what happens at airport if your denied entry

[texxxan1]

So i am sure this question has been answered before on here, but i am trying to see what happens if you are denied entry at the airport

 

My situation is as follows

 

Going to start staying in the LOS in january. I will be coming in with a US passport and will stay 27 days at a time, then leaving for 31 and then back again... So basically the plan is to spend my rotation off of work in LOS. I am 46, so not really eligible for any retirmeent type visa

 

Ive heard that this will be ok for up to 4 entries, but i also know folks who have been doing this for years.   I plan to give it a go for 6 or so entries and then get a Thai Elite program if i decide i want to stay long term.. So consider it a test etc

 

What im not sure, is what happens if i get denied entry on say the 4th time.   I will be flying in most likely from Turkey or Qatar.. If i get denied, do i have to come back from my origination point?  If i do get denied, personally i would just choose to go to the phillipines and visit friends etc, but the unknown is what i want to prepare for

 

Thanks all, i consider this site a valuable resource and do appreciate everyones time

[silverado1]

must know  : do you come on visa exemption or with setv/metv ? 

"........will be ok for up to 4 entries...." will depends on 

[texxxan1]

Visa exemption while i am deciding on if its right for me

[silverado1]

11 minutes ago, texxxan1 said:

Visa exemption while i am deciding on if its right for me

first advice : forget what you have been heard and those "folks who have been doing this for years..."

2 entries a year would be the norm with a visa exemption

 as us citizen  wanting to stay long time in thailand , i would choose the single entry tourist visa (setv)

if you want to leave after 28/29 days , you could come with visa exemption , then leave , then visa exemption again....

 

Edited October 1, 2017 by silverado1

[texxxan1]

The problem with a single entry tourist visa is that i will never stay more than 28 days... I work 28 on/28 off on an offshore platform in the Caspian Sea...

 

So that is not workable.... 

[impulse]

20 minutes ago, texxxan1 said:

The problem with a single entry tourist visa is that i will never stay more than 28 days... I work 28 on/28 off on an offshore platform in the Caspian Sea...

 

So that is not workable.... 

 

I'm in a similar boat since my WP expired this year, and have entered 3 times on visa exempt.  Being an American in the oilfield myself, I know a lot of guys who have lived for years on rotation using visa exempt.  But things are changing.  I live with the knowledge that I may be denied entry, but I don't want to do the 60 hour R/T to the USA until I have some Asian touring out of my system.  Because next time I cross the pond may be the last time I cross the pond.  After around 60 R/T crossings on business, I'm not sure I'd do it again for funzies.

 

You have months and months before you hit any kind of limit (if there are any), and the rules -or their enforcement- may change by then.  At the very least, you'll have a better understanding.  So go for it.  Worry later, if at all.

Edited October 1, 2017 by impulse

[BritTim]

You are very unlikely to have a problem with the first 6 visa exempt entries given the month between each entry. Once you have 6 visa exempt entries (since 2015) immigration on entry will receive an alert that you should be scrutinized more closely than usual to verify you are a genuine tourist. It is unlikely you will be denied entry without a warning. You may well be questioned, and told to get a "proper visa" next time. That might be the appropriate moment to consider Thailand Elite.

 

By the way, ensure you have 20,000 baht equivalent in cash or travelers' checks. While it is unlikely an official will want to deny you entry, if one did, the most common excuse is "being unable to finance your visit". Since this is just an excuse for denying entry, forget about bank statements, credit cards, or being allowed to visit an ATM machine. Only cash/travelers' checks right there and then will be accepted.

 

34 minutes ago, silverado1 said:

2 entries a year would be the norm with a visa exemption

 

This is true only for visa exempt entry via a land crossing. No such limitation exists when entering by air.

[texxxan1]

Thanks for the information guys....

 

Everytime i come there, i have about 25000Bht.. just for that reason...

 

Still the question comes up, what happens if i am denied... Can i just find a ticket counter and take a flight to somewhere in SEA...Manila for example... 

 

I guess a more proper concern, is that my company will be paying for my business class trips back and forth and if i get denied, i will still need to make it back to Thailand (bkk) or CNX to catch my flight back west....

