Denied Entry at Phuket

[scubascuba3]

• Expulsion notices are written in Thai and English. 
• You aren't admitting to anything, but acknowledging why you're being prohibited entry, and the right to appeal.
• You are liable, under law, for the cost of "accommodation" whether you sign or not.

So you can appeal? I'm sure I've read they don't let you anyway

[jackdd]

13 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

Several members have commented in this post that the airlines appear to charge passengers who have been refused entry excessively high fares to return them to their original point of embarkation or to another destination if allowed by Immigration.  I’m not sure that this is the case.

[...]

Your argumentation is of course correct, but i think nobody said that the airlines are extorting money, just that the tickets are expensive, which they objectively are, for a reason.

 

The advantage if you refuse to pay is that most airlines won't even try to recover these costs, you just should not try to fly with them again, which means you don't have to pay anything.

And even if the airlines try to recover these costs you will pay way less than if you buy a ticket. Because i think that, at least in a consumer friendly country, they can only claim compensation for costs which they really had and which they have to prove.

If they put the person on a seat which was empty anyway, this costs them nearly nothing (a bit money for the extra fuel used by the 100kg exta weight, a bit of cleaning, a bit food). The highest cost is probably the fee they have to pay to the airport for processing the passenger.

So if they are really threaten to sue you, offer them 50% of what the cheapest ticket costs and they will take it, they won't get more than this in court anyway. Which means you will pay maybe 25% of what a last minute ticket would cost you.

[jackdd]

15 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You are liable, under law, for the cost of "accommodation" whether you sign or not. 

Under law the airline has to pay, so if you don't sign a document saying that you will pay they can't charge you.

The expense of detaining an alien shall, under Section 19 and 20 be charge to the account of the owner, or person in charge, of the conveyance bringing the alien into the Kingdom.

[emptypockets]

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Many denied had Tourist Visas, though this is considered "less risky".  Even those with METVs have been denied, to spite the higher financials shown to obtain those.

 

Also Swampy, Krabi, Phuket, and Samui airports, and the Poipet/Aranyaprathet land-border.  All of these should be avoided by those staying more than a couple weeks - and only occasionally.

 

Yes, those denied had spent prior time in Thailand - though there is no clear time-frame to rely upon.  It is not just those with only a few days out between entries who are reporting problems.  Even those with more frequent/longer stays months before - including "snowbirds" who leave for 6-mo stretches every year - have been interrogated and/or denied-entry (even with a Tourist Visa).

 

The IOs there want "longer staying" tourists removed from Thailand.  They believe the Immigration Act is insufficient, and they should be able to deny-entry for reasons not permitted within the law.  So they do this, and nothing is done to stop them.

 

Are almost all who visit are 1st time or rare/short visitors.  In recent years, a huge number come in on cheap package tours, receiving "free" or "discounted" VOA, such that the cost of overhead to the country may exceed the benefits of their spending.  While this makes "tourist numbers" look high, those making money on this "package tourism" are externalizing the infrastructure-costs, while internalizing profits.

Perhaps you should add a footnote to all your posts on these matters :

'The above statements are my opinion only and should not be relied upon when planning you trip to Thailand'

 

[elviajero]

21 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

So you can appeal? I'm sure I've read they don't let you anyway

 

Yes you can appeal. Whether they let you or not is another matter. One person claimed they wanted to appeal but wasn’t allowed.

 

I can’t see how a case like the OP’s would be successful anyway, and you could be in detention for up to 7 days while the appeal is considered.

[sanemax]

22 minutes ago, elviajero said:

• Expulsion notices are written in Thai and English. 
• You aren't admitting to anything, but acknowledging why you're being prohibited entry, and the right to appeal.
• You are liable, under law, for the cost of "accommodation" whether you sign or not.

Just going by what I have read on these forums, they arent written in English and I dont think that they are "Expulsion notices" , because they are being refused entry and not expelled .

   If signing the papers , you are agreeing with the reason as to why they refused you entry and admiring guilt/error and this liable for accommodation and flight costs .

  Can you post the law which states your point number 3 ?

[emptypockets]

6 hours ago, mngmn said:

Some guidelines for those who really understand the current limits of 'AI'.

 

'If its written in Python (program code), its probably machine learning.  If its written in PowerPoint its probably AI.'

 

The new immigration system will most likely be neither machine learning or AI but simply a codification of 'the rules' for immigration officers to follow.

