Expelled no questions asked at Don Muang

[JackThompson]

 

3 hours ago, pr9spk said:

People who get repeated tourist visas to stay in the country for months and months on end are clearly not tourists, so I agree with them clamping down in order to weed out people who are abusing the visa rules, and in some cases, maybe even doing something dodgy.

They cannot stay "months and months on end" - they can stay 60-days, optionally extended by immigration to 90-days. Then they leave, at which point they can apply for another tourist visa and, if approved, begin another short stay.

 

Someone pointed out earlier, that the rules for entering the Eurozone for some visitors is 90-days in, and 90-days out.  If someone does this 20 times in a row, is it "abuse" of their tourist-system?  No!  That is the rule there, and if they thought that was "too much," they could change their rules. 

 

Thailand has no "time out" period (nor do most countries), so it's not abuse to follow Thai law as written.

 

Quote

Had the OP been reading this site, he would have known that repeated tourist visas, especially with little or no time spent in your own country in-between, are a sure-fire way to pique the interest of Thai immigration.

Only at bad entry-points which do not follow the law.  But, if he had been reading here, he might have known that the Bankgok Airports are run by IOs who don't follow the laws they swore to uphold, so it would be better to enter at Friendship Bridge (a law-abiding entry point), and then fly onward from Udon Thanni by domestic-air.

 

Quote

There are lots of different visas for people who want to stay long term, and yes, you might need to show some financial information to get them but if you're broke, then what are you doing in Thailand in the first place?

The OP was not broke, and the IO was not interested in finding out if he was.  Those with a history of coming more frequently - traveling in and out without overstays - have shown they are not the types who "go broke" while in Thailand (or they would likely be in the IDC, instead).

 

Quote

Try getting back to back tourist visas in Canada without money to fund your stay and see what happens!

The OP had the money to fund his stay - far more than enough.   Canada is a high-wage country, so is more strict about people entering as Tourists - especially from poorer countries - due to them arriving, overstaying, working-illegally, driving down wages for citizens, and becoming a financial-burden to the country.

By contrast, Westerners entering Thailand are financial-windfalls - each spending multiple Thai median-salaries in foreign-sourced funds into the Thai economy.  It is "all financial upside" for Thailand, when one of us visits.

 

3 hours ago, pr9spk said:

That would be common sense. Which is why it isn't happening. The embassy keeps the money for the visa, whilst the tourist is turned away and loses the money for the flights - sounds almost like a scam. It's up to you to know about Thailand's immigration requirements, I suppose, but then it's always been that way for travellers to any country, you need to do your own research to make sure you have the correct documents and visa.

So just because your local embassy has given you a visa, doesn't mean that you will be admitted, especially if you have spent 90% of the last 6 months+ in the country. It's a pretty harsh situation, and the embassy SHOULD be telling you to apply for a different visa, not sure why they are not doing so.

In the case of Thailand, it's not just about knowing what the laws are - visitors "need to know" that there are entry-points that don't follow the law, and to either avoid those, or travel elsewhere.  Once one understands the underlying nature of Thai-Immigration, the experiences dealing with them can be fit into a form that "makes sense". 

 

Consider the difference between paying protection-money to a mob-boss ("nice shop you've got here"), versus buying legitimate insurance for a business.  Once you understand the nature of the entity you are dealing with - you may hate it - but at least it is not surprising when there is no sense of "fair play" involved.

 

The embassies provide the visas, because it is legal to do so, and legal for those receiving them to enter the country with them.  They cannot control rogue-IOs at lawless entry-points, who deny entry based on lies.

 

56 minutes ago, Lovethailandelite said:

They refuse more visas or stamp you as a frequent visitor, which in effect, stops you getting more visas constantly. ... 

... then are advised by people here to change there passport

This is because embassy-staff advise getting a new passport.  I experienced this personally.  That step is a way to verify an applicant has plenty of money (passports aren't cheap) and they do not have warrants for arrest in their country.  Those "on the lam" from the law back home can not achieve this.