 

 

 

 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, texxxan1 said:

Thanks for the information guys....

 

Everytime i come there, i have about 25000Bht.. just for that reason...

 

Still the question comes up, what happens if i am denied... Can i just find a ticket counter and take a flight to somewhere in SEA...Manila for example... 

 

I guess a more proper concern, is that my company will be paying for my business class trips back and forth and if i get denied, i will still need to make it back to Thailand (bkk) or CNX to catch my flight back west....

 

At the point you are denied entry, the airline becomes responsible for you. They are normally expected to return you promptly to your last point of embarkation. I imagine you could talk to the airline representative. If you propose flying immediately to another location at no expense to themselves, I cannot imagine they would have any objection.

[ubonjoe]

2 hours ago, silverado1 said:

first advice : forget what you have been heard and those "folks who have been doing this for years..."

2 entries a year would be the norm with a visa exemption

 as us citizen  wanting to stay long time in thailand , i would choose the single entry tourist visa (setv)

if you want to leave after 28/29 days , you could come with visa exemption , then leave , then visa exemption again....

Where did you get that 2 entries are the norm. Many people are doing many more than that per year.

[ubonjoe]

1 hour ago, texxxan1 said:

Still the question comes up, what happens if i am denied... Can i just find a ticket counter and take a flight to somewhere in SEA...Manila for example... 

 

I guess a more proper concern, is that my company will be paying for my business class trips back and forth and if i get denied, i will still need to make it back to Thailand (bkk) or CNX to catch my flight back west....

I doubt very much you will ever be denied entry. If you have the 20k baht and proof you are working outside the country.

If you were denied entry you should be allowed to purchase a ticket to a nearby country. If would be best to get a ticket to a neighbouring country so you could an entry by land or where you could get a single entry tourist visa.

[Suradit69]

3 hours ago, silverado1 said:

 

2 entries a year would be the norm with a visa exemption

"The norm" based on what?   Obviously many people have used visa exempt entries more frequently.

[007 RED]

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

 

At the point you are denied entry, the airline becomes responsible for you. They are normally expected to return you promptly to your last point of embarkation. I imagine you could talk to the airline representative. If you propose flying immediately to another location at no expense to themselves, I cannot imagine they would have any objection.

 Sorry Tim... The airline is only responsible when they have allowed a passenger to fly after receiving a 'Refuse Boarding Code' through the Advance Passenger Information System.

 

If a passenger is refused entry, they will be escorted to the detention area at the airport.  Depending upon the immigration officer, and the reason why they have been refused entry, there are two options:

 

1)  The IO will determine the route of departure, or

2)  The passenger can determine where they wish to go.

 

In both the above, the passenger will be liable for the purchase of the air ticket and possibly any costs incurred with the detention.  Once it has been decided where the passenger is going to go the IO will contact the airline and a representative will come to the detention area to make the ticket booking.

 

During the process the passenger will be given an official document indicating the reason for refusal and his/her rights to an appeal.  Prior to departure the passenger's passport is stamped with an exit stamp plus an exclusion stamp and if appropriate a stamp indicating that the passenger is banned from entering Thailand for a number of years.

 

The above procedure is in accordance with the Immigration Act B.E. 22522 section 55.   Note the word deportation in the Act also applies to excluded due to refused entry.

[YetAnother]

2 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If you were denied entry you should be allowed to purchase a ticket to a nearby country.

so how logistically does that work at swampy ? the ticket counters are on the 'safe side' of the immigration stalls; if denied entry, you couldnt get to them, right ?

[YetAnother]

17 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

so how logistically does that work at swampy ? the ticket counters are on the 'safe side' of the immigration stalls; if denied entry, you couldnt get to them, right ?

answered by 007 Red; thanks

[ubonjoe]

48 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

The above procedure is in accordance with the Immigration Act B.E. 22522 section 55.   Note the word deportation in the Act also applies to excluded due to refused entry.

No it does not. You cannot be deported if you if you have not entered the country.

