After 11 years in Chiang Mai, I was Denied Entry

[steven100]

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Always a mistake, never speak to IOs or other government officials in Thai, they don't like it.

Happy and a bit stupid is the way to go.

agree fully .....   just act dumb, wai a couple of times ....  say thank you ....  !!

It makes them feel good as they have the 'power over farang'  ....   

then go on your way ... to the bar and laugh about it. 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, cleopatra2 said:

Section 22 states for persons who has entered and subsequently found to be prohibited under section 12.

You are misreading it. This is the translation of Section 22 that is most often used:

Quote

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. If said alien is not satisfied with the competent official’s order, he (alien) may appeal to the Minister. The order of the Minister shall be final.

Appealing cases are not allowed under Section 12 (1) or (10), but if the Minister does not have an order within seven days beginning from the date of submitting the appeal, it is considered that the Minister has ordered that said alien is not forbidden from entering into the Kingdom under Section 12. Appeal must be submitted the competent official within forty-eight hours beginning from the time of received said order from the competent official and must comply with the pattern (and a fee must be paid) an provided in the Ministerial Regulations. When appeal is submitted by the alien concerned, the competent official shall delay deportation of said alien until an order for said case is receive from the Minister. While processing under order of the competent official or while waiting for an order from the Minister, as the case may be, the provisions of Section 20 shall not be applied.

Note the bit I have emphasised. It is clear that Section 12 is applied at the time you try to pass through immigration on arrival in Thailand. If you are subsequently found to be illegally in Thailand, you are arrested, processed by the courts, and subsequently deported. you will never after being illegally in Thailand for a few weeks, suddenly have an immigration official arrive at your house and present you with a form ordering you to leave the country.

[Just Weird]

5 hours ago, thinkingman said:

If there were hard and fast rules (>180 days; more than 3 tourist visas in a 2 year period; etc.), then there would be no opportunity for baksheesh, tea money, bribes or agents.

 

Discretionary authority is what feeds the corruption.

There are no opportunities for baksheesh, tea money, bribes when entering the country at Immigration, neither are there any agents there to assist those who don't meet the IOs requirements!

[NanLaew]

8 hours ago, chrisc38 said:

Since when is having a pocket full of cash not an appropriate means of living in the country

Because that particular "ไม่มีปัจจัยยังชีพ" rule is the easiest one for them to enforce and it is probably used in maybe 99% of their questionable entry denials. You may have missed how they studiously avoided asking to see your cash through the whole rigmarole. It's so they can stick to their manipulation of the law, ie. if they don't ask to see the cash, they can't possibly be shown the cash, therefore the cash simply doesn't exist and they can use "ไม่มีปัจจัยยังชีพ".

 

Indeed it is a pity that you didn't see this stamp sooner and then showed how much you had since I guess it's not often they come up with a foreigner who can speak and read their language reasonably well. However, since you were at that time in a room full of the buggers, the face loss would have been huge and multi-faceted and they would probably have told the AA rep to bugger off before punting you into IDC, leaving you to stew for a few days.... because in the end, they can.

 

Anyway, you claim to be relatively young and wealthy so stop fart-arsing about with LCC's at DMK and regional SETV's, extensions and visa exempt entries and get a bloody Elite card. The 500,000 baht should ease your butt hurt for the next five years or so.

Edited March 22, 2019 by NanLaew

[holy cow cm]

1 hour ago, freedomnow said:

No matter what on the db8 about long-stay on tourista/ed...he got a great run for his money !!

11 years, try doing that anywhere in the world and that is exactly why so many choose LoS to stay long-term if they can.

However, it looks to be ending from June with many hot topic threads coming....

 

Now if I can just pull the trigger and marry my g/f or do a midnight run...'flip of the coin'

What happens in June?

[RJRS1301]

4 hours ago, Misty said:

OP says he's been living in Thailand for 11 years, so if he was earning money, he would be earning it here in Thailand - not abroad.  Or did I miss something.

I think he said he had no need to earn an income, could be independently wealthy,  

[BritManToo]

Just now, RJRS1301 said:

I think he said he had no need to earn an income, could be independently wealthy,  

......... or wealthy parents.

[holy cow cm]

It may or may not be a good answer to turn on your mobile phone and start recording, or recording at certain times like show the cash or whatever is needed. Or bate them with questions and cash in hand recording it and their name tag. What could they possible do to you? Blacklist you?

