6 hours ago, elviajero said:

It is clear that such power has been given to IO's to scrutinise long term visitors for tourism and to deny entry at their discretion

Evidence? Further, when the law has explicitly avoided giving immigration officials such discretion, would you feel that the Minister explicitly overriding the law's intent is an appropriate use of his power? If such a major override of the original law's intent has indeed occurred, I believe a public announcement to that effect is the minimum that should be expected. Secret regulations are never a good idea without some overwhelming imperative  to keep them secret.

Hey Cheesus ,whats your status

12 hours ago, pr9spk said:

They are looking for anyone who could be detrimental to the country, and wanting to deny entry to these people to protect their homeland. Good for them.

 

The immigration officer is just doing their job to protect the country from suspicious visitors.

If "protecting their homeland" was what happened here, I too would applaud it.  We all want criminals kept out, and there are clauses in the Immigration Act pertaining to those cases. 

 

But, in this case - and all the other cases where they IO used a lying-rejected-entry stamp - they are not doing that.  Instead, they are carrying out an agenda not sanctioned by the laws they swore to uphold. 

 

The OP was not "detrimental to the country" in any way of which I am aware.  Can you articulate the "harm" he was doing by spending his money into the Thai economy - employing Thais by so doing? 

 

In stark contrast to "protecting" - this "clique" of anti-farang IOs are directly harming Thailand in multiple ways.  In addition to denying employment to Thais by taking away customers from Thai businesses, they are also doing irreparable harm to Thailand's reputation, as perceived by visitors.  To restore Thailand's reputation would require a full-blown apology-PR campaign - including attendant retraining of low-level IOs, firings of supervisors, prosecutions of the IOs who concocted this scheme, and years of NOT denying visitors based on lies ever again.

 

12 hours ago, pr9spk said:

And then it is the job of any long-term visitor to try and understand the immigration rules of the country which they spend most of their time in as a visitor. And therefore to get the correct visa for their purpose of stay.

We do.  He did.  They lied.  There is already a limit on land-border Visa-Exempts to protect against potential "near vagrants," using Visa-Exempt entries to serial-repeat-visit Thailand.  People who "cannot afford" to support their stay do not go to Japan. 

 

12 hours ago, pr9spk said:

Wikipedia might define a tourist as such, but it is clear that the Thai authorities take a more sensible approach, and can get a feel for when someone is doing something wrong, or is on the wrong type of visa.

They are not denying-entry for "wrong type of visa."  They are making up a lie about people not having the means to support themselves, in direct contradiction to available evidence.  The OP had repeatedly demonstrated he could afford his stay by his past stays - so much less of a risk than a new visitor.

 

Quote

If they just let everyone in visa-free for as long as they wanted, Thailand would become a haven for criminals and undesirables.

Anyone entering visa-exempt gets 30-days (except a few with bilateral agreements) - not "as long as they want."  Criminals would not want to subject themselves to frequent interactions with Police - every 30-days minimum if using visa-exempt in the OP's case.  At each of those interactions, they could be denied-entry or deported if any evidence of criminal-wrongdoing was evident.

 

Wealthier Criminals and Undesirables would likely purchase an Elite Visa, and be under no scrutiny at all for decades at a time - never having to even face an IO, since the "service" will take care of their annual-extensions and 90-day reports for them. 

 

Poorer Criminals and Undesirables would simply overstay, since they don't respect laws to begin with.  They might not even enter the country legally in the first place.  People who ignore a country's immigration laws by "sneaking in" are much more likely to be criminals than those who do what the OP did - not overstay, and follow the written rules to the letter.

13 hours ago, KarlS said:

Thai IO's have the same discretion about whether or not to allow entry as all IO's of western counties have.

No, they don't, actually.   Western countries give IOs a wider legal latitude than Thailand.  The limits on Thai IOs power limits corruption potential in theory, though those measures are useless when the chain of command ignores their abuses - as is happening in this and many other cases reported.

 

13 hours ago, KarlS said:

What 'law' are you talking about?  Please provide a link.

The Immigration Act and relevant police/ministerial orders.  That is where you find the very limited reasons an IO may deny-entry to a visitor.  See those in Thai and English (and more) here:

 

13 hours ago, pr9spk said:

Genuine tourists do not enter a country multiple times a year for months on end! When will people realise this?