Quote

                                                                                            Chapter 6
                                                                             Deportation of the Aliens

 

Section 53 : If it is learned at a late date that aliens who came to stay in the Kingdom are among the
persons excluded from entry because of any circumstance as prescribed in Section 12 (7) or (8)or (10) or
Section 43 Para.2 or Section 44 or persons convicted under Section 63 or 64 , the Director General will
submit the matter to the Immigration Commission. If the Immigration Commission decides that the alien's
permission to stay in the Kingdom should be revoked, the Immigration Commission will submit their
opinion to the Minister for further consideration in revoking the Permission.

 

 

Edit: Entering the country is under chapter 2.

Quote

                                                                                       Chapter 2
                                                             Entering and Department the Kingdom

 

Section 22 : In the instance where the competent official discovers that an alien is forbidden from
entering into the Kingdom under the provisions of Section 12 , the competent official shall have authority
to order said alien by written notification to leave the Kingdom.

 

Edited October 2, 2017 by ubonjoe

[OJAS]

58 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

 Sorry Tim... The airline is only responsible when they have allowed a passenger to fly after receiving a 'Refuse Boarding Code' through the Advance Passenger Information System.

 

In what circumstances might a passenger be subject to a "Refuse Boarding Code" alert (apart from the obvious one of being on the USA No-Fly list, for example)?

 

In practice, those intending to seek entry into Thailand for the standard 30 days on the basis of a 1-way ticket are (to the best of my knowledge based on various reports on here) only denied permission to board when checking-in at the airport of origin if they are not in possession of a valid onward flight ticket out of Thailand within the 30-day period. But this would presumably not in itself flag up a "Refuse Boarding Code" alert, would it not (or would it)?

 

That said, as an alternative to an onward flight ticket out of Thailand, though, I have heard on here of instances of an airline requiring a passenger to sign a disclaimer form with the effect of washing the airline's hands of all responsibility in the event of the passenger being refused entry into Thailand.

Edited October 2, 2017 by OJAS

[007 RED]

30 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

No it does not. You cannot be deported if you if you have not entered the country.

 

Edit: Entering the country is under chapter 2.

 

If you have not entered the country,  how is the competent official going to give you written notice to leave the Kingdom under Section 22?

[Mattd]

1 hour ago, 007 RED said:

Sorry Tim... The airline is only responsible when they have allowed a passenger to fly after receiving a 'Refuse Boarding Code' through the Advance Passenger Information System.

This cannot be right by default, if the airline received a 'refuse boarding code', then surely that is exactly what they would do?

In reality, the airline has to carry out due diligence of all boarding passengers, i.e. visa or no visa, if no visa, onward ticket, etc. etc. and if Thai immigration can show that the airline did not carry this out with diligence, then they would make them liable to fly the person back.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Mattd

[ubonjoe]

It seems pretty clear to me.

Quote

Section 22 : In the instance where the competent official discovers that an alien is forbidden from
entering into the Kingdom under the provisions of Section 12 , the competent official shall have authority
to order said alien by written notification to leave the Kingdom

That would be the form they give to those being denied entry and then the denial of entry stamp.

[007 RED]

22 minutes ago, OJAS said:

 

In what circumstances might a passenger be subject to a "Refuse Boarding Code" alert (apart from the obvious one of being on the USA No-Fly list, for example)?

 

In practice, those intending to seek entry into Thailand for the standard 30 days on the basis of a 1-way ticket are (to the best of my knowledge based on various reports on here) only denied permission to board when checking-in at the airport of origin if they are not in possession of a valid onward flight ticket out of Thailand within the 30-day period. But this would presumably not in itself flag up a "Refuse Boarding Code" alert, would it not (or would it)?

 

That said, as an alternative to an onward flight ticket out of Thailand, though, I have heard on here of instances of an airline requiring a passenger to sign a disclaimer form with the effect of washing the airline's hands of all responsibility in the event of the passenger being refused entry into Thailand.

FYI - The USA is not the only country to use the APIS. There are currently 16 others including Thailand.