[buick]

8 hours ago, chrisc38 said:

I have lived in Chiang Mai Thailand for 11 years, I first came to Thailand in 2008 on a business visa. I then switched to an education Visa which I did for 7 years. During those years the rules kept changing until the final straw was i had to renew the visa every three months or something ridiculous so i just stopped doing it. So I went to hcmc for a few months got a tourist visa and came back to Thailand, then I just did tourist visa's from there, went to hcmc a few times, then 4 times in Vientiane until i got a red stamp that read (this person travels to Thailand many times on a tourist visa). I never tried to get a tourist visa again.

So since late 2017 i was just flying in and out of the country every few months, I did this because getting a visa was just a hassle asking for permission to leave the country every time reporting all that and since i like to go to hcmc to see my friends there it was just easier to come in and out every two months, obviously not the cheapest route but i'm not exactly hard up financially. It worked for me.

OP - i hope i'm not being too harsh here but flying to SGN for a few days is definitely one of the cheapest ways to depart/re-enter thailand.  and prior to that, you had the ultimate 'cheap way', first, education visas and second, tourist visas from VTE.  so you've used some of the cheapest methods available.  i used to stay in danang in order to stay out of thailand for awhile, it was one of the cheapest options i could find, and a great place to stay for a few weeks.

 

i spent 8 months a year in thailand for 11 years (2006-2017) until i turned 50 in 2017.  i was stopped around 2011 for too many visa exempts and told to use tourist visas (i obtained every tourist visa in my passport country, USA, after that 'interview' at BKK).  during the last couple years of that period, i also got lazy (like you) on getting tourist visas for every entry. but there were times i didn't need 60 days in the country.  so i'd take a trip to see my friends that live in HKG or MNL and return visa exempt and roll the dice.  unfortunately, visa exempt entries for those with long stay histories are like the kiss of death.  especially at DMK.

 

you've got to come up with new plan and stick with it if you want to continue to stay long periods in thailand.  they've really cracked down and you've got to be fully aware these days.  a simple mental lapse can turn into a 'denied entry'. 

 

 

 

 

 

[ubonjoe]

48 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

To claim it applies to denial of entry , in my opinion is a poor reading of  section 22.

I guess you could twist it around anyway you wanted to. But you should look again and note that it is under Chapter 2 of the act.. 

[RJRS1301]

1 hour ago, Mattd said:

Actually, the way that Thailand is set up there would be no need for a law to be enacted, all acts in Thailand can be supplemented by Ministerial Regulations and also in the case of the Immigration act, police orders.

Ministerial Regulations are extremely difficult to track, even for Thais.

And IO "discretionary" powers, I think the discretionary powers are the things which allow the abuses to occur.

The OP of course by his own admission had no intention of complying with rules/legislation and displays an air of " entitlement" which possibly comes across in his communications with the officials

[brokenbone]

7 minutes ago, buick said:

 you had the ultimate 'cheap way', first, education visas and second, tourist visas from VTE.  so you've used some of the cheapest methods available.

the only visa more expensive then ED visa is 5 year elite visa

[cleopatra2]

28 minutes ago, BritTim said:

You are misreading it. This is the translation of Section 22 that is most often used:

Note the bit I have emphasised. It is clear that Section 12 is applied at the time you try to pass through immigration on arrival in Thailand. If you are subsequently found to be illegally in Thailand, you are arrested, processed by the courts, and subsequently deported. you will never after being illegally in Thailand for a few weeks, suddenly have an immigration official arrive at your house and present you with a form ordering you to leave the country.

No 

I quoting from Krisdika

 

In a case where the competent official discovers that an alien who has entered the Kingdom is prohibited from entering the Kingdom under the provisions of Section 12,

 

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Immigration_Act_B.E._2522.pdf

[BritTim]

2 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

No 

I quoting from Krisdika

 

In a case where the competent official discovers that an alien who has entered the Kingdom is prohibited from entering the Kingdom under the provisions of Section 12,

 

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Immigration_Act_B.E._2522.pdf

The translation could have been better phrased. The meaning is "arriving in Thailand, but prohibited from entering".

