not allowed on the airport to enter by tourist visa.

[ubonjoe]

30 minutes ago, Faeton said:

i can show them more then 20k cash. Can show in thai baht or usd.  And i show it Don Mueng airport.

I removed the image of your passport since the visa it had your name on it. Your visa is still valid.

You denied entry under Section 12 clause number 2 that states this "2. Having no appropriate means of living following entrance into the Kingdom" which would be for not showing the 20k baht. If you showed it then your denial of entry had no basis in fact.

30 minutes ago, Faeton said:

Then i can take same day flight to Siem Reap. And get by taxi to PoiPet border. 

That would be poor choice of a crossing to enter the country. I suggest you use the one south of Poi Pet to Ban Laem from Kamrieng on the Cambodia side.

[samsensam]

 

3 hours ago, BaldPlumber said:

I doubt whether many tourists own cars here

 

 

 

 

 

it happens; i was visiting the states in the 90s, bought a car in dallas to travel down to panama city - great trip!

[Freefly]

I have been here for 2 years basically back to back tourist visas. Only few days or couple weeks inbetween them. Iv never been questioned at the border or embassies. I own two condos and a motorbike. Which can legally be bought on tourist visas. So its a catch 22, they let you buy bike/car and condo, which you will obviously use and live in but now they starting to refuse entries. Since I dont fit in to any other visa categorys this is the only way I can stay. I dont work and am fully independant. As I said, iv never been asked but I do carry copies of my condo title, proof of motorbike ownership, statement from my girlfriend and bank statements to prove my case if asked. Not sure if the o.p. carried these with him and whether it makes any difference. Nevertheless it is becoming harder, hearing stories like this more often now. Goodluck to the o.p hope you can get back ?.

[BritTim]

22 minutes ago, blubb said:

They just enforce the 180 day rules, after 180 in the Kingdom you aren't anymore a tourist,

away from you homecountry for a.e. 330 day or 180 day mostly in EU , you're freed for pay personal income tax ...  

What 180 day rule is that? I certainly have seen no such rule in the 1979 immigration act, or the related ministerial or police orders. What have you seen that I have not?

[mstevens]

4 minutes ago, Freefly said:

As I said, iv never been asked but I do carry copies of my condo title, proof of motorbike ownership, statement from my girlfriend and bank statements to prove my case if asked. Not sure if the o.p. carried these with him and whether it makes any difference. Nevertheless it is becoming harder, hearing stories like this more often now. Goodluck to the o.p hope you can get back ?.

I think this is being proactive and really sensible.  Anyone who has a history of residing in Thailand on short-term visas should have minimum 20K baht in cash on them plus paperwork to show that they have no shortage of funds as well as a ticket out of the country 60 / 90 days later.  That should (hopefully!) appease most officers.

[Khun Robert]

I hope he keep us updated about the next border crossing and outcome.

Would the I/O at the border ignore the recent denial stamp?

 

[BritTim]

As @ubonjoe stated (though they slightly filled in the stamp incorrectly) you were officially denied under Section 12 (2) of the 1979 Immigration Act

Quote

Having no appropriate means of living following entrance into the Kingdom.

Usually (again as @ubonjoe said) this is because you did not show them 20,000 baht equivalent in cash before you were denied entry. Did they ask to see it? If they did not ask, did you helpfully show it before you were denied entry? Commonly, if they want to deny entry, they will deny you because you do not have the cash, and refuse to rescind the denial when you subsequently are able to visit an ATM machine.

[RichardColeman]

Man up, spend some money and get a retirement visa with a 'helpful' company, probably the same cost a flight.

[roobaa01]

we had seen the 180 day  rule abolished .

 

wbr

roobaa01

[ubonjoe]

4 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Man up, spend some money and get a retirement visa with a 'helpful' company, probably the same cost a flight.

I see no mention of him being 50 or over so your comment and suggestion is wrong.

[natway09]

There has been this discussion & advice from Immigration for 2 or 3 years now.

As one of the unfortunate ones that have been pulled you need to change your status in their eyes as obviously you have been flaunting the system for some time.Send us the rejection stamp so we can ascertain exactly the situation.My mate flew to Yangon & got in that way via Mae Sot in the end.