PowerPoint..... Surely you don't mean the same format as many have experienced over their working years aka death by PowerPoint?

That is artificial intelligence?  Most of the PP I have suffered through could be better described as no intelligence!

[elviajero]

12 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Under law the airline has to pay, so if you don't sign a document saying that you will pay they can't charge you.

You’re right, the ‘alien’ can only be charged if there is no airline etc. that immigration can charge.

 

So the advice is not a blanket don’t sign anything, but don’t sign anything agreeing to pay for accommodation.

 

Expulsion notices do not mention the cost of detention.

[JackThompson]

 

1 hour ago, Lovethailandelite said:

I told you last week. The big change is coming. Wait until they release this new immigration act.

From one of your links, this seems lower than the current 20K / 10K rules:

Quote

... those entering the country must have a credit limit of more than 8,000 baht and may have to be outstanding in the account for more than 6 months...

... though it could be the translation.  The other article talked about stopping criminals - which we all support, provided the rules are actually designed for that purpose, and not for another purpose hidden behind a smoke-screen so-called reason (as happened with the retirement-rules, recently).

 

1 hour ago, Lovethailandelite said:

I could tell you something but it's futile. You would never believe me. I would simply be wasting my time ????

"I've got a secret"?  You have made many predictions in the past, which have not come to pass.  Maybe this one will - I freely admit I don't know what "they" might do or when, as I don't have a partner who works for immigration or some other inside-angle. 

 

But, I did read the translation of what you linked, and there is nothing there which provides anything clear about the future.

 

Quote

You are 100% going to have something too complain about then.

My primary complaint is the IOs are not following a set of published rules at many bad points of entry - literally making up their own rules on the fly.   I see nothing in what has been written in your links which would apply to the OP, or to those being denied-entry with valid Tourist Visas.

 

If they write bad rules, as was recently done to retirees (to maximize corruption profits via agents, in that case), rather than accomplish something constructive, that will indeed be unfortunate - but much more for the people of Thailand than the expats who can simply go somewhere else to spend their foreign-sourced income.

 

This is the important point to remember, especially to those who gloat at the misfortune of their fellow expats: Any bad decisions made by immigration, which negatively affect Western visitor numbers, hurt Thais far more than the Westerners who move to Vietnam.  Each one of us that leaves un-employs several Thais.  If they manage to get a job serving the "tour group" types, it will be for far less compensation.  Therefore, unless one dislikes the Thai people, they should hope that immigration makes it easier for visitors from wealthier nations to enter easily, and as often as possible - as it was just a few years ago.

[BritManToo]

55 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

f you want to book a flight a month ahead you stand a good chance of obtaining a cheap fare.  Try booking that same flight in a weeks’ time and the fare will undoubtedly have increased.  However, if you want to book a flight on the same, or next, day you can expect to pay substantially more. 

And yet 20 years back, last minute tickets were the cheapest.

[007 RED]

1 hour ago, Lovethailandelite said:

I told you last week. The big change is coming. Wait until they release this new immigration act. You are 100% going to have something too complain about then.

 

The committee has been working on eleven main changes to immigration rules and penalties since January. 

 

Other changes include the stamps that will be used by immigration. A new flag shaped design is in the offing.

 

In a related story Lt-Gen Surachate himself said that a ministerial committee will discuss the proposals this week with implementation expected after Songkran on April 22nd. 

 

TNA called the present era "Yuk Big Joke" (the era of Big Joke) in their feature on the proposed changes. 

 

Sources: TNA | TNA

Your quite correct when you point out that Lt. Gen. Surachate (AKA Big Joke) has announced that there is a committee looking into proposed changes to the current Immigration Act.

 

However, He (Big Joke) does not have the authority to introduce a new Immigration Act, or to make any modifications to the original Act.  That can only be done by Parliament.

 

At present the committee (comprising representatives from several Ministries - MoI, MFA, TAT)  is considering several proposed options to amend the Immigration Act.  As this is Thailand, committees tend to ruminate for ever so there is no telling as to when they will come up with any concrete proposals.  Big Joke's estimates of the proposals being implemented on the 24 April are a little over exaggerated to say the least.

 

Once the committee has decided on what changes to the Immigration Act they consider expedient, those proposals will be submitted to the Minister of the Interior who has overall responsibility for the Immigration Act. 

