Rejected at the airport, what is next?

[balo]

In Norway and Sweden we have a cashless society and even going to the kiosk to buy a hot dog you pay with the card or the smart phone.

Telling a tourist they need to bring 20k in cash will be looked upon as very weird and the tourist will never come back.  

[Thingamabob]

Sorry to say this mess is of your own making. Just get 20k Baht to hand and come in via a friendly land border ie not Poipet. 

[overherebc]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

Only a fool relies on an ATM machine'

- ATM machines do go down and there have been system wide failures.

- Cards can be lost, or rendered inoperable

- Home banks can freeze cards.

Immigration has no way of knowing if the visitor actually has some money. Considering the number of threads in TVF, including this one, that discuss how to play the system, the immigration department's position is reasonable.

20,000 baht is an insignificant amount today, whether you wish to accept that or not and isn't even enough to cover a basic return fare change if someone is refused at the port of entry.

 

In respect to the OP's inquiry, encouraging him to play the ED visa game is wrong. This is not waht the ED visas were intended for, and the more people try to use them to circumvent the intent of the  visa rules, the more likely we will lose access to the ED visa altogether.  The OP should just get a proper long stay visa. He should also start paying his income taxes in Thailand as he is supposed to if he lives in Thailand for more than 6 months a year.

The last bit about tax is a wind up, right?

[MyFriend You]

11 hours ago, AlexRich said:

You could spend 9 months in the Phillipinnes without any hassle whatsoever. Go to Cebu City and it has all the modern conveniences of any Thai city. Then go back to Thailand.

I love Cebu, but I fall in love every day with a different Pinay, that's why I have to avoid it, I am very weak when it comes to Filipina Ladies.   

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

Only a fool relies on an ATM machine'

- ATM machines do go down and there have been system wide failures.

- Cards can be lost, or rendered inoperable

- Home banks can freeze cards.

5K Baht cash if worried about a country-wide telecom/electrical failure - covers guesthouse + restaurants for a few days. 

 

One call to one's home-bank should get new card fed-ex'd in a day or two, or existing card re-activated. 

 

They can send cash Western-Union in an emergency, but better to use one of one's several other cards in a different ATM machine (a few meters distant) or cash-advance from a bank, while waiting for a replacement-card.

 

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

In respect to the OP's inquiry, encouraging him to play the ED visa game is wrong. This is not waht the ED visas were intended for, and the more people try to use them to circumvent the intent of the  visa rules, the more likely we will lose access to the ED visa altogether. 

I suggest people attend their classes and document every day's attendance - as a "CYA" move at the least - and why not get what you pay for? 

Immigration might raise their payoff rates, again - but only if they surmise that market can deliver a higher net return with different per-student costs and volume values.  Ending that money-stream seems unlikely.

 

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

The OP should just get a proper long stay visa.

If the "over 50" guideline was removed, he might already have one.  For now, he is making short-stays on shorter-stay visas, which is 100% within the published rules, provided he can afford to stay here and does not take a Thai job.

 

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

He should also start paying his income taxes in Thailand as he is supposed to if he lives in Thailand for more than 6 months a year.

If remitting income from the year earned, yes on taxes.  Too bad Thailand doesn't offer a means of stay in exchange for paying taxes on foreign-sourced income, or more people would do that, instead of holding the money offshore for a year.  This could be a gold-mine in tax-receipts. 

 

But to get that on-track, some sort of convoluted rules would need to be created, so that honest-applicants were forced to pay agents 25K Baht /yr for each extension.  With that in place, immigration might get on-board 100%. 

[sanemax]

2 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

The OP should just get a proper long stay visa. He should also start paying his income taxes in Thailand as he is supposed to if he lives in Thailand for more than 6 months a year

Going abroad every few months for a visa means that he hasnt stayed in Thailand for over six months continuously and even a yearly ed-visa , you have to usually leave Thailand before six months  and come back

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, balo said:

Telling a tourist they need to bring 20k in cash will be looked upon as very weird and the tourist will never come back.  