Thailand does not have a legal definition of "genuine tourist" that specifies any length of time one can spend in the country behaving as a tourist (i.e. not-working a Thai Job, not violating laws, etc).   This was an intentional feature of the system - not a "loophole" - because every day a self-funded foreigner spends foreign-sourced money into the country, several Thais are being financially-supported.

 

13 hours ago, sweatalot said:

Don't the  IOs the have right of discretion?

And yes they are representing the state at the border.

As to "discretion" - they have very restricted power, as specified in the Immigration Act.

 

This clique of IOs may have taken control of some entry-points, but most entry-points still follow the law.  Criticism of the clique's abuses is not a criticism of Thailand as a country.

 

4 hours ago, sweatalot said:

not good news for those who think they can abuse a tourist visa for long term stay.

Anyone staying "long term" on a Tourist Visa would go onto overstay after 60 days (90 days, if immigration granted an extension, which they almost always do - further evidence no laws are broken by frequent visits).  Overstaying is already addressed by fines and banning.

Did the guy mention what was the official reason stamped in his passport was? I find it interesting that some posters claim that the laws are clear and straight forward, and the get with the rules etc... yet I wonder if his passport was erroneously stamped with the good old  "insufficient funds" excuse. 

 

anything can happen at anytime.  retired, 99 years old and checking in every three months, and then deported, fined, arrested, but you die of black lung first.

 

i love the uncertainty..........the OP needs to check out vietnam.

 

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 6:43 AM, steven100 said:

sorry simon, my bad. Yes ....  it looks like he's been denied entry because he has traveled extensively on legitimate tourist visas. So it appears the Thai immigration are attempting to enforce their own rule that ' it is illegal to have numerous legitimate tourist visas in your passport '  ....  or to that effect.

" So it appears the Thai immigration are attempting to enforce their own rule that ' it is illegal to have numerous legitimate tourist visas..."

The IOs are not saying that at all, they're more than likely suspicious that he's living/working here on tourist visas as he said he stays here 10 months a year.  That is perfectly reasonable suspicion to have.

5 minutes ago, puukao said:

anything can happen at anytime.  retired, 99 years old and checking in every three months, and then deported, fined, arrested, but you die of black lung first.

 

 i love the uncertainty..........the OP needs to check out vietnam.

 

Vietnam has just withdrawn their 6 and 12 month business visas, apparently it happens every few years, so it doesn't seem much better unless married/retired. 

 

Just now, returnee222 said:

Vietnam has just withdrawn their 6 and 12 month business visas, apparently it happens every few years, so it doesn't seem much better unless married/retired. 

Visus Interruptus?

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 7:26 AM, Tayaout said:

 

My guess is that she is semi-clueless like when I was in the same situation in Don Muang about 2-3 weeks ago. If you have a euro passport then you can fly to Malaysia and get 90 days via free. I read on this forum that Malaysia immigration don't really care and even despise Thai immigration decision. Since you have been denied in Thailand you will be handled separately by Malaysia immigration. 

"My guess is that she is semi-clueless..."

Well she is an employee of an airline, she is not, and was not claiming to be an IO, so no reason for her to be fully clued-up on Immigration regulations!

 

"I read on this forum that Malaysia immigration don't really care and even despise Thai immigration decision".

Must be true if it was posted by a Thaivisa member, then!

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 8:31 AM, Cheesus said:

Usually close to maximum. I live in Thailand so pretty much every 3 months. I also had METV 2 times from my home country

"I live in Thailand..."

Don't you think that could explain it?  So what is your complaint, that you were caught out deliberately abusing the tourist visa privilege?

A post using a foreign language has been removed.   English is the only acceptable language anywhere on ThaiVisa including Classifieds, except within the Thai language forum, where of course using Thai is allowed. 

OP should report this to your embassy and to the international media on such abusive behaviour from a bunch of idiotic immigration chaps. Ignore the usual boot lickers who will say the usual "you deserved it" - "you looked for it" or finger point at your visa uses  etc etc.

If you did nothing wrong, tell your story to any media or news on such behaviour and it will encourage tourists to chose other countries - perhaps then will the authorities wake up and put a stop to such abusive decisions of deporting people for a yes or a no.

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 11:23 AM, prb said:

Unfortunately, time to wake up and smell the coffee, it has nothing to do with illegal work.

 

I was thinking the same before but after being rudely questionned at DMK even though I was out of the country for more than 2 months, i just came to an other conclusion:

 

They just don't want farangs to stick around for too long on SETV or VE.

 

So, time to think about alternatives regarding the country to spend your time and cash or an other visa if it has to be Thailand.