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, roobaa01 said:

we had seen the 180 day  rule abolished .

 

There has never been one to abolish. Only  the long rescinded rule limiting visa exempt entries to 90 days in 6 months.

[NorthernRyland]

Was this an act of racial profiling? I read 3 pages so far and it was never mentioned what this persons  nationality is or perhaps the most important part, how many TV's did he have/when was the last time he went home. That's crucial information to the story. This is an alarming story unless of course we was African and hadn't traveled home in over a year, in which case it seems perfectly reasonable.

[Mattd]

22 minutes ago, Freefly said:

I dont work and am fully independant. As I said, iv never been asked but I do carry copies of my condo title, proof of motorbike ownership, statement from my girlfriend and bank statements to prove my case if asked.

This could also work against you, depending on the IO, if ever asked, as all do go to prove that you are residing in Thailand, the most important piece of evidence that you would need to show in that case would be proof that you are not working in Thailand and that the funds come from outside of Thailand.

 

TBH I suspect that there is more to the OP's story than we know, however it could be just that the IO was not in a good mood.

 

The issue is that Thailand have not really properly defined in law or official regulations, their definition of a tourist and usage of tourist visas, so there is confusion from both the ends.

Yes, an argument could be made that those that do wish to stay here long term and are not working here legally,  or are not married to a Thai, do not have children here and are under 50, then the elite visa is available to them.

This still does not negate the fact there is nothing officially wrong with utilising TV's as the regulations stand now.

[KiChakayan]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Actually - many do.  Under-50s not married to a Thai and with independent-income which means no need to work don't have many other stay-options, and the rules do not prohibit repeated stays on Tourist visas.

 

Many using Tourist stays have cars or motos in other nearby SEA countries, also.   Even though those countries offer sane options for under-50s for longer stays (money-in bank for the PI, "Buy a Visa" for ~$360/yr in Cambodia, 1-yr ME Tourist-Visa for Vietnam), they seem to find no reason to hassle or block repeat-tourists from spending money into their economies.  I wonder why Thailand is the outlier? 

Yeah, you are absolutely right, there are no illegal workers here after all...

[pearciderman]

1 hour ago, blubb said:

 

technically you can, if you bought a vehicle before the rules changed. The other possibility

he had a non imi and this was chanced another way is the mine is your and you is mine thing ... his Mia owns the car for you're talking about 'my car' based on the regular usage.... 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What rule change? There has never been a rule saying what type of entry you need to buy a vehicle.

[pearciderman]

20 minutes ago, BritTim said:

As @ubonjoe stated (though they slightly filled in the stamp incorrectly) you were officially denied under Section 12 (2) of the 1979 Immigration Act

Usually (again as @ubonjoe said) this is because you did not show them 20,000 baht equivalent in cash before you were denied entry. Did they ask to see it? If they did not ask, did you helpfully show it before you were denied entry? Commonly, if they want to deny entry, they will deny you because you do not have the cash, and refuse to rescind the denial when you subsequently are able to visit an ATM machine.

 

There are no ATM machines before the immigration check point, so for you to visit one they would have had to of let you through.

[Just Weird]

4 hours ago, markaoffy said:

Having a valid visa issued by a Thai consulate and then being rejected by Thai immigration sums up the madness


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

No it doesn't sum up any madness; a visa is not an entitlement to enter any country, the IOs are the ones, in any country, to decide who gets in, visa or no visa. 

 

This person was clearly abusing the visa system designed to allow legitimate tourists access to the country and it's people like him that cause problems for others who stick to the rules.

[alex8912]

3 hours ago, mjnaus said:

 

Then go live in one those other fantastic countries like Cambodia or Myanmar (uhg!). The Thai government has made it very clear that tourist visas are not to be used for long stays, period. Thailand has other visa for such cases, namely the non-O ones. If you don't quality for those, you have one final route: the Elite visa. If that's not for you, you're out of luck. You can hardly blame the government for misuse of tourist visa. If you still insist on doing so, roll the dice and hope for a positive outcome. But don't go crying when it does not pan out. 

Or better yet since he mentioned having money in the bank etc why not just go back to your home country and get a METV. If you follow your dates correctly you can get 9 months stay with it and just two border hops/ trips. Then go to Vietnam or Cambodia or somewhere else a couple months then a brief trip back to your home country for another METV and repeat. 

