Denied entry Immigration Act 2, 12 (2)

[Media1]

They were employed through family and operate off a menu system. There not smart or intelligent. Not worry that stamp is rubbish. GET a new passport and a VISA. Enter land border with already a Cambodia or other stamp in the nice new passport

[NoshowJones]

I blame the overstayers, Oh! wait.

[jspill]

How long are you spending out of the country on average when you leave? They said 'too many in/outs' and you say indeed you do have a lot. An in/out is flying back within 1-2 days.

 

You can probably get away with 270 days a year as lkv said, I've done that before too. Just don't push it close to 365

[Russell17au]

I would say that your biggest mistake was taking the arrogant attitude with the Immigration Officer that you did by demanding to know what law they were refusing your entry on and you were told too many ins and outs when you yourself have admitted you do have too many, but you still wanted to push a point trying to make yourself more superior than the IO. You had been warned about this previously but you chose to ignore the warning and try to enter the country again on this trip with another Visa Exempt. To me that is the action of an arrogant smart ass that does not want to listen to those warnings. You now have Thai immigration off side with you and you deserve it by your own actions. You will eventually learn a lesson that the IO in any country except your home country has the legal right to refuse you entry without having to explain to you the reason. You pushed the issue and now you have a stamp in your passport that you could have avoided simply by taking notice of what the previous IO had warned you about plus what this IO told you, it would have meant that you would have been returned to your previous departure point by the airlines that brought you to Thailand, you could have then applied for a SETV or METV and then returned to Thailand.

[jackdd]

5 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

You will eventually learn a lesson that the IO in any country except your home country has the legal right to refuse you entry without having to explain to you the reason.

I think there is hardly any country where an IO can refuse you entry without giving a reason. OP got a reason from the IO, the reason mentioned in 12/2. If OP would have had any visa he also could have appealed against this reason.

[mekko]

Where was you deported to? Did you have any input into destination? Did you have to buy a expensive new ticket? 

[jackdd]

Just now, mekko said:

Where was you deported to? Did you have any input into destination? Did you have to buy a expensive new ticket? 

He didn't get deported, he got denied entry. The airline has to pay to send him back to where he came from

[Hoppyone]

15 hours ago, JBBKK said:

Yes, you could be right about that. One officer kept saying I was trying to get "free visa", which annoyed me because it wasn't about the money at all. I've only ever entered on a VE when I plan to stay for a shorter period (I often have things to take care of outside Thailand). The piece of mind of having the SETV is well worth the money. 

However, other officers seem more concerned about the fact that I was staying for a long time and clearly not a tourist in the normal sense. 

I’ve been coming to Thailand on 6mth multi entry visas,in Dec 17 I was pulled aside and questioned why in that 12 month period I’d spent 251 days in Thailand but the law says only allowed to stay for 183 days,I’ve never overstayed but managed to stretch my stay with extensions ect,they wanted me to contact my airline and return to my country suggesting to me that I wasn’t a genuine tourist and that I should be on a retirement visa ,after an hour being interviewed and with me pleading my case I was allowed entry , taking their advice I’ve since applied for a retirement visa and was very grateful to IO for allowing entry in Dec 

[Yeahbutwhytho]

10 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

I would say that your biggest mistake was taking the arrogant attitude with the Immigration Officer that you did by demanding to know what law they were refusing your entry on

 

In what world wouldn't you need to know what law you're being pressed on? The world work's in laws - you've been in cambodia too long there Russell - when was the last time you've been back home??

[Russell17au]

6 minutes ago, jackdd said:

I think there is hardly any country where an IO can refuse you entry without giving a reason. OP got a reason from the IO, the reason mentioned in 12/2. If OP would have had any visa he also could have appealed against this reason.

The IO does not have to give the reason for refusal of entry, you can ask politely and he can answer but legally he does not have to give the reason. Most of them do give the reason. The OP had been given the reason from a previous trip when he was warned to get a proper visa next time, but the OP ignored that warning.