Or, time to stop living here on tourist visas as the OP has already confirmed that he had been doing and then whinging about it when you're caught out.

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 11:30 AM, JackThompson said:

 

The first step in exploring this, would be to find out if "airline reps" handling rejected-entry cases get a commission on the "forced sales."  If they do, the opportunity for sharing the commission-money exists. 

Good grief...

5 minutes ago, observer90210 said:

OP should report this to your embassy and to the international media on such abusive behaviour from a bunch of idiotic immigration chaps. Ignore the usual boot lickers who will say the usual "you deserved it" - "you looked for it" or finger point at your visa uses  etc etc.

If you did nothing wrong, tell your story to any media or news on such behaviour and it will encourage tourists to chose other countries - perhaps then will the authorities wake up and put a stop to such abusive decisions of deporting people for a yes or a no.

What a waste of time that would be. Embassies and the press already know; it’s been happening ‘legally’ for years. The “authorities” are giving IO’s the orders to use their discretion to deny entry.

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 11:48 AM, Thaiarrow said:

Please read the information provided. The individual has been living in Thailand  by way of short term and multi entry TOURIST ENTRY visas.

Note the statements;

- " I already have 5-10 tourist visas in my passport"

- "I live in Thailand" 

Short term tourist visas are not a substitute for the appropriate residency visas. He was able to  play the system for some time and was  caught. Now he must accept the consequences of non-compliance with the Kingdom of Thailand immigration  regulations.

 

Foreign visitors are  reminded to please read and familiarize themselves with the regulations  available for reference at Government of Thailand website.  

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4908/15405-General-information.html

 

To those who have used this as an opportunity to make false claims on motivations of Thailand Immigration Service, you are asked to reconsider your erroneous statements and to offer an apology.

Absolutely right.  Don't hold your breath, though, waiting for apologies or retractions.

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 12:01 PM, 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.

"People have been doing it for decades..."

That makes it ok, does it?

7 minutes ago, elviajero said:

What a waste of time that would be. Embassies and the press already know; it’s been happening ‘legally’ for years. The “authorities” are giving IO’s the orders to use their discretion to deny entry.

No, you are wrong. 

Regular reminders are needed to the public as people are sometimes naive, allow themselves to be manipulated and need a little refresh on how things can get ugly or unfair, sometimes, by the officials in Thailand.

What if they still have to take you if you refuse to buy a ticket - which I understand to be the case.

 

I suspect what will happen (and is common for many carriers) and many carriers legal contract with you permits, is that the existing onward/return tickets value will be used as the principle means to “pay” for your repatriation...

 

Also remember that so long as the carrier that is tasked with repatriating you is the same carrier who issued your ticket (that means the first 3 numbers of your e-ticket) they can always make changes to it— even if your ticket had you flying out of Thailand on a different carrier (I.e. interline) that issuing carrier has a lot of control over it and, by association, the funds/value it represents.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

they're more than likely suspicious that he's living/working here on tourist visas as he said he stays here 10 months a year.  That is perfectly reasonable suspicion to have.

If they have suspicions he and others are working they should go to where these people are working, but they never do

1 hour ago, Just Weird said:

" So it appears the Thai immigration are attempting to enforce their own rule that ' it is illegal to have numerous legitimate tourist visas..."

The IOs are not saying that at all, they're more than likely suspicious that he's living/working here on tourist visas as he said he stays here 10 months a year.  That is perfectly reasonable suspicion to have.

The correct reason to use to deny entry to those working illegally on tourist visas is Section 12 (3), not Section 12 (2). Personally, though, I somewhat doubt there are a lot of Westerners spending 6-8 months a year in Thailand, working without a work permit.

Mostly, cracking down on illegal working is best done by catching those working illegally red handed, prosecuting both the employer and employee. Immigration often knows who is employing foreigners (mostly from low income countries) in their area without work permits, but for some strange reason do not take action.

55 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

" So it appears the Thai immigration are attempting to enforce their own rule that ' it is illegal to have numerous legitimate tourist visas..."

The IOs are not saying that at all, they're more than likely suspicious that he's living/working here on tourist visas as he said he stays here 10 months a year.  That is perfectly reasonable suspicion to have.

There is a specific stamp for working-illegally.  They seem to have quit using it, as it was not reasonable, as it is obvious people would not travel to Thailand to work an illegal-job that pays less than the lowest-paid job that exists in their passport-country.

