Expelled no questions asked at Don Muang

[BritTim]

51 minutes ago, JAG said:

An Immigration Officer's prerogative to refuse entry to visa holders is by no means confined to Thailand, it exists in many/most countries, including the UK and USA. There is I believe an "on the spot" appeals procedure (form TM12?) which can be used to challenge the refusal.

Better stated, unlike in Thailand, immigration officials in countries like the US and UK have the power by law to refuse entry if they feel this is warranted. It is true that an appeals procedure is supposed to exist , but one of the other ways the law is being flouted is by preventing those denied entry from submitting appeals. 

[jimn]

5 hours ago, Essecola said:

Racist? Excuse me? So onward from becoming a minority in the country I was born in, where is the place in the world I call 'home' then? Where most of the people look the same as me. Will Thai people ever be having their passports checked by a farang when returning home from a trip? (No, never). These are points one of my Asian friends at 'home' pointed out to me in conversation once in reference to how him and others like him laugh about things like that when in private with other Asians. About how stupid we are. And somehow it makes me a racist? Please. I still dont know the place in the world that I call 'home'. But the Thais, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, and Indians & many others will not ever need to worry about this as they are not minorities in their own countries that they built and developed. Ah, but me just simply spending money here, not disturbing anyone, as part of a group of people, foreigners, that is near 1% of the place, is "too uncomfortable" for some. I see. Not a racist sir, sorry. These are just facts.

Thank you for your well structured reply. However there are 2 points here. Firstly. The fact is yes I agree that there is racism on a large scale in Thailand. I also suspect although I have no evidence that the same exists in China, Japan, Vietnam and India, you dont see many of these races mixing or marrying outsiders. Secondly your issue with as you call it "home" is where your problem lies. Home to many is where they were born, to others it is where they have chosen to live. You feel there are too many asians where you came from "home". An asian checking your passport shows an inclusive society, not a racist society, that you seem to be advocating is wrong with that country. Get real my friend. Yes it is racist over here, if you didnt know that before you came here you know it now. It doesnt excuse your point about asians checking passports in your home country. I suggest you decide on where you want to spend your life going forward, be responsible for your own actions and stop blaming others. Look inwards to yourself.

 

[BritTim]

39 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

And about the OP: he just should apply for a non O visa, which he should have done in the past. He was just found as using a tourist visa while not being a tourist

On what basis should he have applied for a Non O visa?

[ThomasThBKK]

20 minutes ago, Tayaout said:

What non O visa is available to me? My wedding is not done yet and my child still unborn. 

Nothing really without a job. Normal Jobs prolly don't make sense here for you as u seem to have money. 

 

So basically you are down to  3-4 options: 

 

1) thai elite visa, 1 mio thb for 20 years or 500k for 5 years. 

2) An ED visa, which is quite uncertain for long term

3) use sth like igluu, they hire you and get you a work permit. You run parts of your business (income) over them. They take a cut and pay your taxes. That's good long term as you are edligible for a permanent residency or passport later. 

4) Setup your own thai co Ltd, hire a bunch of thais and get a work permit for yourself. 

5) Try to get a BOI setup and running (complicated but doable) 

 

I went with 1 as i am too lazy for the others and also too young for retirement. 

 

 

Best of luck ???? 

[JimmyJ]

 
21 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:
"He had over 200,000 baht in cash with him...."


    21 hours ago, Vacuum said:

    "Are you sure (could be on a credit/debit card or in the bank), he also mentioned Bitcoins, hence my thoughts that he didn't have the money in cash. I could be wrong though."

 

Good grief!

 

 "He said he had 200k in cash. So it is thoroughly unclear what that means.

That may mean it was in the bank, or that he had loaned it 2 years ago to a guy named Shecky or Joe or maybe Bill, or that he saw it in his hand in a dream he had yesterday or last week.

Why can't people be precise?"

Edited March 9, 2019 by JimmyJ

[JackThompson]

10 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

You can't compare the elite visa like that, its special....

 

You can maybe compare it to the golden visa in portugal and spain which coasts 350000/500000 EUR, the Investment Visa in the USA for 1 mio USD, the hungary and bulgaria investment visas for 1 mio EUR...

 

10 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

... cannot be compared to others like NON-O visa or retirement where u need to qualify actually.