[Russell17au]

9 minutes ago, Yeahbutwhytho said:

 

In what world wouldn't you need to know what law you're being pressed on? The world work's in laws - you've been in cambodia too long there Russell - when was the last time you've been back home??

I find that your reference to me being in Cambodia an insult and it has nothing to do with when the last time I've been back home. It shows your arrogant attitude because in the real world you can ask the IO but legally he does not have to disclose this information to you and a lot has to do with how you ask for that information

[BritTim]

2 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

The IO does not have to give the reason for refusal of entry, you can ask politely and he can answer but legally he does not have to give the reason. Most of them do give the reason. The OP had been given the reason from a previous trip when he was warned to get a proper visa next time, but the OP ignored that warning.

By law, an official denial of entry into Thailand is made under Section 12 of the Immigration Act. The stamp in the passport and record in immigration's computer system indicate the subsection (reason) under Section 12 for the denied entry. Sometimes, immigration will allow you to leave without a formal denial of entry. When that occurs, there is no record of the refused entry in immigration's system (or your passport) which can make life a lot easier in the future. Immigration are happy to issue these unofficial denials because the official denials involve more work, as well as actions by senior officials. 

[Russell17au]

2 minutes ago, BritTim said:

By law, an official denial of entry into Thailand is made under Section 12 of the Immigration Act. The stamp in the passport and record in immigration's computer system indicate the subsection (reason) under Section 12 for the denied entry. Sometimes, immigration will allow you to leave without a formal denial of entry. When that occurs, there is no record of the refused entry in immigration's system (or your passport) which can make life a lot easier in the future. Immigration are happy to issue these unofficial denials because the official denials involve more work, as well as actions by senior officials. 

That is correct Brit Tim but when you take a bad attitude demanding answers and you get the IO off side then they will make things official, which is what has happened here.

[jackdd]

32 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

The IO does not have to give the reason for refusal of entry, you can ask politely and he can answer but legally he does not have to give the reason. Most of them do give the reason. The OP had been given the reason from a previous trip when he was warned to get a proper visa next time, but the OP ignored that warning.

Do you think an IO can just say "i don't allow you to enter Thailand" and then that's it, there is nothing else? I'm quite sure not even in Thailand that's possible

[The Theory]

On 6/2/2018 at 10:36 PM, JBBKK said:

they said I should apply for another visa outside, preferably an Non-imm 'O' or maybe even a 60 day tourist visa (anything except the 30 day visa waiver, they really seem to dislike that). 

Even though they said that, there is no garrantee that you can get back in soon by any other visas. The fact is once you are deported all goes to your record. Most probobly they think you are working illegally. That’s why you shall be reheated next time even with a real visa. 

[jackdd]

Make sure you carry this form, a photo and 1900THB with you in case they try to deny you when having a tourist visa https://www.immigration.go.th/download/1486548054958.pdf

[Russell17au]

12 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Do you think an IO can just say "i don't allow you to enter Thailand" and then that's it, there is nothing else? I'm quite sure not even in Thailand that's possible

The fact is that the IO can do that even if you have a SETV or a METV issued at an embassy and they often do but it is how you react is the main thing they are looking at, you can react by simply asking the IO politely to explain to you the reason so that you can ensure that it does not happen again or you can take the attitude that you demand answers and demand that they show you the law that gives them the right to refuse you entry. It is all to do with your attitude. Remember these people have the final say on whether you can enter the country or not.

[Yeahbutwhytho]

Just now, Russell17au said:

The fact is that the IO can do that even if you have a SETV or a METV issued at an embassy and they often do but it is how you react is the main thing they are looking at, you can react by simply asking the IO politely to explain to you the reason so that you can ensure that it does not happen again or you can take the attitude that you demand answers and demand that they show you the law that gives them the right to refuse you entry. It is all to do with your attitude. Remember these people have the final say on whether you can enter the country or not.