Edited March 9, 2019 by JackThompson

[JackThompson]

 

3 hours ago, Ctkong said:

Living using back to back visas and with extensions.

As do many who are married to a Thai - entering on Non-O Visas repeatedly, because many immigration offices refuse to do extensions w/o "agent help" and/or throw up one "unpublished requirement" after another, to avoid doing their job.

 

There is nothing wrong, illegal, improper, etc about using Tourist Visas to spend multiple 60-day periods in Thailand (90-days when/if immigration chooses to give an extension to the 60-days).  If it were improper, the law would state what the limits were - at which point, visitors would have to abide by those.

 

3 hours ago, Ctkong said:

Thailand is getting serious in weeding out the bogus tourists because of the large number of overstayers from all the previous administrations.

Like many countries, Thailand used to treat overstays as "free money" and not make a problem out of it.  When that policy changed, the overstay problem was handled by instituting the well-published overstay-banning rules.  Most on overstay got the message, and left before those took effect, and kept within the stay-limits thereafter.  Others were literally rounded-up.  BJ fairly recently claimed the overstay-backlog was cleared.

 

3 hours ago, Ctkong said:

We find more and more foreigners committing crimes because of lack of funds, drug abuse or simply lack of public civilness.

How are these "found"?  Do you mean, the news-outlets tend to harp on it more, as part of an orchestrated PR campaign do demonize farangs?  I have noticed this.  Yet, we come from civilized countries, and do not cause crime-epidemics.  This is in stark-contrast to that which has occurred in many of our passport-countries.

 

Quote

Thailand seems to be getting lots of white trash recently .

Because the short-stay tourists, who have kept the go-go bars full for decades, were paragons of virtue, until recently?  Credit where it is due - they do spend a lot of money in a week, before heading home.  This is not too surprising, given many had ~350 days of pent-up frustration, before arriving (since their last visit).

 

The longer-stay types (many with long-term relationships) are generally a less "trashy" behaving lot, among Thailand's visitors - though the wealthier ones (not affected by Immigration issues) can afford to keep up a lifestyle of rotating lady-friends.

 

The people Thais tend to think of as "poor trash," with bad manners, tend to come from another prominent nation in the region.  Just ask those who work in tourist areas which types of foreigners they prefer, and which they don't.

Edited March 9, 2019 by JackThompson

[Lovethailandelite]

2 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

They cannot stay "months and months on end" - they can stay 60-days, optionally extended by immigration to 90-days. Then they leave, at which point they can apply for another tourist visa and, if approved, begin another short stay.

 

Someone pointed out earlier, that the rules for entering the Eurozone for some visitors is 90-days in, and 90-days out.  If someone does this 20 times in a row, is it "abuse" of their tourist-system?  No!  That is the rule there, and if they though that was "too much," they could change their rules. 

 

Thailand has no "time out" period (nor do most countries), so it's not abuse to follow Thai law as written.

 

Only at bad entry-points which do not follow the law.  But, if he had been reading here, he might have known that the Bankgok Airports are run by IOs who don't follow the laws they swore to uphold, so it would be better to enter at Friendship Bridge (a law-abiding entry point), and then fly onward from Udon Thanni by domestic-air.

 

The OP was not broke, and the IO was not interested in finding out if he was.  Those with a history of coming more frequently - traveling in and out without overstays - have shown they are not the types who "go broke" while in Thailand (or they would likely be in the IDC, instead).

 

The OP had the money to fund his stay - far more than enough.   Canada is a high-wage country, so is more strict about people entering as Tourists - especially from poorer countries - due to them arriving, overstaying, working-illegally, driving down wages for citizens, and becoming a financial-burden to the country.

By contrast, Westerners entering Thailand are financial-windfalls - each spending multiple Thai median-salaries in foreign-sourced funds into the Thai economy.  It is "all financial upside" for Thailand, when one of us visits.

 

In the case of Thailand, it's not just about knowing what the laws are - visitors "need to know" that there are entry-points that don't follow the law, and to either avoid those, or travel elsewhere.  Once one understands the underlying nature of Thai-Immigration, the experiences dealing with them can be fit into a form that "makes sense". 