 

The Minister may return those proposals to the committee with his, or her, recommend changes for further consideration.  Once the Minister approves the proposals he, or she, will need to submit the proposals to Parliament for approval which will have several readings (and possible amendments) before being passed to the upper house for approval.  Once Parliament has given it approval to the proposal, it then has to be submitted to the King for his approval and once the King has approved the proposal it is normally a month before those proposals can come into effect (law).

 

Given the current state of play (election wise) it is highly unlikely that a new Government will be place and up and running until June at the earliest.  Even then I would expect that there will be other matters that will take priority over any proposed changes to the Immigration Act.

 

FYI…. It is highly unlikely that committee will even consider changing the stamps used by Immigration to a “new flag shaped design” as the shape of stamps used by Immigration worldwide are governed by the UN under the auspices of International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to ensure uniformity.  At present there is no ICAO approval for flag shaped Immigration stamps.

 

Also knowing how loyal Thais are to their flag it is incomprehensible that the Government would allow someone to write on their flag.  No doubt there is a law that prohibits defacing the Thai flag.

[elviajero]

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

Just going by what I have read on these forums, they arent written in English and I dont think that they are "Expulsion notices" , because they are being refused entry and not expelled .

You are being refused entry and expelled.

 

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

   If signing the papers , you are agreeing with the reason as to why they refused you entry and admiring guilt/error and this liable for accommodation and flight costs .

You’re not being charged with anything to admit guilt to.

 

5 minutes ago, sanemax said:

  Can you post the law which states your point number 3 ?

I was wrong. They can only charge the alien if they haven’t got a carrier to charge.

 

Here’s an expulsion notice.

[007 RED]

Just now, BritManToo said:

And yet 20 years back, last minute tickets were the cheapest.

Sorry.... but those day have long gone... today its all about the bottom line  AKA Profit.

[sweatalot]

10 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

I once took China Southern from Nagoya, via Shanghai AND Guangzhou to Chiang Mai. Even though it was business class never again.

Why never again?

[BritManToo]

Just now, 007 RED said:

Sorry.... but those day have long gone... today its all about the bottom line  AKA Profit.

And it wasn't 20 years back?

I'd rather fill all my seats at any price than fly the plane empty.

[BritManToo]

3 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

However, He (Big Joke) does not have the authority to introduce a new Immigration Act, or to make any modifications to the original Act.  That can only be done by Parliament.

I assumed he'd been sacked, or moved to an inactive post.

Haven't seen his photo for a while now.

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, 007 RED said:

Airlines use very complex algorithms to set the prices of their fares and these are being updated by the minute.  However, for the passenger the main factors that that will determine the advertised cost of the flight is the date and the time of that flight. 

Agreed.  The "rip off" aspect is the retail price on the day of booking.  In any post I made regarding the price, this should not imply detainees are charged a "non-standard" rate for a last-minute booking - just that the rate for a same/next day purchase is dreadful.

 

I am curious if the "airline rep" - or anyone in the local airline personnel-chain - earns commissions on those sales, though.

 

11 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

And yet 20 years back, last minute tickets were the cheapest.

Remember "Air-Hitch"?  That was awesome for USA/Europe runs.

[JackThompson]

43 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

So you can appeal? I'm sure I've read they don't let you anyway

 I've only seen one case where someone tried - and he was unsuccessful; they ignored him, and "escorted" him to a plane, then demanded-payment upon arrival.  Maybe if you had the form with you and filled out, there might be a shot, but it is untested. 

[scubascuba3]

Yes you can appeal. Whether they let you or not is another matter. One person claimed they wanted to appeal but wasn’t allowed.
 
I can’t see how a case like the OP’s would be successful anyway, and you could be in detention for up to 7 days while the appeal is considered.

Hopefully people will start appealing when the reason for expulsion is wrong. Would make a good thread

[scubascuba3]

 I've only seen one case where someone tried - and he was unsuccessful; they ignored him, and "escorted" him to a plane, then demanded-payment upon arrival.  Maybe if you had the form with you and filled out, there might be a shot, but it is untested. 

I did read a thread within the last year where someone did appeal and was successful, from memory it was resolved within a short time certainly not 7 days. At the time he included the TM11 form 

 

 

[JackThompson]

6 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Hopefully people will start appealing when the reason for expulsion is wrong. Would make a good thread

They had better do it with a Tourist Visa and a pocket full of money, hotel-booking, and ticket-out within 60-days.  Might as well make the best case, then find out how the appeals process plays-out. 

 

I would think immigration would at least have to provide some sort of evidence to the appeals-panel supporting the claim that a visitor really had no "means of support" for a 60-days stay.

