening.

Countries will share information on persons who are on a watch list, especially if it involves a security threat, this is most likely done via an organisation such as Interpol.

There have been numerous reports of folks getting caught here for messing with children whilst teaching etc. etc. and then it comes out that they have served time, or are still wanted in their home country for similar.

A recent example was the Brit accused of the death of the girl who 'fell' off the balcony in Pattaya.

Lots of people have been found here who are wanted murderers / rapists and other heinous type crimes, very few are found entering the country though, mores the pity.

It is possible that the guy in the OP may have made a petty mistake years ago, paid the price and has been clean since, everybody does deserve one chance to rehabilitate.

12 minutes ago, midas said:

I've been asking for years why they don't have this system already? I mean it is hardly rocket science to link a few databases to keep out all these people that escape here and seek refuge here even when they have outstanding warrants and are wanted in their own country.

I actually do not disagree with your sentiments, the issue would be one of data protection and privacy, especially regarding EU countries etc.

Although I'd imagine that it wouldn't be that easy to implement TBH, a lot of data involved.

2 minutes ago, keithpa said:

Bank statements, he put illegally gotten gains into the bank, then drew it out. Currency exchange, he exchanged illegally gotten gain in US $ and cashed them for Thai baht. These methods are common and well known by the authorities. Condo sale, if he can show the money coming into Thailand, that will do.

Since 9/11, there are restrictions in place for largish deposits or withdrawals in to a financial institution, so the safeguards are, at least according to the establishment, already in place in that regard, there are a lot of ways of proving where the cash came from, i.e. salary, proceeds of a sale, inheritance, pension payout, winnings of some sort, dividend payments, the list is endless.

You would probably be asked questions if you tried to exchange a large amount of cash, so would likely have to do this several times to avoid suspicion if it was ill gotten gains, which would raise eyebrows the other end.

In the case of the OP, yes the sale of his condo should be fine, especially as it is below the limit allowed.

Where it goes wrong is when there is no explanation or it is obviously fabricated with no trail.

53 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Australia Immigration do according to their Border Secuity Programmes.

Actually, after doing some research, it appears that the only 2 countries that actively share criminal record information during the immigration entry process are US & Canada.

The UK for example doesn't share this information unless it is specifically asked for and even then it has to be through the correct process, which takes a little time.

For another country to request the information, then they would have to have reasonable cause to do so.

I go with @007 RED theory, the IO threw a random question out and the guy bit, seems a bit harsh to deny entry just for this though, if indeed that was the sole reason..

4 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

Australia Immigration do according to their Border Secuity Programmes.

Quite possibly they do, although given the nature of the US system, even this is probably only certain limited info, i.e. whatever is on a federal database.

I still doubt the Thai's have this sort of access.

I'd be gobsmacked if Thai immigration suddenly has access to US criminal records, especially one going back so long ago. As above, there must be some other reason.

25 minutes ago, keithpa said:

How do you prove that the funds legally belong to you,

Many ways, in the OP's case, then he should have proof of the sale of his condo, bank statements, currency exchange slips etc.

There have been several cases where people have had cash seized by UK customs, as they have not been able to show proof of where it came from, they can seize cash for up to 48 hours without a court order and longer with.

On 1/26/2018 at 2:58 PM, theoldgit said:

As said if you’re stopped then mention it, and be prepared to prove the source of the funds even though you’re under the declaration threshold.

Sound advice, make sure that you have some way of proving that the funds legally belong to you, just in case of a random stop.

Just now, ubonjoe said:

No extension is based upon a work permit. It would depend upon the type of extension or visa (non-la possibley) she has. If she has an extension of stay based upon on working or non-la visa he could get one based upon being her spouse if the were able to get married.

So it is really going to depend on whether she actually has a passport and extension of stay of some sort, as opposed to the special permission that some migrants can get.

12 minutes ago, blubb said:

The immigration at Airport said, there is no need to show those 20k in Bath for tourists

There is a possibility of being asked, though very very remote.

For VE then it would 20k THB for the family, not each.

I would think that the Burmese lady will have a work permit for neighbouring countries (migrant labour plan),  if this is indeed the case, even if they were allowed to marry, can a spouse get an extension of stay based on this type of work permit?

Just now, SpokaneAl said:

 

It depends on where you look for the information.

http://www.thaiconsulatela.org/service_visa_detail.aspx?link_id=48


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Agreed, however, as MFA are the custodians, so........

15 hours ago, Evilbaz said:

In that you fit the requirements for retirement in Thailand in the view of the MFA.

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15385-Non-Immigrant-Visa-"O-A"-(Long-Stay).html

No mention in the MFA blurge of retirement whatsoever, there simply is not a visa that's specific purpose is for retirees, at the end of the day it doesn't really matter.

2 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

Well, they don't usually refuse at land borders if you have the cash. Will the denial at the airport change that?

There are differing thoughts on that subject throughout the thread, the only test would be for him to try it, there are two things that would suggest a further refusal is likely though, he now has a fresh entry refusal stamp in his passport and the same information is in the immigration database.

The OP is now talking of whether he can get a non b visa for business, this could prove difficult if he doesn't have the documentation to back it up and even this does not guarantee him entry.

11 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

I don't have time to wade through all 16 pages of this thread.

11 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

Why not take that, fly from Hat Yai to Bangkok and sort out your business visa documents when you get home? 

If he did this then it is highly likely that they would just refuse him entry again, as per the first entry by the OP that started the thread.

8 minutes ago, edwardandtubs said:

We also don't know what the OP said to the immigration officer. As he seems to think what he's doing is perfectly legal, he probably revealed all to the immigration officer. If he had just said he was on a long holiday in Koh Chang, he probably wouldn't have had this problem.

This is true with regard to the initial refusal in DMK airport, however, he said that sometime after this refusal he contacted a friendly female IO who works out of BKK airport and she thought the refusal was to do with working illegally, of course if he did make suggestions in DMK to that effect, then it would say this in the immigration system.

The OP does seem to think that whatever it is he does is not in violation of any laws, the way he describes it suggest the opposite.

Who knows what information has been exchanged, either by the OP or by others.

45 minutes ago, Dmitry2222 said:

So, the work of the OP seems not to be the main reason for the refusal of the entrance. Actually they did not know does him working or not in Thailand and they had not proofs for it.

Even if they had no concrete proof, they obviously had the suspicion, this was even confirmed by the OP himself when he supposedly contacted somebody he knew in BKK airport immigration.

I suspect that there is a lot more behind this refusal than we are being told.