That is what they want 

[AlexRich]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Sure they do.  I have stayed in several.  They hoped I would never leave, other than an "out/in" to comply with the terms of my visa.  "Welcome Back" is the general attitude.

 

No reason to limit it to 9-mo.  They have made it easy to stay 3 years before your first visa-run now (formerly 14 months) - and welcome-back those folks the same day they left, for another 3 year stint.

I agree, but the OP appears to stay abroad for 9 months at a time, he could easily stay 3 years or more. But 9 months then back to Thailand ... he could do 3 months going back and forth ... he might get away with that.  

[AlexRich]

48 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

I love Cebu, but I fall in love every day with a different Pinay, that's why I have to avoid it, I am very weak when it comes to Filipina Ladies.   

Yes, you need self discipline when travelling there. But it's a decent enough place for the OP to hang out in before returning to Thailand.

[Gilsh]

4 hours ago, alex8912 said:

Were you with a supervisor and exactly how do they refuse you from showing your bank statement ? Didn’t you at least have it in your hand at some point ? Do you personally feel if you had the equivalent of 20k cash you would have been let in ? This is really important I think. Thank you. 

I had it in my hand but she didn't want to look. had more than 1 million to show. I'm not sure if she would not have look for something else.. I dont know  

[balo]

25 minutes ago, sanemax said:

That is what they want

Yes but its time for them to join the future.

[Gilsh]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

You could also fly to Penang (usually via KL - easier to find flights from some parts of the world) and then take the Train in through the Pedang Besar entry-point.  Asking to see the 20K Baht is reported here, so be prepared.  Then, on by train, bus, and/or taxi to Hat Yai airport, and fly domestic from there.  If you need more details on this route, feel free to ask (I've done it many times).

I can not fly to KL with an Israeli passport. I can fly to Laos only through Bangkok (in a connection flight) and it is very expansive. 

@JackJohnson I can also fly to Thailand through Phuket, Is that a good option? 

 

 

 

 

[DrJack54]

46 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Going abroad every few months for a visa means that he hasnt stayed in Thailand for over six months continuously and even a yearly ed-visa , you have to usually leave Thailand before six months  and come back

10,000 posts and you allude to "imaginary 6 month rule". Can you direct me to it

[elviajero]

2 minutes ago, Gilsh said:

4 hours ago, alex8912 said:

Were you with a supervisor and exactly how do they refuse you from showing your bank statement ? Didn’t you at least have it in your hand at some point ? Do you personally feel if you had the equivalent of 20k cash you would have been let in ? This is really important I think. Thank you. 

I had it in my hand but she didn't want to look. had more than 1 million to show. I'm not sure if she would not have look for something else.. I dont know  

As I have explained already, having a foreign bank statement is of little help in these circumstances. And I doubt having 20K would have helped. 

 

A retiree wanting to stay long term cannot walk in to an immigration office and show a foreign bank statement to satisfy they have the means to fund their stay; they have to put cash in a Thai bank for x months or provide a certified foreign income. The same principle applies to you at the border. You haven't provided -- under the immigration system -- the recognised means to stay long term, which is why you're rejected under section 12.2.

[elviajero]

8 hours ago, onera1961 said:

9 hours ago, elviajero said:

There are no ATM’s because they aren’t needed by 99.99% of visitors, and the lack of certainly isn’t anything to do with an immigration ploy!

But they have a currency conversion booth. And I had seen a few people at the counter most of the time when I came to BKK airport. 

The exchange bureaus are not there for the benefit of tourists that need 10/20K baht. They are there to make money off of stupid visitors that didn't make time to get hold of some Thai baht before getting on the plane.

Edited December 2, 2018 by elviajero

[Elkski]

Last week I flew into Don muang from a nearby country with maybe 15 k baht.  I'm 58 and have not stayed in Thailand excessively the past few years.  Longest is 60 days of 8 trips.  I have only used visa on entry, I am USA citizen.  Was I at this risk?   This is first time I traveled with less than 20 k because it is a risk.  Many hotels have no lock boxes, they have been shown to be worthless security devices anyway.  A money belt can give me a heat rash in the last place I want one and seems like a big red flag telling would be robbers to Target me.   Lastly I spend such little cash because hotels are 89% on Agoda or some such and credid cards okus I have started to swallow the 220 baht ATM fees game.  What a ficked up country. No wonder I spent 70% if myrecent vacation outside Thailand this trip.  