 

Consider the difference between paying protection-money to a mob-boss ("nice shop you've got here"), versus buying legitimate insurance for a business.  Once you understand the nature of the entity you are dealing with - you may hate it - but at least it is not surprising when there is no sense of "fair play" involved.

 

The embassies provide the visas, because it is legal to do so, and legal for those receiving them to enter the country with them.  They cannot control rogue-IOs at lawless entry-points, who deny entry based on lies.

 

This is because embassy-staff advise getting a new passport.  I experienced this personally.  That step is a way to verify an applicant has plenty of money (passports aren't cheap) and they do not have warrants for arrest in their country.  Those "on the lam" from the law back home can not achieve this.

Complete rubbish! They absolutely don't tell you to get a new passport. The exact same way as when your denied entry at the airport, your not told to go running around land crossings to gain entry. You can keep on peddling that it's perfectly OK to keep living here on these Tourist visas and swapping passports etc. Let me give you a little tip......This isn't going to see the year out ????

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

I think the best thing would be to set a strict 180 day/year limit for “tourism”, like most rational countries do

That would benefit the people of Cambodia, Vietnam, The Philippines, and Latin America - while harming Thais.  If they were really worried about us working illegally, a 10-day "out" period between entries would solve that.  Most longer/frequent stay tourists could keep their condos year-round, and tolerate 4 "mini-vacations from the permanent-vacation" every year.

 

Making the airports "useable" to them, again, would also allow longer stop-overs, in places further afield - without having to route back through Penang or Vientiane, in order to enter via a law-abiding land-border crossing.

 

The only countries with strict limits have higher-wage economies than Thailand, and/or are intensely xenophobic.  ALL the rest welcome visitors with monthly incomes which are several multiples of their own citizen's median income level.

 

Even among the higher-wage nations - where tourism is less important to the economy and where abuse of tourist-entries (illegal work and overstay) creates more hurdles, generally - if a visitor has 5x+ the median income of their citizens, extended-stay is generally affordable for a person with that income.

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, elviajero said:

The main issue for the authorities is that the immigration system doesn’t currently count time spent in the country, therefore, it would down to manual counting by the IO. The last time they did something similar for visa exempt entries it was scrapped because it was impractical.

It is pretty easy for immigration to impose restrictions on visa exempt entries (and visas on arrival) because those are the responsibility of the Immigration Bureau. They can simply give public notification, and go ahead. (Both the two-per-calendar year by land, and the old using visa exempt entries to stay too long in Thailand notifications are examples.) With entries on visas, you get into a turf war. It is clear that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Immigration Bureau are not on the same page. The MFA believes that screening applicants for eligibility for visas is their responsibility. They will not agree to law changes that have immigration assuming that responsibility, overriding the decisions of their own consuls. As a result, immigration cannot deny entry to those they believe should not have qualified for their visas using publicly disclosed restrictions. They must fall back on misuse of whatever official reasons for denial they can find.

 

If it was just a matter of a notification by the Immigration Bureau that, from such and such a date, entries using tourist visas would be limited to so many days a year, the system support for that could be implemented. They cannot go ahead with such an official increase in their legal power without MFA acquiescence.

[elviajero]

41 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Even Thailand is using computers now. What's the problem do an online check when someone applies?

There is no central record of visas that have been issued that the consulates can use. They can only go by what they see in s passport or their own internal records.

 

Quote

But that's not even the point. Here we talk about people who get a visa somewhere and are denied entry then because have "too many" stamps in their passport. Do officers at the embassies no have eyes to look at the passport before issuing something?

They probably don’t care. Most consulates only exist to sell visas and make money for whoever’s running it.

 

And, as it stands, there are no set limits of “stamps” for them to work to anyway.

Edited March 9, 2019 by elviajero

[JackThompson]

10 hours ago, Lovethailandelite said:

Complete rubbish! They absolutely don't tell you to get a new passport.

Yes they do.  That is exactly what I was told.