[mngmn]

32 minutes ago, emptypockets said:

PowerPoint..... Surely you don't mean the same format as many have experienced over their working years aka death by PowerPoint?

That is artificial intelligence?  Most of the PP I have suffered through could be better described as no intelligence!

Precisely!

[sweatalot]

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

As is, there is no legal reason to deny-entry ...

Are you sure there is a legal reason that Thailand has to let in everybody?

Is there even a "legal" reason to let in people with a visa?

 

I think they are a sovereign country and free to decide whom to let in and whom not

[scubascuba3]

They had better do it with a Tourist Visa and a pocket full of money, hotel-booking, and ticket-out within 60-days.  Might as well make the best case, then find out how the appeals process plays-out. 
 

Are you sure about the ticket out within 60 days?

[jackdd]

2 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

Are you sure there is a legal reason that Thailand has to let in everybody?

Is there even a "legal" reason to let in people with a visa? 

 

I think they are a sovereign country and free to decide whom to let in and whom not

The legal reason is called "Thai law" and was made by people way above an immigration officer.

Obviously the law makers didn't think IOs are very competent so they limited their powers, the default is to let the foreigner in if the papers are in order, and entry can only be denied if the foreigner violates one of the points outlined in the law. Spending "too much" time in Thailand on tourist visas is no reason to deny entry.

[sweatalot]

7 hours ago, Thaiarrow said:

To those who have used this as an opportunity to make false claims

I don't buy some posters claiming   IOs are criminals or acting illegally - Thailand as a sovereign country is free to decide whom to let in.

Those posters seem to be sure they have the right to go everywhere they want and stay as long as they want. They don't. They should try to go to China or NK and see what happens

 

[sweatalot]

7 hours ago, PingRoundTheWorld said:

LOL. There is literally NOTHING in there that says long-term tourism is prohibited. That's the entire point - there is no rule prohibiting it. People have been doing it for decades, it's only very recently that certain immigration offices decided to "amend" the rules on their own.

But where is it written that they have to let in everybody?

[elviajero]

35 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

1 hour ago, elviajero said:

Yes you can appeal. Whether they let you or not is another matter. One person claimed they wanted to appeal but wasn’t allowed.
 
I can’t see how a case like the OP’s would be successful anyway, and you could be in detention for up to 7 days while the appeal is considered.

Hopefully people will start appealing when the reason for expulsion is wrong. Would make a good thread

It would be interesting, but anyone that has spent months/years in the country really doesn’t have a chance of a successful appeal, unless that is the reason given on the expulsion notice; which it never is.

[JackThompson]

28 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

I don't buy some posters claiming   IOs are criminals or acting illegally - Thailand as a sovereign country is free to decide whom to let in.

The Thai government can pass any laws they want without our input.  They could also publish official Police or Ministerial orders.  But IOs - who are not even remotely representative of "Thailand" as a country - cannot make up their own reasons to deny-entry as they see fit.

 

27 minutes ago, sweatalot said:

But where is it written that they have to let in everybody?

What is written into law, are a list of specific reasons entry can be denied.  There is also a police-order restricting land-border Visa-Exempts to 2x per calendar-year.  These are the only reasons they can deny-entry.  In cases outside of those limits, everyone is allowed-in by default. 

 

This is why, even though the IOs admit they are denying-entry for "here too much before," they cover up their actions, by using an unrelated and inapplicable reason in the denial-stamp.  They would literally be confessing to a crime if they admitted the Real Reason they denied-entry. 

 

Quote

Those posters seem to be sure they have the right to go everywhere they want and stay as long as they want. They don't. They should try to go to China or NK and see what happens 

We don't go to totalitarian countries for a reason.  Our money flows to nations who are not totalitarian.  China is not as bad as in the past - but I still have no interest in anything beyond a short visit.  Thailand was welcoming until recently - and still is, except at some entry-points run by supervisors who have a "problem" with people who have spent more than "short time" here as Tourists. 

 

I believe these supervisors are being paid-off to do this, because this policy is not universal or consistent, is only downside for the Thai people, and under-the-table money seems to be how immigration functions, generally.  Nothing else makes sense.

[The Theory]

13 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

The last “nail in the coffin” of Thai tourism

It has nothing to do with tourism, because this kind are real tourists. 

And most probably the immigration won’t let him to fly to KL since they know there will be another attempt by him through KL.