 

47 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

"I read on this forum that Malaysia immigration don't really care and even despise Thai immigration decision".

Must be true if it was posted by a Thaivisa member, then!

It has been reported, that when passengers are returned, the Malaysians sometimes even apologize for the vile attitudes and inexcusable actions of IOs at some Thai airports. 

 

I suggest airports put up warning signs to be seen by all passengers flying to Thailand, warning them they will be entering an immigration-anarchy zone, where "what I say goes" is substituted for "laws."  Online flight-bookings should have a similar warning, with "I understand the dangers" check-box that must be ticked.  Procedures should be similar to if one were flying into a war-zone, since that is the attitude projected by Thai immigration at the bad entry points towards law-abiding travelers.

 

50 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

abusing the tourist visa privilege?

Have you found the section of law which defines this "abuse," yet?  Or are you just going to keep repeating it, as if it were true, absent any basis in law or decades of precedent, and to spite these lying-rejection-stamp problems only occurring at select points of entry?

 

43 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

whinging about it when you're caught out.

He was "caught out" violating which law or police/ministerial order?  His wording to describe his frequent visits is irrelevant.  If he is not violating the law, then the IOs who rejected his entry are.  I have yet to see anyone point out what law he violated.

 

40 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

On 3/26/2019 at 11:30 AM, JackThompson said:

The first step in exploring this, would be to find out if "airline reps" handling rejected-entry cases get a commission on the "forced sales."  If they do, the opportunity for sharing the commission-money exists. 

Good grief...

Because immigration has never, ever been involved in any sort of corruption.  Just every major office in the country running multi-billion bahts of corruption via agent-money combined with blocking legit-extensions, pushing embassies to cancel letters, and locking up the funds of retirees year-round to force agent-use. Then throw in "extra fee" edu-extensions (under "crackdown" cover).  Every move they make is aimed at one goal - boosting the corruption money flow. 

 

But never mind all that.  This is different.  It's all on the "Up and Up" - This Time.  Right? 

No hanky-panky should even be considered as remotely possible. 

 

41 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

"People have been doing it for decades..."

That makes it ok, does it?

It's called precedent.  But the fact there is no legal basis for denying entry for "here too long before" is the primary reason what the IOs are doing is illegal.

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

There is a specific stamp for working-illegally.  They seem to have quit using it, as it was not reasonable, as it is obvious people would not travel to Thailand to work an illegal-job that pays less than the lowest-paid job that exists in their passport-country.

 

It has been reported, that when passengers are returned, the Malaysians sometimes even apologize for the vile attitudes and inexcusable actions of IOs at some Thai airports. 

 

I suggest airports put up warning signs to be seen by all passengers flying to Thailand, warning them they will be entering an immigration-anarchy zone, where "what I say goes" is substituted for "laws."  Online flight-bookings should have a similar warning, with "I understand the dangers" check-box that must be ticked.  Procedures should be similar to if one were flying into a war-zone, since that is the attitude projected by Thai immigration at the bad entry points towards law-abiding travelers.

 

Have you found the section of law which defines this "abuse," yet?  Or are you just going to keep repeating it, as if it were true, absent any basis in law or decades of precedent, and to spite these lying-rejection-stamp problems only occurring at select points of entry?

 

He was "caught out" violating which law or police/ministerial order?  His wording to describe his frequent visits is irrelevant.  If he is not violating the law, then the IOs who rejected his entry are.  I have yet to see anyone point out what law he violated.

 

Because immigration has never, ever been involved in any sort of corruption.  Just every major office in the country running multi-billion bahts of corruption via agent-money combined with blocking legit-extensions, pushing embassies to cancel letters, and locking up the funds of retirees year-round to force agent-use. Then throw in "extra fee" edu-extensions (under "crackdown" cover).  Every move they make is aimed at one goal - boosting the corruption money flow. 

 

But never mind all that.  This is different.  It's all on the "Up and Up" - This Time.  Right? 

No hanky-panky should even be considered as remotely possible. 

 

It's called precedent.  But the fact there is no legal basis for denying entry for "here too long before" is the primary reason what the IOs are doing is illegal.

How is it illegal, when the IOs have "discretion" in making decisions??

1 minute ago, RJRS1301 said:

How is it illegal, when the IOs have "discretion" in making decisions??

They don't have discretion.

15 hours ago, Cheesus said:

I'm in KL now, no problem with immigration

Since the OP is now in Malaysia this topic is now closed since it has gone way off topic with bickering about the denial of entry.

Topic