Quote

The exact same way as when your denied entry at the airport, your not told to go running around land crossings to gain entry.

On this, you are correct.  They will try hard to deceive foreigners into thinking their lies are "real rules" that are enforced everywhere (although they are not).  I was lied to this way at Poipet ("must fly in with your next TR Visa") on departure, but entered through Ban Laem a week later w/o a problem.

 

Quote

You can keep on peddling that it's perfectly OK to keep living here on these Tourist visas and swapping passports etc. Let me give you a little tip......This isn't going to see the year out ????

You said that about 2 years ago, also.  But maybe you know of a plan by the 'elite' folks - to pay off the other entry points to break the law also, now?

Edited March 10, 2019 by JackThompson

[Lovethailandelite]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

Yes they do.  That is exactly what I was told.

On this, you are correct.  They will try hard to deceive foreigners into thinking their lies are "real rules" that are enforced everywhere (although they are not).  I was lied to this way at Poipet ("must fly in with your next TR Visa") on departure, but entered through Ban Laem a week later w/o a problem.

 

You said that about 2 years ago, also.  But maybe you know of a plan by the 'elite' folks - to pay off the other entry points to break the law also, now?

http://huahinexpatnews.com/?p=10126

 

“I can guarantee it will be easy to apply and live here,” Surachate said. “[But] bad people will have a hard time.”

Proposed changes include abolishing 90-day reports and introducing 10-year visas for foreign retirees, Surachate said. A data link between the immigration and Thailand’s consular affairs around the world was recently established. Experts will also be consulted to see what restricted professions should be open to foreigners.

“The amendment process will take probably about two or three months,” Surachate said – an optimistic assessment when at least half a year is usually needed to pass legislation.

At the same time, he said immigration is working with the Anti-Money Laundering Office to inspect past tax records of expats living in Thailand in order to weed out those with suspicious activities.

 

[ubonjoe]

12 minutes ago, Lovethailandelite said:

Surachate said. A data link between the immigration and Thailand’s consular affairs around the world was recently established.

But no clarification about what that data link is for.

I think it will only be for a check to find out if a person is banned from entering the country similar to the check that is done by airlines now.

[Lovethailandelite]

Just now, ubonjoe said:

But no clarification about what that data link is for.

I think it will only be for a check to find out if a person is banned from entering the country similar to the check that is done by airlines now.

I guess we can debate all day what it is going to do and none of us are truly too know . Without a doubt though, they now have access to each others databases.

[jspill]

17 hours ago, Ctkong said:

Maybe it is less than 180 days a year? Because some years back, on one of my trips to Thailand, I was pulled aside and informed that I would have to give next month’s trip a pass because I had almost overstayed the number of days per period. The lady IO was going thru my passport noting down each entry. I told her I got a GF in Bangkok and since I am Malaysian, I make a monthly trip to see her. Anyway she said ‘ next month cannot enter country’. I still returned the next month and luckily got thru. Seems it is an adhoc situation depending upon the IO you met. 

It's also female IOs, don't use a queue with a female IO. Lots of reports of them being worse.

[jspill]

12 hours ago, Lovethailandelite said:

Complete rubbish! They absolutely don't tell you to get a new passport. The exact same way as when your denied entry at the airport, your not told to go running around land crossings to gain entry. You can keep on peddling that it's perfectly OK to keep living here on these Tourist visas and swapping passports etc. Let me give you a little tip......This isn't going to see the year out ????

I know several guys who got told to get a new passport.

 

I actually expect things to get better after the upcoming elections and end of military rule. Also airport staff are regularly replaced with a new batch, it's a job no one wants to do, long commute. There will always be fresh staff who haven't got the memo to deny people, or who don't care to.

 

Avoid lines with a female IO, and if you see the male IO ahead of you sending lots of people aside for questioning, switch to another line, better yet use the Laos land borders.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Lovethailandelite said:

I guess we can debate all day what it is going to do and none of us are truly too know . Without a doubt though, they now have access to each others databases.

