Court case over but black listed

[tomacht8]

3 minutes ago, Preacher said:

Using fake documents/false statements to obtain an extension of stay perhaps?

If this was his offense, a court has decided, with a corresponding judgment.
Immigration, as part of the police, has its overstay fine catalog which they can enforce without calling a court.

If someone parks his car wrong, he gets a ticket and pays the penalty.
Now the immigration can not come again, as an executive organ, and impose a further punishment for the same offense , which has already been atoned for.

[Preacher]

2 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

If this was his offense, a court has decided, with a corresponding judgment.
Immigration, as part of the police, has its overstay fine catalog which they can enforce without calling a court.

If someone parks his car wrong, he gets a ticket and pays the penalty.
Now the immigration can not come again, as an executive organ, and impose a further punishment for the same offense , which has already been atoned for.

Not entirely the case.  The immigration act gives immigration the right to expel someone under certain circumstances, being convicted is such circumstance.

In a lot of countries a judge would decide upon that, but in Thailand immigration can decide it on its own and than you have to appeal within 48 hours to the immigration commission.

 

For something that a judge didn't deem more than a fine deportation is I believe rare, hence i wander if the documents were used to obtain an extension of stay.

[NanLaew]

38 minutes ago, Preacher said:

Family live is protected under international treaties, also signed by Thailand and his family live should be taken into consideration and might be a good reason for a judge to lessen the ban. It does not mean that no ban should be imposed, but often immigration does not take family live into account in the first place. A judge might rectify that and perhaps impose no ban or a shorter ban.

 

The day that a Thai judge places international treaties in the same regard as good old Thai law, I am buying a lottery ticket.

 

This is a nation that tows refugees in open boats back into international waters and turns a blind eye to a huge human trafficking operation while still being signatory to all sorts of stuff that tells them they can't do that.

[007 RED]

1 hour ago, Preacher said:

If the OP used false documents to obtain an extension of stay to obtain an extension of stay from immigration his stay was in Thailand was void. Immigration has always considered fake or falsified documents a very serious matter. Much more serious as a simple case of overstay and under the policy of good guys in,  bad guys out that certainly will not have been changed. Thus the ban.

 

If however the documents have not been used to obtain an extension of stay, the situation might be better from the viewpoint of immigration and the OP probably stands a better chance.

 

 

Sorry but you are way off the mark.... Nowhere has there been any indication that the OP used false documents to obtain an extension of stay.  The case is all about a criminal conviction for 'fake nominees'.

[NanLaew]

39 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

I would see that differently.
Perhaps family members depend on him?
He is not a tourist without any bond, but he has a thai family.

For the overstay cases, there are clear penalties that can impede immigration.
But if the 5 year ban was not for overstaying, then for what?
The punishment for his offense was indeed punished by judicial judgment in a court.
He has paid the penalty, his offense has been eradicated.

On what legal basis the 5-yearBan was imposed, I ask myself.



 

There's plenty of 'sole providers' of families doing time in Thai (and other countries) jails; having dependents is an irrelevancy.

 

Not banned for overstay. The punishment for this crime, like many crimes in Thailand (and other countries) is a fine, and/or jail and/or deportation. The OP hasn't 'done his time' by any stretch of the judicial imagination. he pleaded guilty, paid the fine and has been deported with a 5 year limitation. Black listed would mean a lifetime ban.

[Preacher]

3 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

Sorry but you are way off the mark.... Nowhere has there been any indication that the OP used false documents to obtain an extension of stay.  The case is all about a criminal conviction for 'fake nominees'.

If the documents were not used to obtain an extension of stay I am indeed off the mark and can't understand the decision by immigration.

 

But were the fake nominees purely for a company for a house and land or was the company also used to support an extension of stay?

[007 RED]

55 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

This would be an out of court, arbitrary second punishment.
On which legal basis would the 5 years be imposed?
Why he did not get 1 or 100 years?
Was considered in his case that he has a Thai family?
In any case, the OP needs a good lawyer.

Deportation of an alien following a criminal conviction is normal in most countries. 

 

In Thailand the Immigration Act B.E. 2522 gives immigration officials the power to deport an individual who has been convicted of a criminal offence.  The legal basis for the 5 year re-entry ban would have come from the Ministerial Order announced in 2011. 

 

The fact that the OP has a Thai family would not be have been considered when immigration decide on deportation and re-entry ban.

 

Agreed... he needs a good lawyer but unfortunately it may now be to late for an appeal.

[LannaGuy]

Very sorry to hear this for a 'minor' crime for which he has paid a fine. If they deported all the farangs who had 'nominees' there would be 1000s as Pattaya, particularly,  is full of condos held in Thai co. names. I hope the OP finds a way through this as it is very harsh.