The airline is required to submit basic passenger details (passport data) prior to the passenger boarding. Normally this is sent 24 hours before departure but can be as little as 1 hour.

The APIS submits the data to the immigration database which checks if anything untoward is known about the passenger, for example banned. If there is a ban the system sends a code back to the airline indicating deny boarding. If nothing known the feedback code indicates clear to board.  Feedback is normally given within a few seconds as the system is automatic.

Airlines will not allow a passenger to board (even if they sign a so called disclaimer) because they will be held responsible for the cost of returning the passenger plus they will incur a very heavy fine.

In addition to APIS feeding passenger data to the immigeation database, it also feeds that information to customs and various law enforcement agencies, any of whom can aalso feedback a deny boarding code.

[JackThompson]

5 hours ago, texxxan1 said:

Still the question comes up, what happens if i am denied... Can i just find a ticket counter and take a flight to somewhere in SEA...Manila for example... 

 

1 hour ago, 007 RED said:

If a passenger is refused entry, they will be escorted to the detention area at the airport.  Depending upon the immigration officer, and the reason why they have been refused entry, there are two options:

 

1)  The IO will determine the route of departure, or

2)  The passenger can determine where they wish to go.

 

In the cases I have read, recently, the only ticket-out option is "where you just came from."  There was a case some years back of being sent to his passport-country, but I haven't seen another case like that since.  Granted, though, it's the choice of Immigration what they do, in any particular case - so not a rule written in stone.

@texxxan1 - If traveling back to the USA at any point, apply for a Multiple-Entry Tourist Visa.   It is unfortunate that these are only available in a country where the applicant has legal-residence, but it appears the MFA's hands were tied when they created this visa - making it "not useful" for cases where it would be most applicable.

[007 RED]

5 minutes ago, Mattd said:

This cannot be right by default, if the airline received a 'refuse boarding code', then surely that is exactly what they would do?

In reality, the airline has to carry out due diligence of all boarding passengers, i.e. visa or no visa, if no visa, onward ticket, etc. etc. and if Thai immigration can show that the airline did not carry this out with diligence, then they would make them liable to fly the person back.

I agree the airline should show due diligence but check in clerks are human beinings and subject to making miistakes. Hence if the airline or one of its employees or agents allows the passenger to fly when they have recieved a deny boarding code, the airline is responsible.

[Mattd]

8 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

I agree the airline should show due diligence but check in clerks are human beinings and subject to making miistakes. Hence if the airline or one of its employees or agents allows the passenger to fly when they have recieved a deny boarding code, the airline is responsible.

So, what you are saying is that it is possible for the APIS system to issue a deny boarding code and the airline somehow still allow the passenger to board and fly?

So the system isn't automated then?

A mere mortal like me would have thought that the whole process would be automated, i.e. if a deny boarding code is in the system, then it would not be possible (or at least simple) for the system to issue a boarding pass. 

[gandalf12]

6 hours ago, texxxan1 said:

The problem with a single entry tourist visa is that i will never stay more than 28 days... I work 28 on/28 off on an offshore platform in the Caspian Sea...

 

So that is not workable.... 

Of course it is workable. I assume you work on Kashagan. I worked there and I obtained a visa which I then applied for a re-entry permit. It can be done so it is workable

[007 RED]

29 minutes ago, Mattd said:

So, what you are saying is that it is possible for the APIS system to issue a deny boarding code and the airline somehow still allow the passenger to board and fly?

So the system isn't automated then?

A mere mortal like me would have thought that the whole process would be automated, i.e. if a deny boarding code is in the system, then it would not be possible (or at least simple) for the system to issue a boarding pass. 

The APIS is automatic.... l cannot speak for the airlines systems.  I agree that if the airline recieve a deny boarding feedback code their system (and l include the humans) should not allow the passenger to board the flight, but it does occassionaly happen for whatever reason hence the heavy penalty and cost of repatriation.

[BritTim]

2 hours ago, 007 RED said:

4 hours ago, BritTim said:

At the point you are denied entry, the airline becomes responsible for you. They are normally expected to return you promptly to your last point of embarkation. I imagine you could talk to the airline representative. If you propose flying immediately to another location at no expense to themselves, I cannot imagine they would have any objection.