 

Ask don't demand, I agree with you there

[lkv]

5 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

The fact is that the IO can do that even if you have a SETV or a METV issued at an embassy and they often do

I disagree, they don't often do. I would say  I have never heard of confirmed cases they do, apart from some "pollution" here on the forum in the past from posters that lack credibility.

[jackdd]

2 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

The fact is that the IO can do that even if you have a SETV or a METV issued at an embassy and they often do but it is how you react is the main thing they are looking at, you can react by simply asking the IO politely to explain to you the reason so that you can ensure that it does not happen again or you can take the attitude that you demand answers and demand that they show you the law that gives them the right to refuse you entry. It is all to do with your attitude. Remember these people have the final say on whether you can enter the country or not.

Immigration Act, 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.

I assume the written notification is the stamp in the passport which specifies the reason. So according to the law he can't just tell you that he refuses you entry without giving a reason.

[Odin Norway]

1 hour ago, jspill said:

How long are you spending out of the country on average when you leave? They said 'too many in/outs' and you say indeed you do have a lot. An in/out is flying back within 1-2 days.

 

You can probably get away with 270 days a year as lkv said, I've done that before too. Just don't push it close to 365

As stated many times before.There is no written rules on how many visa exempts you can have a year or how many days pr year in the country.I was also pushing the limits until now with over 100 entries the last 10 years.Yes I was living here and yes that is not what the visa exempts is for.

Yes I got warnings also.But I also took the hint and got a visa before it was to late.Having kids that need you, do that to you.So play it safe and get a propper visa or shup up if you are denied when you push or bend  the rules.

[Russell17au]

8 minutes ago, jackdd said:

 

 

I assume the written notification is the stamp in the passport which specifies the reason. So according to the law he can't just tell you that he refuses you entry without giving a reason.

Under that the IO does not have to tell you anything, all he has to do is put the "Refuse Entry" stamp  with the section number of the Act listed as well and hand your passport to security to escort you to the holding area until your flight out of the country where your passport will be handed to the cabin staff and you will be flown back to the country that you arrived via the airline that brought you here on arrival back at that country your passport will be returned to you. There was a case several months ago where 2 men were refused entry and they were not told the reason verbally by the IO and  the "Refused Entry" stamp was put in there passports and it was not until they arrived back in Australia that they were told that they were undesirables in Thailand and the third man was held in custody in Bangkok as he was refused entry back into Australia because he was traveling on a UK passport. None of these 3 were told that the Australian Federal Police contacted Thailand warning them that they were coming.

[jspill]

1 hour ago, Russell17au said:

I would say that your biggest mistake was taking the arrogant attitude with the Immigration Officer that you did by demanding to know what law they were refusing your entry on and you were told too many ins and outs when you yourself have admitted you do have too many, but you still wanted to push a point trying to make yourself more superior than the IO. You had been warned about this previously but you chose to ignore the warning and try to enter the country again on this trip with another Visa Exempt. To me that is the action of an arrogant smart ass that does not want to listen to those warnings. You now have Thai immigration off side with you and you deserve it by your own actions. You will eventually learn a lesson that the IO in any country except your home country has the legal right to refuse you entry without having to explain to you the reason. You pushed the issue and now you have a stamp in your passport that you could have avoided simply by taking notice of what the previous IO had warned you about plus what this IO told you, it would have meant that you would have been returned to your previous departure point by the airlines that brought you to Thailand, you could have then applied for a SETV or METV and then returned to Thailand.

No, he was already going to be denied entry before he started asking what the reason for refusal was, it made no difference.

 

And as he said, he was deported back to his previous departure point.

 

Then the immigration there decided to deport him back to home country, which is unusual, but nothing to do with anything he said to the IOs in Thailand.

[Russell17au]

9 minutes ago, jspill said:

No, he was already going to be denied entry before he started asking what the reason for refusal was, it made no difference.