[007 RED]

5 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

Very sorry to hear this for a 'minor' crime for which he has paid a fine. If they deported all the farangs who had 'nominees' there would be 1000s as Pattaya, particularly,  is full of condos held in Thai co. names. I hope the OP finds a way through this as it is very harsh.

I totally agree when you consider what some Thai's get away with.

[jeab1980]

1 minute ago, 007 RED said:

I totally agree when you consider what some Thai's get away with.

Just for the record your statement should read what some Thais/falang/African/ Chinese  get away with. 

[tropo]

 

It won't cost a lot of money to get advice from a lawyer. Hopefully, right now, he's getting real advice from my recommended lawyer rather than wasting his time reading replies from members with no other agenda than to chastise him for breaking the law. Certain people seem to get a kick out of kicking people who are already down.

 

Earlier advice that he should immediately evacuate his wife and mother-in-law to another neighboring country is one of the most insane recommendations so far. He'd be better off getting a visa for his wife to live in his own country, which I'm sure he will do if there are no legal remedies. 

Edited September 9, 2017 by tropo

[LannaGuy]

49 minutes ago, jeab1980 said:

Just for the record your statement should read what some Thais/falang/African/ Chinese  get away with. 

Nah it was right in the first place Mr. PC

[ubonjoe]

A baiting post has been removed. A repeat will result in a formal warning.

[jeab1980]

I belive in the origional post the OP mentioned his wife and his mother in law. So a visa for his wife in his home country would not be useful. I belive at this moment Cambodia would be his better option. Plus he would be closer to possibly meet his solicitor if need be.

[tropo]

54 minutes ago, jeab1980 said:

I belive in the origional post the OP mentioned his wife and his mother in law. So a visa for his wife in his home country would not be useful. I belive at this moment Cambodia would be his better option. Plus he would be closer to possibly meet his solicitor if need be.

75 year old, ill people don't usually respond well to changing countries, especially to poor neighboring countries with comparatively inferior medical facilities. I could be wrong, but I doubt the OP will be considering this as a solution. I'll ask him so we can stop debating the point, but it's premature as he still has to investigate his legal options. I also doubt that a lawyer in Thailand is going to fly to Cambodia to meet with him. With Skype and other communication tools at one's disposal, it doesn't really matter where one physically resides. 

[jeab1980]

2 minutes ago, tropo said:

75 year old, ill people don't usually respond well to changing countries, especially to poor neighboring countries with comparatively inferior medical facilities. I could be wrong, but I doubt the OP will be considering this as a solution. I'll ask him so we can stop debating the point, but it's premature as he still has to investigate his legal options. I also doubt that a lawyer in Thailand is going to fly to Cambodia to meet with him. With Skype and other communication tools at one's disposal, it doesn't really matter where one physically resides. 

75 yr old women dont take well to being left alone whilst wife gets a visa to husbands country either. I belive and always have done in face to face meetings with legal people not over the internet and being close to Thailand would be my choice. 

[tropo]

15 minutes ago, jeab1980 said:

75 yr old women dont take well to being left alone whilst wife gets a visa to husbands country either. I belive and always have done in face to face meetings with legal people not over the internet and being close to Thailand would be my choice. 

I know what I'd be doing. I'd be setting her up with Thai care-providers and not moving her to another country. 

 

How does the OP meet his lawyer face to face if, for example, he lives in Cambodia? The lawyer flies to Cambodia? LOL. 

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed.   Please keep the discussion civil. 

[hawker9000]

On ‎9‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 2:17 AM, stevenl said:

Yes, legally a crime. However a crime committed by many businessmen, and IMHO really not worth more than a fine.

Emphasis on "IMHO":  means less than nothing here.  When the arrival card has questions on it asking what you think Thailand's criminal penalties ought to be, by all means let us know.   In the meantime, you'd do well to understand the penalties as they exist   and conduct your affairs accordingly, as the OP did not.  And criminals shouldn't receive get-out-of-jail-free cards and be considered "entitled" to preferential treatment because of their family involvements.  When the family suffers because of an individual's criminal activities, that's the responsibility of the individual, not the courts and not Immigration if he happens to be a foreigner.

 

[NanLaew]

14 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

Very sorry to hear this for a 'minor' crime for which he has paid a fine. If they deported all the farangs who had 'nominees' there would be 1000s as Pattaya, particularly,  is full of condos held in Thai co. names. I hope the OP finds a way through this as it is very harsh.

FWIW, I don't think victims of a crime care much if others consider it minor or not. I recall about a year ago when the army started attending the Pattaya police check points. The casual, on-the-spot 'fine' option looked like it was being replaced with breath tested, busted, vehicle impounded, night in custody, court appearance,  big fine... and then a quick check with Immigration police to see if you were liable for deportation. This caused all sorts of ED, TR, visa-exempt and various extension users working without a WP a serious headache. Even employers of those who had WP's could be advised of their employees wrongdoing.