I would not rule-out them doing as you suggest, and limiting access to TR Visas somehow.  Anyone here who is not rich, should have a "Plan B" bug-out-plan regularly updated.  

 

But, I think there are some in the upper-levels who don't support the same agenda as the anti-farang brigade - otherwise they would have changed the rules already.   Also, projections / timelines here are rarely kept - so no telling when any change will actually occur.

[Sheryl]

17 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

It's not the travellers fault if he gets a TV from a thai consulat or embassy and then is refused enter by an IO.

Why let him fly in, put him in detention and send him back to where he came from if only the embassies have to do their work properly. They just have to say "no, you can't get another TV now"

I don't think Thai Embassies and Consulates have access to the Imm database that shows all prior entries and time spent in country, whereas IOs at entry points do.

[lkv]

3 hours ago, Lovethailandelite said:

I guess we can debate all day what it is going to do and none of us are truly too know . Without a doubt though, they now have access to each others databases.

You read too much into this anti foreigner pre election propaganda, destined for local consumption.

 

"We will do this, we will do that." "He said that....".

Edited March 10, 2019 by lkv

[JackThompson]

57 minutes ago, Tayaout said:

I thought it would be better to fly since it's more expensive and not a classical broke ass visa run route.  

Flights out of Vientiane international are the "more expensive" way to return, so clearly those would be the last people targeted, right?  But there we go - trying to apply logic to the situation - big mistake here.

 

Think of each immigration-office and entry point as separate countries, and you have a better framework from which to approach the problem.  The Nong-Khai border post is a "friendly zone" within Thailand, whereas the Bangkok airport entry points are "little Somalias" within Thailand.  

 

To get an idea how convoluted this is - the "immigration office" serving foreigners living in Nong Khai has been reported as Not Friendly, even though the entry-point Is Friendly.

 

Oh, and I love how those making excuses for abuses by immigration based on foreigners being "poorly dressed" were quick to switch to saying you were "too well dressed."  Immigration could begin cutting off heads and hands w/o trials, and these types would applaud it.  They are the same people who sit on juries, and when asked why they voted to convict on flimsy evidence say, "Well, he must have done something, or he would not be on trial."  (data from post-trial polls of USA-jurors)

 

 

Edited March 10, 2019 by ubonjoe
removed quote of a removed post and a comment about it

[tgeezer]

I was browsing the Immigration Act and came upon Permanent Residence I think, it is in Thai, The place where you reside. People in this class are limited to 100 per year and have undergone a vetting process. Retirees are not mentioned specifically in The Act, we are ‘others’ permitted to a max stay of one year. Since the police order refers to us as ‘End of life ‘ people and the implication is that we are here forever, are we not being given permanent status ‘by the back door’? Is it possible that the Chief and others agree with the Immigration Act that too many foreigners living here permanently is a bad thing and is doing something about it?


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Tayaout]

[ubonjoe]

3 minutes ago, tgeezer said:

The place where you reside. People in this class are limited to 100 per year and have undergone a vetting process

That is per country not overall and the quota is set by the cabinet before the applications are accepted during the last few months of the year or even only in December if the cabinet does not set the quota soon enough.

Last years annoucmenet is here. http://bangkok.immigration.go.th/en/base.php?page=residence

[ubonjoe]

Some baiting and inflammatory posts and replies to them have been removed.

[atyclb]

i am aware of a us born us citzen that had a valid student visa and was in attendance at the shool, after visiting family in usa returned to thailand and was denied entry and made to fly back to the usa. they refused to let him fly to cambo or viet despite having visa.

[ubonjoe]

28 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Some baiting and inflammatory posts and replies to them have been removed.

And now another one. A repeat of it will result in a formal warning.

Edit: And now another one I missed earlier.

Edited March 10, 2019 by ubonjoe

[ubonjoe]

12 minutes ago, atyclb said:

i am aware of a us born us citzen that had a valid student visa and was in attendance at the shool, after visiting family in usa returned to thailand and was denied entry and made to fly back to the usa. they refused to let him fly to cambo or viet despite having visa.