The "investment extension" option for Thailand is 10M Baht - about 1/3 of the offers you cite from the other countries - which is a separate thing entirely from the Elite "legal payoff" visa, which is indeed "special," in that respect. 

The actual investment-based extension allows continual renewal for as long as you hold the investments - doesn't just "expire" - and you "own" the investments, vs basically burning a pile of money in a trash-can, for temporary-permission to spend yet more money in Thailand with actual legit-businesses - minus what you had to burn-up for that privilege.

The process of "qualifying" in Vietnam, The PI, and Cambodia is so easy, that it is hardly worth thinking about.  No need to burn piles of money, or pay years in advance.  This, in stark contrast to the nightmare getting worse year after year like Thailand - recently "enhanced" with "post extension bank-book reviews" at some offices, making life even worse for honest applicants. 

The only logical reason for Thailand making things this difficult would be to maximize agent-money and increase elite-visa sales.  It doesn't make sense from any other angle except for xenophobia, which I view more as way to motivate low-level IOs to senselessly hate and attack us - in service to the monetary-goals.

[JustAnotherHun]

How long does it take to do all the paperwork and requested translations to marry a thai? And if they really refuse him to enter the country now would it be an option to take the girl back to canada, marry her there and apply then for a non-o based on mariage?

[Khunangkaro]

16 hours ago, Tayaout said:

 

The stamp reads "ไม่มีปัจจัยยังชีพ" = No subsistence. 

I suppose that points at Clause .2 under Section .12

"Having no appropriate means of living following entrance into the kingdom."

Also read: "ubonjou Post #134"

Then it is not about showing whatever amount of money.

Edited March 9, 2019 by Khunangkaro
redacted writing error

[Tongjaw]

10 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

 
21 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:
"He had over 200,000 baht in cash with him...."


    21 hours ago, Vacuum said:

    "Are you sure (could be on a credit/debit card or in the bank), he also mentioned Bitcoins, hence my thoughts that he didn't have the money in cash. I could be wrong though."

 

Good grief!

 

 "He said he had 200k in cash. So it is thoroughly unclear what that means.

That may mean it was in the bank, or that he had loaned it 2 years ago to a guy named Shecky or Joe or maybe Bill, or that he saw it in his hand in a dream he had yesterday or last week.

Why can't people be precise?"

Post # 13, OP stated “ I had 200,000 cash with me.” Seems pretty clear and precise to me. 

[Vacuum]

29 minutes ago, BritTim said:

unlike in Thailand, immigration officials in countries like the US and UK have the power by law to refuse entry if they feel this is warranted

I thought that the IO's in Thailand had had the same power, i.e. their word is the law.

[Vacuum]

27 minutes ago, BritTim said:

On what basis should he have applied for a Non O visa?

Getting married and apply for a marriage extension after one month?

[Vacuum]

19 minutes ago, JimmyJ said:

He said he had 200k in cash

Where did he say that?

[JustAnotherHun]

7 minutes ago, Vacuum said:

Where did he say that?

Post 13, first page

[BritTim]

9 minutes ago, Vacuum said:

I thought that the IO's in Thailand had had the same power, i.e. their word is the law.

Your assumption is a common one that can only be dispelled by reading the Immigration Act. That act lays out the conditions under which people can be admitted or denied entry. To deal with exceptions, there are two relevant sections:

Quote

Section 14

The Minister shall have power to issue public notice in the Government Gazette requiring the alien entering into the Kingdom to have with either money or bond, or shall have power to order an exemption under any condition. The public notice issued by the Minister under the first paragraph of this section shall not apply to children under the age of twelve years.
 

Section 16

In the instance where for reason of national welfare or safeguarding the public peace, culture, morality, or welfare, or when the Minister considers it improper to allow any alien or any group of alien to enter into the Kingdom, the Minister shall have power to exclude said alien or group aliens from entering into the Kingdom.

Other sections make clear that, excepting the Minister, the "competent official" only has the power to question those arriving to determine whether they meet the requirements for entry as specified in the law or in exceptions decided by the Minister.

[Vacuum]

2 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Post 13, first page

Thanks, I missed that.

[zhangxifu]

20 hours ago, elviajero said:

You were probably denied under section 12 (2), which has nothing to do with how much money you have on you. It is because you don’t have the “appropriate” means of living in the country such as a proven income, job in Thailand or cash in the bank.

 

If so it’s a legal way for them to deny entry to someone they consider has spent too long in the country as a tourist.