 Sorry Tim... The airline is only responsible when they have allowed a passenger to fly after receiving a 'Refuse Boarding Code' through the Advance Passenger Information System.

 

If a passenger is refused entry, they will be escorted to the detention area at the airport.  Depending upon the immigration officer, and the reason why they have been refused entry, there are two options:

 

1)  The IO will determine the route of departure, or

2)  The passenger can determine where they wish to go.

 

In both the above, the passenger will be liable for the purchase of the air ticket and possibly any costs incurred with the detention.  Once it has been decided where the passenger is going to go the IO will contact the airline and a representative will come to the detention area to make the ticket booking.

 

During the process the passenger will be given an official document indicating the reason for refusal and his/her rights to an appeal.  Prior to departure the passenger's passport is stamped with an exit stamp plus an exclusion stamp and if appropriate a stamp indicating that the passenger is banned from entering Thailand for a number of years.

 

The above procedure is in accordance with the Immigration Act B.E. 22522 section 55.   Note the word deportation in the Act also applies to excluded due to refused entry.

 

I know this is an area where you have some expertise, but I think you are confusing inadmissible persons and persons subject to deportation. The rules (contrary to what you state about Section 55 of the Immigration Act) are quite different. Both the removal versus deportation orders provided to the airline, and the documentation provided to the traveler differ between the two cases.

 

While countries are not necessarily bound by ICAO Best Practices, Thailand does tend to follow them, including Annex 9 on Facilitation. The most important part of Annex 9 with respect to Inadmissible Persons is Chapter 5 (http://www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/docs/bestpractices/chapter5.htm).

First, though, let us be totally clear about the difference between a Deportee and an Inadmissible Person. 
https://www.icao.int/SAM/Documents/2014-FAL-SEM/3.5 1100-1200 IATA InadmissiblePersons.pdf succinctly summarizes the difference:

Quote

Deportee:
A person who had legally been admitted to a State by its authorities or who had entered a State illegally, and who at some later time is formally ordered by the competent authorities to leave that State.

 

Quote

Inadmissible Person
A person who is or will be refused admission to a State by its authorities.

 

Except in the case of the national airline where the deportee has citizenship, an airline is not even obliged to accept a deportee for travel.

 

The rules for inadmissible Persons are covered in detail in sections 5.3 through 5.16. I do not quote the whole text here, but it makes clear that the airline is responsible for the removal, and assumes the cost of this once a removal order has been issued to the airline. (The airline is not precluded from trying to recover this cost from the passenger.) Prior to the removal order being issued, the cost of custody and care of the Inadmissible Person falls on the state, except where the person was improperly documented in a manner that was within the expetrise of the airline to detect.

[MadMuhammad]

Last year (2016) I entered and stayed in Thailand 5 times on visa exempt entries staying anywhere up to the limit and once on a SETV. I was never held up or asked any questions relating to reason for stay or cash reserves. 

Mad mentiones by UbonJoe I have doubts you’d even be looked a twice with the 28 day intervals

[Aditi Sharma]

3 minutes ago, MadMuhammad said:

Last year (2016) I entered and stayed in Thailand 5 times on visa exempt entries staying anywhere up to the limit and once on a SETV. I was never held up or asked any questions relating to reason for stay or cash reserves. 

Mad mentiones by UbonJoe I have doubts you’d even be looked a twice with the 28 day intervals

Whats the secret? 

[MadMuhammad]

29 minutes ago, Aditi Sharma said:

Whats the secret? 

 

No secret. 

 

I just checked my passport and I actually had 8

entries in 2016. Some for short days in between other countries and others for extended periods.

I entered on visa exempt:

Feb 15

Apr 12 

(Jun 18 SETV)

Jul 18

Aug 18

Sep 6

Oct 30

Dec 21

Once never once questioned or held up. Maybe because some stays were short term? (a few days)

 

edit: maybe month on/moth off maybe different?

Edited October 2, 2017 by MadMuhammad