That happened to a few people a few years ago when they were cracking down on people with one year extensions entering with a re-entry permit after being out of the country for a long period of time.

No recent cases of it happening since they changed the rules to make it harder to get the extensions.

[totally thaied up]

20 minutes ago, atyclb said:

i am aware of a us born us citzen that had a valid student visa and was in attendance at the shool, after visiting family in usa returned to thailand and was denied entry and made to fly back to the usa. they refused to let him fly to cambo or viet despite having visa.

I read that report on Facebook. He had been coming in for three years using Tourist Visas and exempts. Seems he took his visiting here to 'live' with his girlfriend a step too far, so they returned him home. For what he was doing, he did not have the right visa for the history of his visiting patterns. Needed either an Elite Visa or to Marry. He was living here, so hence, he needs the right visa.

[BritManToo]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

Oh, and I love how those making excuses for abuses by immigration based on foreigners being "poorly dressed" were quick to switch to saying you were "too well dressed."  Immigration could begin cutting off heads and hands w/o trials, and these types would applaud it.  They are the same people who sit on juries, and when asked why they voted to convict on flimsy evidence say, "Well, he must have done something, or he would not be on trial."  (data from post-trial polls of USA-jurors)

It's more about wishing to see other people harmed IMHO.

 

Back on topic,

I find it more and more concerning the IOs are starting to question all VISAs at entry and exit points.

I have friends in Cambodia, and enjoy visiting them, but my non-o (to live with my son) is questioned at AranyapraThat, both on exit and entry. My trip next month I'm flying to HCMC (cheap flight) for 1 week then the bus back through Phnom Penh (1 week Songkran), Siam Reap (1 week ruins) and then Poipet. It'll be interesting to see what they say when I'm only going one way through the Thai border.

Edited March 10, 2019 by BritManToo

[atyclb]

17 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

27 minutes ago, atyclb said:

i am aware of a us born us citzen that had a valid student visa and was in attendance at the shool, after visiting family in usa returned to thailand and was denied entry and made to fly back to the usa. they refused to let him fly to cambo or viet despite having visa.

That happened to a few people a few years ago when they were cracking down on people with one year extensions entering with a re-entry permit after being out of the country for a long period of time.

No recent cases of it happening since they changed the rules to make it harder to get the extensions.

 

interesting.

 

is immigration not allowed to let the person board a flight to viet or cambo rather than make him do the long haul  right after finishing it?

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

interesting.

 

is immigration not allowed to let the person board a flight to viet or cambo rather than make him do the long haul  right after finishing it?

That is at their discretion. Returning the their point of origin is a common requirement.

[atyclb]

7 minutes ago, totally thaied up said:

32 minutes ago, atyclb said:

i am aware of a us born us citzen that had a valid student visa and was in attendance at the shool, after visiting family in usa returned to thailand and was denied entry and made to fly back to the usa. they refused to let him fly to cambo or viet despite having visa.

I read that report on Facebook. He had been coming in for three years using Tourist Visas and exempts. Seems he took his visiting here to 'live' with his girlfriend a step too far, so they returned him home. For what he was doing, he did not have the right visa for the history of his visiting patterns. Needed either an Elite Visa or to Marry. He was living here, so hence, he needs the right visa.

 

assuming that is same case if you have a valid ed visa and in actual attendance at a school are you not free to choose your living situation?

[DrJack54]

7 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

interesting.

 

is immigration not allowed to let the person board a flight to viet or cambo rather than make him do the long haul  right after finishing it?

I don't know why but you are always flown back to where you boarded. Maybe possible exception if someone had 2 passports ie USA and Vietnam.

[atyclb]

1 minute ago, DrJack54 said:

10 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

interesting.

 

is immigration not allowed to let the person board a flight to viet or cambo rather than make him do the long haul  right after finishing it?

I don't know why but you are always flown back to where you boarded. Maybe possible exception if someone had 2 passports ie USA and Vietnam.

 

point of boarding would have been korea,  taipei or japan.  wonder if thai io will allow the denied person the right to get ticket there?