 

There has never been a procedure for living illegally in Thailand, and then being asked nicely to please leave.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, edwardandtubs said:

I believe you can fly from Kuala Lumpur to Hat Tai so that could be an option.

The issue would be a lack of reports on that airport - so no telling if the bad-guys have captured it.  With CM, we have enough traffic to know it seems to be OK.  I'd enter by train, then fly out of Hat Yai to where ever.

 

49 minutes ago, cerox said:

I am curious what you guys meant with the attendance scam / payoff. I use ED visas too, I am aware of the new attendance record, but honestly every school I know will just sign that you were there every time. Everyone knows that, it is part of the visa system and this is why ED visas are not cheap. The money paid to school includes some donations to immigration, not only money for the school and teachers.

At some schools, you must pay a "no hassle fee" for every extension to get 3 months.  Otherwise, immigration only gives you 1 or 2 months as punishment.   That's great if your school has it all included in the tuition fee.

 

49 minutes ago, tingtongtourist said:

That when you get the right visa you are screened and vetted from the Thai official consul and that satisfy them of proof of your situation and meet requirements  

I might buy that, if not for the fact they also reject-entry for Tourist Visa holders for the same false-reason (pretending they know they don't have money for their stay.

 

45 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

"I ask her what act i'm actually in violation of as I can't find that in the immigration act....Ok, but you are enforcing it you can't tell me what's the number so i can look it up".

I don't see a problem with this part.  The rest is just descriptive, from the perspective of a person being shafted for no legal reason.

 

46 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

You also do not know much about the authority that the IOs have when faced with situations that you presented!

Someone else who seems to have found the part of the immigration-act, or ministerial/police order which allows denial of entry for "here to long before." Please do enlighten us.

 

30 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

There are no opportunities for baksheesh, tea money, bribes when entering the country at Immigration, neither are there any agents there to assist those who don't meet the IOs requirements!

It has been reported a couple times to be 20K Baht at Poipet/Aranya.  But their primary motivation seems to be to push people into the elite, agent, or edu corruption-revenue schemes, which are negatively affected by Thailand's lack of legal restrictions on tourist-entries. 

Hating foreigners - and especially our independence to travel - just fuels their motivation.  This is why you often read reports (and posts by agents here) saying, "Why / When ... go back to your country," as if that is where we would "have to go" if not in Thailand. 

[Just Weird]

52 minutes ago, Liverpudlian said:

Ever tried taking things with a pinch of salt ?

Ever tried explaining what that is supposed to mean?  Are you suggesting that he invented most of the story of embellished it wildly?

[Just Weird]

3 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

I don't see a problem with this part.  The rest is just descriptive, from the perspective of a person being shafted for no legal reason.

 

Someone else who seems to have found the part of the immigration-act, or ministerial/police order which allows denial of entry for "here to long before." Please do enlighten us.

You said that, not me, I have not claimed to have any particular knowledge of the Immigration Act but I do know that IOs are authorized by virtue of their job to decide who enters and who doesn't.

[JackThompson]

15 minutes ago, RJRS1301 said:

The OP of course by his own admission had no intention of complying with rules/legislation and displays an air of " entitlement" which possibly comes across in his communications with the officials

Asking reasonable things like, "What law are you referring to," can lead them to this perception - especially when they know it doesn't exist.

 

28 minutes ago, holy cow cm said:

It may or may not be a good answer to turn on your mobile phone and start recording, or recording at certain times like show the cash or whatever is needed. Or bate them with questions and cash in hand recording it and their name tag. What could they possible do to you? Blacklist you?

It might be a very bad idea, depending on what the laws are.  No sense breaking a "real law" - giving them that ammunition.

[jspill]

Don't queue up at a booth with a female officer at passport control

[JackThompson]

1 minute ago, Just Weird said:

You said that, not me, I have not claimed to have any particular knowledge of the Immigration Act but I do know that IOs are authorized by virtue of their job to decide who enters and who doesn't.

In Thailand, they are only authorized to reject-entry based on the Immigration Act and Ministerial or Police orders.   There is no legal basis for "here too much/often before" in any of those.

 

That said, the IOs at lawless entry-point are not law-abiding, so that may not do you any good.  As a practical matter, one can only avoid those bad points of entry.

[Just Weird]

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

In Thailand, they are only authorized to reject-entry based on the Immigration Act and Ministerial or Police orders.   There is no legal basis for "here too much/often before" in any of those.