[marqus12]

I am on ME non o visa and in 2014 I received a leaflet

several times on the borders about the fact that I can be

not let in if I do not show 20k on request.
Nobody ever wanted me to show it but I always have it

with me. Considering how expensive it may be not to

have 20 k in cash .. one have to be very not wise 

[realenglish1]

Just get a new passport with no stamps in it That should help a lot

[dundas]

I'm a regular visitor to Thailand and have spent four months this year on visa waiver entries. March, then July, followed by a week in Japan, August, and then November (entry from Japan again, although I am Australian). I don't think I'm in breach of any published rule, but I've started bringing the equivalent of THB20.000 with me. I haven't been asked to show the money -- yet. All arrivals so far have been in BKK. Next time, instead of flying THAI, I'm thinking I'll fly SG/Silkair and clear immigration in Chiang Mai. And yes, maybe I should get a tourist visa, but that is such a PIA. I don't even want to check in a bag when I go on holiday, let alone go through any visa getting process. 

[Ebumbu]

21 hours ago, onera1961 said:

I think OP is a remote worker, and if so, he can look into iglu or coffee asia for a B visa with WP. Without an elite, this is the only course left for remote worker. 

 

Hi, do you have a link for Coffee Asia? I found Iglu. Thanks! 

[sanemax]

34 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

10,000 posts and you allude to "imaginary 6 month rule". Can you direct me to it

As far as I'm aware , if you stay in Thailand for over six months , you become liable to pay tax , although most people dont have to pay tax in Thailand because their income is taxed at home .

   If you were talking about the education visa and the "six month rule" , if you get a school ed visa , you get stamped in for 3 months and you can extend for a further 3 months , then after six months , you have to go abroad and come back for a further 3 months

[elviajero]

5 hours ago, JackThompson said:

16 hours ago, Gilsh said:

ok, found this in my passport. I think it is related, anyone knows what it means?

The "9" means you didn't have the 20K Baht to show

The "2" means they determined you did not have the funds to afford your stay here. 

 

Regarding the "2" - Did they look at you bank-balance and tell you it needed to be higher, or it needed to show foreign-xfers?  Did they say you needed to bring a different form of proof on this point in the future, to get a Tourist Visa entry of 60-days stay?  I am guessing not, given others have reported getting it without any questions at all about their financial situation - but those would have been relevant to that stamp.

 

Note that you were applying for a 60-day stay, so any financial issues would Only involve funds needed for that future-time, maximum.  An additional 30-days can be applied for to extend that stay, but this receives separate and independent permission-granted by immigration at a local office.  So, only 60-days of future-spending-ability was relevant when you were attempting entry.  If they didn't determine you didn't have the funds to live here for 60-days, then they lied when they put that "2" in your passport-stamp.

You continue to completely; misunderstand the law, not accept the lawful power IO's have, and along with others misinform long term tourists.

 

I have written, for years, that not having 20K is a completely separate issue to being denied under 12.2. And that trying to prove your financial standing at the border is a complete waste of time. Any advice to the contrary is just ill-informed misinformation.

 

It doesn't matter how much the person has in their foreign bank. The underlying reason for the denial was the cumulative time spent in the country as a 'tourist' without jumping through the hoops required to prove their financial standing to get a long term visa/permit to stay.

 

It's not just about the funds for a future 60 day stay. That is simply wrong. And the 20K is meant as pocket money, not the funds expected to fund a two month holiday. You're not going to get far on 333 baht per day!

 

Again... Section 12.2 effectively allows the IO to deny entry because the person has stayed in the country a long time without proving -- through normal channels -- their financial standing to continue that long stay.

[jackdd]

9 minutes ago, elviajero said:

without proving -- through normal channels -- their financial standing to continue that long stay.