Yes, that is the meaning of the stamp they have. And that's why I always carry documents of chanots in my name, main Thai bank accounts, wife's documents with me while travelling just in case needed. I have never worked in Thailand. Do you think those docs would have saved the op in this case? I would imagine the first thing he said was family, as he says about to be married.

I think it's a legal, very loosely defined way to deny entry. And sometimes very much bogus.

[JimmyJ]

11 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Post 13, first page

As well as post 1.

[JackThompson]

 

 

8 hours ago, rott said:

It would be be better if the rules were clearer, then people would know what is acceptable and what is not.

Pshaw.  It is "in our interest" to be able to play "Thai Immigraton Lottery" every time we enter at lawless entry point.  Don't you see how lucky we are, to be able to "maybe" get in one more time?  Some have been lucky may times, and maybe you will be too!! 

 

How can you insist on this weird "certainty" stuff, when having your world potentially turned upside-down arbitrarily by IOs in a crooked system is soooo much better? 

 

Never mind they could set up published-rules with a "no hassle" baseline, with "might get denied" above that, allowing the gamblers to test their luck if they want, while taking FEAR out of the equation for everyone else.   Nope - can't have that - the arbitrary IO-Lottery system with FEAR will drive out the maximum number of evil-farangs (we are inherently evil, you know, with our troublesome anti-corruption views), so shall remain en-force.

 

8 hours ago, rott said:

Source for this please Jack.

Are you able to quote solid figures for this?

Not solid yet - but want to bet?  Consider, an early report - just after the new-rules were announced from an agent-source - indicated the fees in Pattaya were going to go up, because the agents and IOs had worked out a system where applicants (or their agents) would have to come-back every 90-days to "prove they still had the money."   Just as predicted, that has now been verified by the letters given to those applying there since March 1st at that location.  So, it appears that scam will go forward - with "extra fees" for each "bank book checkup" - in addition to the initial-fee.   I haven't read a report yet on a change to the initial-fee (was 12.5K to 15K, before).

CW-Bangkok, OTOH, is not issuing these "must return" letters, but an early report indicated those filing there "should have an updated bank book" when returning to the office for future service (90-day reports, etc).  The IO at CW said that "each office" can make up it's own enforcement rules (explaining why none were published officially). 

 

This "flexibility" allows Jomtien to set up a "quadruple dipping" agent-fee system (4 bank-book checks/yr) - though we don't know if they will do that many, yet.  It is possible the one return visit will satisfy their thirst (for now). 

Edited March 9, 2019 by JackThompson

[rott]

6 hours ago, elviajero said:

Rubbish. I am well aware of how the rules are enforced. And with discretionary power will come inconsistency.

 

It is not a false reason. 

 

To deny someone for staying to long would require regulations stating what is too long. The authorities are currently avoiding that — which long term tourists benefit from — and they don’t need to pass regulations because they can lawfully deny long term tourists under the catch all of 12 (2).

 

Better for who!?

 

Under the ‘discretionary’ enforcement policy only a few ‘westerners’ get denied entry and many continue to stay months/years.

 

You’re a turkey voting for Christmas. Set limits will mess it up for all long term tourists!

 

They were not denied entry for having insufficient funds!

 

They could have been carrying 1M baht and still lawfully be denied entry.

 

What a ridiculous comment. I’m not conIdoning it and I have no influence to encourage it.

 

I am simply exlaining the law and why the claims of unlawful corrupt behaviour by IO’s denying entry to long term tourists is complete nonsense.

No, refusing entry to someone carrying 200,000 baht on the grounds of insufficient funds is complete nonsense. And you make Thailand look bad by backing it up, when apparently IO's from neighbouring states think it is funny.

 

Years ago a rule was introduced stating a max of 180 days in one year on tourist visas (might have been 90 days in 180) but was never enforced. If it was people would know where they stood and could plan accordingly.

 

Are you actually in Thailand? You seem to post at odd hours.

 

[HiSoLowSoNoSo]

On ‎3‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 9:32 AM, Tayaout said:

the IO got pressured after a meeting with their superior because too much farang stay in Thailand

Wonder what TAT says about this?

 

[jacko45k]

21 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

I can only suspect that the IO has made a personal decision that the Op has spent too much time in country and decided to take the law into his own hands and reject him - somewhat of a power trip. 