 

I thought Thai condominium law effectively dictates that any condo development must be majority Thai owned and thus it is the only legal way for a foreigner, as a minority owner, to own property. Unless there's a huge Thai condo industry scam going on with Thai's selling and/or foreigners buying Thai-owned units that casually blurs the overall Thai ownership of any given development, beyond caveat emptor, then I'm not sure if the legitimate foreign condo owners are at risk. I have never considered the Thai condo market so if indeed there is such a huge con going on, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

 

The 1000's of ass-puckering foreigners are the ones who have paid Thai lawyers to set up Thai majority-owned companies to 'own' the land that 'their' houses are sitting on.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, hawker9000 said:

Emphasis on "IMHO":  means less than nothing here.  When the arrival card has questions on it asking what you think Thailand's criminal penalties ought to be, by all means let us know.   In the meantime, you'd do well to understand the penalties as they exist   and conduct your affairs accordingly, as the OP did not.  And criminals shouldn't receive get-out-of-jail-free cards and be considered "entitled" to preferential treatment because of their family involvements.  When the family suffers because of an individual's criminal activities, that's the responsibility of the individual, not the courts and not Immigration if he happens to be a foreigner.

 

On a forum like this we all give our opinions. Mine has exactly the same value as yours; none, but it still is mine.

 

But in my opinion it would be bad for many if they went after fake nominees.

[LannaGuy]

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

FWIW, I don't think victims of a crime care much if others consider it minor or not. I recall about a year ago when the army started attending the Pattaya police check points. The casual, on-the-spot 'fine' option looked like it was being replaced with breath tested, busted, vehicle impounded, night in custody, court appearance,  big fine... and then a quick check with Immigration police to see if you were liable for deportation. This caused all sorts of ED, TR, visa-exempt and various extension users working without a WP a serious headache. Even employers of those who had WP's could be advised of their employees wrongdoing.

 

I thought Thai condominium law effectively dictates that any condo development must be majority Thai owned and thus it is the only legal way for a foreigner, as a minority owner, to own property. Unless there's a huge Thai condo industry scam going on with Thai's selling and/or foreigners buying Thai-owned units that casually blurs the overall Thai ownership of any given development, beyond caveat emptor, then I'm not sure if the legitimate foreign condo owners are at risk. I have never considered the Thai condo market so if indeed there is such a huge con going on, I wouldn't be at all surprised.

 

The 1000's of ass-puckering foreigners are the ones who have paid Thai lawyers to set up Thai majority-owned companies to 'own' the land that 'their' houses are sitting on.

I can assure you that foreigners buy tons of condos in Thai nominees names and company names. I have never had a problem with this for a few reasons:

 

1/ it's a ridiculous law if Thais can own a football club in England why can't we own a condo

2/ technically the foreigner never owns a condo/house in a Thai name

3/ it is good for the economy because, otherwise, some of the 51% Thai owned part of condos would not be sold

 

Thais are as much a party to this as foreigners

[NanLaew]

3 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

I can assure you that foreigners buy tons of condos in Thai nominees names and company names. I have never had a problem with this for a few reasons:

 

1/ it's a ridiculous law if Thais can own a football club in England why can't we own a condo

2/ technically the foreigner never owns a condo/house in a Thai name

3/ it is good for the economy because, otherwise, some of the 51% Thai owned part of condos would not be sold

 

Thais are as much a party to this as foreigners

The football club analogy is superfluous and irrelevant but I agree that if some locals are making profit from ultimately illegal condo sales, then it is indeed a case of caveat emptor. Unfortunately, there's no way that any realtor specializing in placing condo's with foreigners will be expected to forewarn the buyer that his purchase is NOT in compliance with the Thai condominium act, just as the buyer can expect no justice from Thai courts when someone else's illegal business practice unravels. There must be similar loopholes in Thai condo law to the well knows ones in Thai property ownership law that allows a foreigner to 'own' house and land by some form of proxy. Pretty sure that it still entails someone in legal authority signing off on something that they know or at least suspect to be illegal. Be it a condo, house, land or like the guy who recently had a dishonest employee refinance a company car that didn't belong to her and pocket the loot, despite registered government entities and lawyers being involved and signing everything, at the end of the day it means absolutely bugger all.

[hawker9000]

13 minutes ago, stevenl said:

On a forum like this we all give our opinions. Mine has exactly the same value as yours; none, but it still is mine.

 

But in my opinion it would be bad for many if they went after fake nominees.

You're correct.  None.

 

The only people who it would be bad for are people breaking the law or involved in (as in, benefit from) such violations.   That you think it's not a good law or disproportionately punished - esp. as you are a foreigner and a guest of the country - is of no consequence whatsoever.  None.