OP has a multiple entry visa, so when he applied for the visa he showed money (i don't know how much it is in Israel, in Europe it's 5000 Euro, so about 180k THB) in his bank account.

[onera1961]

14 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Again... Section 12.2 effectively allows the IO to deny entry because the person has stayed in the country a long time without proving -- through normal channels -- their financial standing to continue that long stay.

What those normal channels will be for someone with a tourist visa (like an elite visa)?

[stud858]

20 minutes ago, jackdd said:

OP has a multiple entry visa, so when he applied for the visa he showed money (i don't know how much it is in Israel, in Europe it's 5000 Euro, so about 180k THB) in his bank account.

I thought that would seem good reasoning but proving your funds for visa and proving funds for actual entry are mutually exclusive events imo. Every single time I make sure to have more than the required 20k. When entering no matter the visa type.

[alex8912]

29 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You continue to completely; misunderstand the law, not accept the lawful power IO's have, and along with others misinform long term tourists.

 

I have written, for years, that not having 20K is a completely separate issue to being denied under 12.2. And that trying to prove your financial standing at the border is a complete waste of time. Any advice to the contrary is just ill-informed misinformation.

 

It doesn't matter how much the person has in their foreign bank. The underlying reason for the denial was the cumulative time spent in the country as a 'tourist' without jumping through the hoops required to prove their financial standing to get a long term visa/permit to stay.

 

It's not just about the funds for a future 60 day stay. That is simply wrong. And the 20K is meant as pocket money, not the funds expected to fund a two month holiday. You're not going to get far on 333 baht per day!

 

Again... Section 12.2 effectively allows the IO to deny entry because the person has stayed in the country a long time without proving -- through normal channels -- their financial standing to continue that long stay.

What are the NORMAL channels?  Could you specifically explain this? If he had 20k in cash and a bank statement and had a current METV and spent 3 months out of Thailand between them, why would he be denied entry? Could a supervisor be asked for ? I know he didn’t have the 20k ( and I understand you said it probably may have not mattered) But if he did what would be the denial of entry reason ? Thank you. 

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, JackThompson said:

7 hours ago, Proboscis said:

I think that the message the Thai authorities are trying to send to all folks coming to Thailand is that tourism visas (and visa waivers) are for genuine tourists only.

In Thai law, "genuine tourist" is defined as not working a job, and having the money to afford one's next stay of 60-days (with a Tourist Visa).

Not sure I've ever seen that law.

 

I think you will find that immigration consider a 'typical' tourist to be someone that visits for a short term holiday/stay, and goes home.

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, alex8912 said:

10 hours ago, elviajero said:

There are no ATM’s because they aren’t needed by 99.99% of visitors, and the lack of certainly isn’t anything to do with an immigration ploy!

 

If immigration are asking about cash they are almost certainly thinking about denying entry even if the person has the requisite cash. Even if ATM’s existed they’d be of little use to someone in that situation.

I like your advise most times but I think your stat of 99.99 percent of arriving tourists not needing cash is ridiculous. The first thing many and I would sometimes say MOST tourists do is go the atm or money exchange but AFTER they go through immigration ( fir convenience ). I meet many tourists here in Thailand and both this year and last year I asked them if the knew the quivolent of 20k could be asked for AT immigration and not one single person has said yes ( I’ve asked over 100) as I mentioned most said they used the ATM after. I also do this when I visit most other countries as well. 

I didn't say that arriving tourists don't need cash. Most tourists carry cash and immigration accept cash in any exchangeable currency so there is no need to change to Thai baht before passport control.

 

Immigration do not, as a general rule, ask tourists to show 10/20K. They, as a general rule, only ask people they are considering to deny entry to who tend to be long term tourists.

 

6 hours ago, alex8912 said:

The second point I would like to argue is that you keep insisting with absolutely no reason that IF this person had 20k on him he would have been rejected anyways. What exactly do you mean? Not just they will find another reason blah blah. An METV lets you stay up to nine months ( and you have to show income and many other things to get one in your home country). He seemed to leave the country for at least 3 months between them. I think in this ONE situation not having the 20k was the reason. If he showed the 20k AND showed the bank statement that he said he had I think he would have been let in ( perhaps it would have gone to a supervisor level or he should have asked for one if he had 20k) and then he would have been let in with just a verbal warning. Do you think what I wrote is at least 50% or more possible ? 