 

And as he said, he was deported back to his previous departure point.

 

Then the immigration there decided to deport him back to home country, which is unusual, but nothing to do with anything he said to the IOs in Thailand.

Was he "Refused Entry" or was he "Deported"? You can only be "deported" if you actually pass through immigration and enter the country and from what I have read he was "refused entry" and that is the stamp that would be in his passport from Thailand but what the stamp that has been put in his passport in the country he was sent back to would be the biggest worry because if they have put the red "Deported" stamp in his passport then he is going to have all sorts of problems trying to get a visa for any country for a long time, however if they only put a "refused entry" stamp in then he can go and apply for and pay for a visa at an embassy, but with those 2 stamps it can still cause him problems. If he had kept his mouth shut and voluntarily left Thailand and apologised to the IO and flown back to his point of departure then he probably would not have been sent home and he probably would not have any red stamps in his passport which would mean that he could have applied for a visa at the local Thai embassy

[jspill]

22 minutes ago, Odin Norway said:

As stated many times before.There is no written rules on how many visa exempts you can have a year or how many days pr year in the country.I was also pushing the limits until now with over 100 entries the last 10 years.Yes I was living here and yes that is not what the visa exempts is for.

Yes I got warnings also.But I also took the hint and got a visa before it was to late.Having kids that need you, do that to you.So play it safe and get a propper visa or shup up if you are denied when you push or bend  the rules.

I know, he knows too, but there's a much lower risk if you don't do a 24 hour 'in/out'. 

[lkv]

1 minute ago, Russell17au said:

 if they have put the red "Deported" stamp in his passport 

What red "Deported Stamp"? Do you have a picture of this?

[jspill]

1 minute ago, Russell17au said:

Was he "Refused Entry" or was he "Deported"? You can only be "deported" if you actually pass through immigration and enter the country and from what I have read he was "refused entry" and that is the stamp that would be in his passport from Thailand but what the stamp that has been put in his passport in the country he was sent back to would be the biggest worry because if they have put the red "Deported" stamp in his passport then he is going to have all sorts of problems trying to get a visa for any country for a long time, however if they only put a "refused entry" stamp in then he can go and apply for and pay for a visa at an embassy, but with those 2 stamps it can still cause him problems. If he had kept his mouth shut and voluntarily left Thailand and apologised to the IO and flown back to his point of departure then he probably would not have been sent home and he probably would not have any red stamps in his passport which would mean that he could have applied for a visa at the local Thai embassy

Figure of speech, he was denied entry and flown back to where he flown from. Yes technically it isn't called a deportation. 

 

It isn't voluntary either way though. And it had nothing to do with anything he said, he was already going to be flown back. Then, again, what immigration at the next airport did with him (decided to fly him back to his home country) is nothing to do with whatever he said to the Thailand IOs either, as you posted. 

 

[Russell17au]

5 minutes ago, lkv said:

What red "Deported Stamp"? Do you have a picture of this?

 

[lkv]

10 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

 

Ah that's Photoshop man. It does not look like this in Thailand. It's not red, it just lists the reason of denial of entry (in Thai), what flight you arrived on etc. Deportation is similar if not sort of the same stamp. In addition to that, should one get banned for overstay, there is an additional rectangular stamp stating the number of years (also in Thai).

 

 

[Russell17au]

1 minute ago, lkv said:

Ah that's Photoshop man. It does not look like this in Thailand. It's not red, it just lists the reason of denial entry, what flight you arrived on etc. Deportation has a similar stamp. In addition to that, should one get banned for overstay, there is an additional rectangular stamp stating the number of years. 

 

 

You should read the stamp under it and you will see that it is the UK stamp but the deported stamps are basically all the same, some have the country of origin language on them. Not all deportation stamps have the details of your travel on them because some can be 10 - 20 years old and you have committed a criminal act which requires your deportation