 

I actually offer no opinion about the particular law or its penalties.  I merely recognize that it IS the law and that the courts are authorized to award the sentences.  Beyond that, it's obviously absurd to voluntarily enter another country, as a guest, knowingly violate its laws and then whine like a child about it when called to account.  And how much more pathetic to then try to hide behind the skirts of "family".

 

No one can really argue that Thais who are parties to such arrangements don't deserve their share of the criminal liability.   But as a foreigner, that and 10B will buy you a ride on the baht bus and has no bearing (that's right, None) on the foreigner's own culpability.   Dance to the tune, expect to pay the piper.

[jeab1980]

1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

I can assure you that foreigners buy tons of condos in Thai nominees names and company names. I have never had a problem with this for a few reasons:

 

1/ it's a ridiculous law if Thais can own a football club in England why can't we own a condo

2/ technically the foreigner never owns a condo/house in a Thai name

3/ it is good for the economy because, otherwise, some of the 51% Thai owned part of condos would not be sold

 

Thais are as much a party to this as foreigners

1.a. Beacuse its English law they can.

   b. Beacuse its thai law and we cant.

Its really that simple

[LannaGuy]

Just now, jeab1980 said:

1.a. Beacuse its English law they can.

   b. Beacuse its thai law and we cant.

Its really that simple

it's racist we agree on that

[LannaGuy]

1 hour ago, NanLaew said:

The football club analogy is superfluous and irrelevant but I agree that if some locals are making profit from ultimately illegal condo sales, then it is indeed a case of caveat emptor. Unfortunately, there's no way that any realtor specializing in placing condo's with foreigners will be expected to forewarn the buyer that his purchase is NOT in compliance with the Thai condominium act, just as the buyer can expect no justice from Thai courts when someone else's illegal business practice unravels. There must be similar loopholes in Thai condo law to the well knows ones in Thai property ownership law that allows a foreigner to 'own' house and land by some form of proxy. Pretty sure that it still entails someone in legal authority signing off on something that they know or at least suspect to be illegal. Be it a condo, house, land or like the guy who recently had a dishonest employee refinance a company car that didn't belong to her and pocket the loot, despite registered government entities and lawyers being involved and signing everything, at the end of the day it means absolutely bugger all.

 

No you have misunderstood what happens. Please Google 'Usufruct' we all use it and it's 100% legal. The football club analogy was to show the hypocrisy and racism of the policy. 

[tropo]

4 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

On 9/8/2017 at 4:17 PM, stevenl said:

Yes, legally a crime. However a crime committed by many businessmen, and IMHO really not worth more than a fine.

Emphasis on "IMHO":  means less than nothing here.  When the arrival card has questions on it asking what you think Thailand's criminal penalties ought to be, by all means let us know.   In the meantime, you'd do well to understand the penalties as they exist   and conduct your affairs accordingly, as the OP did not.  And criminals shouldn't receive get-out-of-jail-free cards and be considered "entitled" to preferential treatment because of their family involvements.  When the family suffers because of an individual's criminal activities, that's the responsibility of the individual, not the courts and not Immigration if he happens to be a foreigner.

 

As it happened, the court agrees with hawker9000 and only gave him a fine. No humble opinions are necessary.

 

You've probably never had to deal with the justice system in Thailand and therefore come off as incredibly naive. How you get punished has everything to do with how good your lawyers are and a lot of luck. I got totally screwed in a criminal court case due to the negligence of my lawyer (he presented key evidence a few days late, outside the required 90-day deadline - even though I gave him months to prepare). I ended up facing criminal charges because of my lawyer and there was nothing I could do about it. I was being held criminally responsible for the lawyer's mistakes. I had to change lawyers and the first lawyer's screw-ups ended up costing me a lot of money and put my life here in jeopardy. Justice in Thailand? - forget about it. 

 

Incidentally, less than a week after my court hearing I met up with the senior judge who mediated in my case, in a shopping mall, and had a long informal chat with him. He told me not to trust lawyers. With a judge telling you something like that there's no hope. It's all about luck. I was lucky with my judge and lucky with my second lawyer. If I wasn't lucky I would have ended up being deported and possibly blacklisted, just like the OP.

 

If the OP had good legal assistance he probably wouldn't be in this predicament right now.

[tropo]

2 hours ago, hawker9000 said:

 Beyond that, it's obviously absurd to voluntarily enter another country, as a guest, knowingly violate its laws and then whine like a child about it when called to account.  And how much more pathetic to then try to hide behind the skirts of "family".

 

That's a bit harsh. The OP came here asking for advice and suggestions and looking for solutions. I don't see "whining like a child". Most of the whining came from people chastising him for breaking the law.

[vasudev]

On 09/09/2017 at 0:35 PM, tomacht8 said:

Normally, the police keep the passport as security until the court's time.
I think you have the 5 year Ban erroneously get for overstay.
Do you have payed a penalty to immigration?

I was not overstayed for even single day