I am saying that if the IO asks to see 20K -- and you have it -- they can in many cases, lawfully, find another reason to deny entry. In this case the OP was denied on two counts. Even if he had 20K the other reason would stand.

 

A METV does not let you stay up to 9 months. It was never designed as a way to stay in the country for months/years. It is a multiple entry visa designed for people that want to visit frequently, and was targeted primarily at the Asian market.

 

His explusion notice and entry denial stamp clearly give two reasons. But the underlying reason was his cumulative time spent in the country.

 

Using back to back METV's to stay months years is not a legitimate way to stay long term so we can't really complain when immigration say enough. Unfortunately there is a disconnect between consulates that dish out visas for financial gain, and immigration who have to police the border. I wouldn't be surprised if the issue of back to back METV's doesn't soon get clamped down on if the practice grows.

 

I don't think showing bank statements at the border is the solution in cases like this. Typical tourists have hotel bookings, onward flights pocket money, stay for short periods and generally have large gaps between visits. That is the profile IO's are looking for.

 

[elviajero]

6 hours ago, Tony125 said:

11 hours ago, mvdf said:

BRING CASH! Why is it so difficult for English-speaking expats to understand this!? Tourists bring cash with them. No bona fide tourist travels totally cashless! Maligning the Kingdom's border watchdogs for performing their duties is plain wrong. If you all want to avoid problems, follow the rules, instead of challenging them!

No bona fide tourist travels totally cashless?   Are you for real?  Most travelers carry little cash in this day and age as ATM's are prevalent in most countries and they don't want to be robbed. 

No sensible traveller would not carry some cash! Especially in a country where cash is king. What would you do if you had your wallet "robbed"? And I've known several people that have had their foreign bank/credit cards blocked because they haven't notified the issuer that they are abroad. What are you going to do if you get off the plane without any cash and cant get any money out of an ATM?

 

The west is becoming a cashless society; when I'm in the UK I almost never use cash, but when in Thailand it's almost all cash. Having an ATM before passport control to help a small number of visitors to meet the entry requirements doesn't seem necessary to me.

 

And anyone that travels without having some cash or travellers cheques tucked away is asking for trouble.

[Lovethailandelite]

6 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I didn't say that arriving tourists don't need cash. Most tourists carry cash and immigration accept cash in any exchangeable currency so there is no need to change to Thai baht before passport control.

 

Immigration do not, as a general rule, ask tourists to show 10/20K. They, as a general rule, only ask people they are considering to deny entry to who tend to be long term tourists.

 

I am saying that if the IO asks to see 20K -- and you have it -- they can in many cases, lawfully, find another reason to deny entry. In this case the OP was denied on two counts. Even if he had 20K the other reason would stand.

 

A METV does not let you stay up to 9 months. It was never designed as a way to stay in the country for months/years. It is a multiple entry visa designed for people that want to visit frequently, and was targeted primarily at the Asian market.

 

His explusion notice and entry denial stamp clearly give two reasons. But the underlying reason was his cumulative time spent in the country.

 

Using back to back METV's to stay months years is not a legitimate way to stay long term so we can't really complain when immigration say enough. Unfortunately there is a disconnect between consulates that dish out visas for financial gain, and immigration who have to police the border. I wouldn't be surprised if the issue of back to back METV's doesn't soon get clamped down on if the practice grows.

 

I don't think showing bank statements at the border is the solution in cases like this. Typical tourists have hotel bookings, onward flights pocket money, stay for short periods and generally have large gaps between visits. That is the profile IO's are looking for.

 

The Internet visa runner forums are awash with the knowledge that Perth, Australia is the only near place where non residents can easily get a METV. They are all heading there to get the visa.
Immigration are more than aware of the amount of people now using the METV to live here.
I would hazard a guess, that like KL before, Perth will soon stop issuing them too non Australian residents.