 

It is often cited that 'insufficient funds' is used as a general block for people they don't want to stamp in. In this case the IO was very much wrong, but of course they can't be. 

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, dbrenn said:

I think that Thailand just prefers package tourists these days, which is easier  for them

But why is it easier/better?  Higher volume = more infrastructure/overhead = more costs.  The Thai taxpayer subsidizes these visitors.  Those who stay in one place 3 mo at a time are more efficient.   And then there is the fact that to keep the "package tourist" numbers up (as China's economy slows), poorer visitors are being encouraged with discount/free VOA offers; they clearly don't have a lot to spend.

 

The only advantage I can see, is for the businesses who partner with the package-tour companies.  They arrange have the buses stop and the visitors spend (what money they have), exclusively with them.  No doubt they spread envelope (or suitcase) money around to keep this "arrangement" functioning. 

 

Meanwhile, all other businesses lose out big with this system due to Thailand becoming a less attractive place to visit due to overcrowding tourist-areas with the package-hordes, combined with their "frequent-visitor" customers being actively driven away by immigration.

 

3 hours ago, swbaggies said:

There are many Thai people with Chinese and mixed race background. Just as there are many British people with African, Caribbean and Asian backgrounds. Many of whom may have been born in that country. 

So to say all immigration officers in this country are 100%thai from including their family tree is a bit unlikely. 

But what culture to they express / live-by?  That is the pertinent question.  It's not about skin-color - see the Hutus and the Tutsis, or the struggles in Ireland.  Either the vast-majority share a common core-culture, or separate states must be carved out for each group, to avoid each ethnic-bloc attempting to dominate and exploit the others.

 

Thailand is smart not to allow foreigners to own land, or give away birthright-citizenship to those w/o a Thai parent.  Limiting voting to only those with 4 Thai grandparents would not be a bad idea - just to ensure only the fully-assimilated could influence policy. 

 

To the extent that cultural-pollution is considered an issue, that cannot be stopped w/o cutting off the Internet and all other international telecommunications.  Blocking farang visitors won't make a dent in this. 

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, JAG said:

An Immigration Officer's prerogative to refuse entry to visa holders is by no means confined to Thailand, it exists in many/most countries, including the UK and USA.

Thailand IOs are not given the same power by the Thai Immigration Act as exist in those other countries, where higher-wages require more stringent measures to prevent illegal-working by those entering as tourists.

 

2 hours ago, JAG said:

There is I believe an "on the spot" appeals procedure (form TM12?) which can be used to challenge the refusal.

People have tried, and their attempts ignored.  It is important to remember, when one is dealing with a Lawless Entry Point zone, the IOs there will not care what "the law" is. 

 

They stamp 12(x) as a CYA measure, to cover their lie from being explored outside of their fiefdom - but within that fiefdom, there is no Law en-force beyond "What I say goes."

 

2 hours ago, JAG said:

significant abuse, which has often been boasted about here and elsewhere, principally in the area of proving income for retirement and education visas.

Well reported here, that IOs work consistently with agents to maintain a system of bypassing the income for retirement extensions, and work with schools to extort money for each ED extension. 

 

The problem is entirely "internal" and never required any change to what we foreigners needed to do.  The solution was to bust the criminals in their ranks. Clearly, that is not part of their plan.  Hence, with each so-called "crackdown," (ED, Retirement "seasoning", etc) they have increased the corruption-revenue to the criminals within, which gives a clue to the nature and corruption-beneficiary status of the people at the top.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, JustAnotherHun said:

How long does it take to do all the paperwork and requested translations to marry a thai? And if they really refuse him to enter the country now would it be an option to take the girl back to canada, marry her there and apply then for a non-o based on mariage?

A few days - I'd give it a week if starting early on a Monday.  That includes getting documents from his embassy (freedom to marry doc plus a stamped copy of his face-passport page), getting translations done, getting MFA stamps on all that, and then getting legally-married at an amphoe.  The "do it in one day" routine is long-over. 

 

He may have to do some "amphoe shopping" or even hire a "marriage agent" to get an amphoe to allow him to marry.  Yes - the amphoes have their own agent-racket, and many will treat your fiance like a traitor unless/until paid-off - just like many immigration offices.  Marriage "agents" ran about 10K Baht, last I checked - can be found just off the Train-stop closest to Wireless Rd in Bangkok.  Check with a few, and get the best offer.  That price should include the translations and MFA certifications of everything - so you can get it all done as a "package deal" and not have to worry about a translation-error, or other (often invented) roadblock.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, rott said:

Years ago a rule was introduced stating a max of 180 days in one year on tourist visas (might have been 90 days in 180) but was never enforced. If it was people would know where they stood and could plan accordingly.