If you say so.  But you'll find that their powers are not as black or white as you seem to think they are.

[dcnx]

8 hours ago, glegolo said:

Agree to 100%.. This guy likes to makes up his own way of approaching things. I suggest he "bends over" and follows the easy route and not be so damn stubborn..

 

glegolo

Not everyone gets on their knees, cradles the balls, and begs for the gravy.

 

Doing things your own way is what makes Thailand enjoyable and attractive. It just didn’t work out this one time for him.

[dcnx]

OP, a new passport should sort you out. I would also only fly in to CNX, avoid BKK at all costs.

 

One of my friends has a similar history, got a new passport and started all over again.

[cleopatra2]

25 minutes ago, BritTim said:

The translation could have been better phrased. The meaning is "arriving in Thailand, but prohibited from entering".

 

There has never been a procedure for living illegally in Thailand, and then being asked nicely to please leave.

Here it is in Thai , from immigration 

 

มาตรา 22 ในกรณีที่พนักงานเจ้าหน้าที่ตรวจพบว่าคนต่างด้าวซึ่งมีลักษณะต้องห้ามมิให้เข้ามาในราชอาณาจักรตามมาตรา 12 เข้ามาในราชอาณาจัก

 

Rough English translation

Section 22 In the event that the competent official detects that an alien who has prohibited characteristics to enter the Kingdom under Section 12, enters the Kingdom

 

 

Taking in context with the rest of the section, regarding giving notification to leave kingdom , and suspension of deportation on receiving appeal. 

It appears to me for the purpose of persons who have entered the Kingdom , not for persons requesting entry at the checkpoint

[KCM]

21 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

You said that, not me, I have not claimed to have any particular knowledge of the Immigration Act but I do know that IOs are authorized by virtue of their job to decide who enters and who doesn't.

Why do you think they stamp their official reason for denial of entry as being not having sufficient funds? There are limited reasons that they are "authorized" to use for denial of entry.

[Fatman666]

1 hour ago, edwardandtubs said:

 

I believe you can fly from Kuala Lumpur to Hat Tai so that could be an option.

I will use this option next month for the first time with a overnight stop in KL. Cheap Air Asia return tickets under 2k THB. 

[BritTim]

28 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

You said that, not me, I have not claimed to have any particular knowledge of the Immigration Act but I do know that IOs are authorized by virtue of their job to decide who enters and who doesn't.

The trouble with that is that the Immigration Act specifically states that, unlike in most other countries, immigration officials do not have that power. They are supposed to deny entry only for the reasons specified in Section 12 of the Immigration Act (and they do actually stamp one of those reasons in your passport, even though their use of it is bogus). Only the Minister has discretion to deny entry to individuals or groups for other reasons. It is possible for the Minister to use Police Orders to instruct officials on other reasons for denied entry (and this is sometimes done with visa exempt entries and visas on arrival). However, the Minister clearly is not supposed to delegate power to officials to deny entry whenever they feel like it.

[lamyai3]

4 hours ago, Old Croc said:

He used education visas or 7 years before stopping because the rules had become ridiculous! Possibly the need to prove attendance at the institution?

I'd have thought the fact the OP is proficient in speaking, reading and writing is evidence enough that he used the education visa in exactly the way he was meant to. Perhaps he was referring to the required doubling of class hours and fees - it's well documented that the crackdown on this type of visa a few years ago made it a far less user-friendly option. 

[thecyclist]

7 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Always a mistake, never speak to IOs or other government officials in Thai, they don't like it.

Happy and a bit stupid is the way to go.

That last point is debatable :With some of them speaking Thai can help immensely, others don't like it. Junior officers more likely than not appreciate your speaking Thai, with supervisors, that are proud of their English skills, it might not be a good idea :They're losing face :Thailand is all about face. 

[lamyai3]

4 hours ago, dbrenn said:

ไม่มีปัจจัยยังชีพ translates more directly to 'doesn't have a current occupation'

 

It seems like they're expecting tourists to be doing something for a living somewhere else, unless of course you pony up the cash for an Elite visa. Times have changed. 

This was also indicated in regard to the rules they bought in for the new METV in 2015. Proof of employment was never part of the requirements previously, when applying for the older double or triple entry tourist visas.