[JLCrab]

From the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website:

 

10.  Royal Thai Embassies and Royal Thai Consulates-General have the authority to issue visas to foreigners for travel to Thailand.  The authority to permit entry and stay in Thailand, however, is with the immigration officers.  In some cases, the immigration officer may not permit foreigner holding a valid visa entry into Thailand should the immigration officer find reason to believe that he or she falls into the category of aliens prohibited from entering Thailand under the Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979).

 

-- and then as UJoe and others noted:

(2)  Having no appropriate means of living following entry into the Kingdom.

 

 

[Just Weird]

4 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Actually - many do.  Under-50s not married to a Thai and with independent-income which means no need to work don't have many other stay-options, and the rules do not prohibit repeated stays on Tourist visas.

Those people are not tourists, they are trying to stay for extended periods on tourist visas.

[Yeahbutwhytho]

1. What is your nationality

2. Did you show them CASH or a bank statement for your proof of money - 20,000b equivalent. 

[Dmitry2222]

4 hours ago, mjnaus said:

The Thai government has made it very clear that tourist visas are not to be used for long stays, period. Thailand has other visa for such cases, namely the non-O ones.

Few months ago officer wanted to reject me with NON-O visa(upon marriage) in the Suvarnabhumi airport. So, some times it is not working as well.

Edited January 26, 2018 by Dmitry2222

[Kieran00001]

4 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Actually - many do.  Under-50s not married to a Thai and with independent-income which means no need to work don't have many other stay-options, and the rules do not prohibit repeated stays on Tourist visas.

 

Many using Tourist stays have cars or motos in other nearby SEA countries, also.   Even though those countries offer sane options for under-50s for longer stays (money-in bank for the PI, "Buy a Visa" for ~$360/yr in Cambodia, 1-yr ME Tourist-Visa for Vietnam), they seem to find no reason to hassle or block repeat-tourists from spending money into their economies.  I wonder why Thailand is the outlier? 

 

Thailand is hardly an outlier just because a couple countries near here are even more lenient, Thailand remains an easy country to live long term without seeking permanent residency.

[Russell17au]

I think there is a lot more scrutiny into so called tourist travelers now because of terrorist activity and also with the drugs. Immigration in all countries are looking at the amount of times a person travels to one destination on tourist visa's. I think the problem he has now is the date on his entry refused stamp, if he came to me as an immigration office of Thailand and presented me with that passport with that stamp I would seriously be looking at how long ago that stamp was put in his passport. I think he is going to have to leave it for awhile before he tries to re-enter the country.

[flyingdoc]

Sometimes just the number of VE entries is counted, and NOT the fact that the passport holder had returned from another country or different countries, solely to catch a flight back home from BKK.

[NorthernRyland]

16 minutes ago, Yeahbutwhytho said:

1. What is your nationality

2. Did you show them CASH or a bank statement for your proof of money - 20,000b equivalent. 

No one answered that one yet. If  this guy is from a 3rd world African country and has been jumping around SE Asia for many months then obviously immigration is suspicious and this is a non-story (whether you think this is fair or not is another story).

[NorthernRyland]

13 minutes ago, Dmitry2222 said:

Few months ago officer wanted to reject me with NON-O visa(upon marriage) in the Suvarnabhumi airport. So, some times it is not working as well.

Damn, what were their reasons? Fraud marriage is really common in the US  at least (all 3 Thai's I know started out that way) but I don't think immigration officials in Airports can properly make that determination without looking at your documents.

[cameraman888]

My understanding is they don't want you there over 6 months a year (out of the past 12 months?) on a tourism visa. It was a red flag in that your last two visas totaled somewhere around 6 months in a row from what it sounds like. Now you're trying for 9 months in a row or more  (I don't know how long you were there in total in the past 12 months).

[ubonjoe]

1 minute ago, genericptr said:

No one answered that one yet. If  this guy is from a 3rd world African country and has been jumping around SE Asia for many months then obviously immigration is suspicious and this is a non-story (whether you think this is fair or not is another story).

If he was from a country in Africa he would not of been able to get a new tourist visa in Kuala Lumpur since most people from them can only get a visa in their home country.