The rule only applied to visa-exempt entries, and was 90-days per 180 days.  It was expressly rescinded and replaced by a later ministerial order (which was then rescinded/replaced by another, which is current).  All of these only concern visa-exempt entries.

 

55 minutes ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

Wonder what TAT says about this?

Most recent I've seen:

 

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Khunangkaro said:

The stamp reads "ไม่มีปัจจัยยังชีพ" = No subsistence. 

I suppose that points at Clause .2 under Section .12

"Having no appropriate means of living following entrance into the kingdom."

Also read: "ubonjou Post #134"

Then it is not about showing whatever amount of money.

200K Baht is plenty of "means of living" for the 60-days stamp he should have received.  Of course, they didn't bother to even ask if he had a "means of living," since that was not the real reason they denied his entry - just a LIE they stamped, to cover up their crime.

 

1 hour ago, zhangxifu said:

Yes, that is the meaning of the stamp they have. And that's why I always carry documents of chanots in my name, main Thai bank accounts, wife's documents with me while travelling just in case needed. I have never worked in Thailand. Do you think those docs would have saved the op in this case? ...

He was not given the opportunity to present any documents or even asked relevant (or any) questions.

 

1 hour ago, JustAnotherHun said:

If he is short of money to proof the required sums because of the sharp decline of all western currencies it's a true mess. I understand the disappointment and depression of people realizing their money is worth less year by year. But it is not Thailand who's to blame for.

They raised the limits when the Baht was in decline, so why not lower the limits as the Baht gets stronger?  That's a rhetorical question, of course - expecting some sort of "fairness" from immigration is a joke.  Instead, they have made it even more expensive to qualify to remain-retired here (by increasing seasoning-times) - or remain-married at some offices, where that seasoning is now "post-application" extended through the 1 to 2 month "under consideration" period. 

Edited March 9, 2019 by JackThompson

[dbrenn]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

volume = more infrastructure/overhead = more costs.  The Thai taxpayer subsidizes these visitors. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. Tourism is classed as an invisible export: tourists bring in foreign currency, and spend money in local businesses, creating jobs and boosting Thailand's balance of trade. Yes, there are far too many of them, but nobody cares about that while there's money to be made. 

 

With 35 million of them each year, immigration appears to have neither the time nor the inclination to deal with problem cases. 

 

[dbrenn]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

 give away birthright-citizenship to those w/o a Thai parent

This is also untrue. Foreigners who live and work in Thailand can get Thai citizenship. 

[JackThompson]

2 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

This is also untrue. Foreigners who live and work in Thailand can get Thai citizenship. 

They do not get it by "birthright," though.  In the USA, for example, a pregnant illegal-alien crosses the border and has a child, and that child is given "birthright citizenship" (per a twisted-interpretation of a Constitutional amendment added to ensure citizenship for the children of former-slaves).

 

5 minutes ago, dbrenn said:

Nothing could be further from the truth. Tourism is classed as an invisible export: tourists bring in foreign currency, and spend money in local businesses, creating jobs and boosting Thailand's balance of trade. Yes, there are far too many of them, but nobody cares about that while there's money to be made. 

 

With 35 million of them each year, immigration appears to have neither the time nor the inclination to deal with problem cases.

In general, I agree on the positive-effects of tourism - but this is least the case with high-volume / low-spending "package tour" tourists.

 

I do not understand how those immigration labels as "problem-cases" (only at some entry-points, where the actual laws are not followed) are actually some sort of "problem."  They are a "problem" to who or what and why? 

[Nyezhov]

14 hours ago, Essecola said:

But my country is "for sharing". Ah but not here. Oh no. 1% of another people just spending their money is too uncomfortable. "This is ours" they say. But then when I "go back home" , I have to show my passport to an Asian when entering and I am a minority there too. The phrase "if you dont like it, go home" pops up often. So ok, where is my "home" then, where 99% of ppl look like me? Thai people can be in Thailand where it is 99% Thai. 

I say the same thing. There arent a lot of countries where 99% of the folks are like me: fat, ugly and stupid.