Blatant abuse of entry denials at Phuket Airport

[jacko45k]

21 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

As I've already stated, there is likely to be more to this or it's a one-off Phuket error. There is no wider evidence that there has been any change. In fact, a number of ex-teachers I worked with have arrived recently on visa-exempt to continue their life here by (hopefully) finding a new job. 

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

You do not know that and it certainly is far from being the first person turned back arriving with a valid TV. Were any of these teachers concerned about being turned away? Where did they land and from where? On the TM6 did they declare reason for visit as 'looking for a job'?

[brewsterbudgen]

You do not know that and it certainly is far from being the first person turned back arriving with a valid TV. Were any of these teachers concerned about being turned away? Where did they land and from where? On the TM6 did they declare reason for visit as 'looking for a job'?

Of course people are regularly denied entry for having too many Tourist visas. What is unusual, and in my view unique, is someone being denied entry on a Tourist visa with a history of Work Extensions. What is entered on the TM6 card is irrelevant, but, as has repeatedly been explained to you, looking for work is allowed on a Tourist visa or Visa-exempt entry.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Of course people are regularly denied entry for having too many Tourist visas. What is unusual, and in my view unique, is someone being denied entry on a Tourist visa with a history of Work Extensions. What is entered on the TM6 card is irrelevant, but, as has repeatedly been explained to you, looking for work is allowed on a Tourist visa or Visa-exempt entry.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

There is no limit on tourist visas. That cannot be the reason a person is denied entry.

It has not been proven to me, most certainly a person is not allowed to work on a TV, and it is issued SOLELY for tourism or medical purposes. I have shown that to you. 

So if what is written on the TM6 is irrelevant, did they put 'looking for work' or lie and claim tourism?

[Sheryl]

I have been following all the reports of denial of entry. Until today all were from people who were clearly living in Thailand on sequential tourist visas or visa exempts or combo of both. Yes, I know there is no rule about  umber of tourist visas but I think IOs have the discretion to deny people they suspect are not tourists and the pattern of most people denied entry clearly suggests that.

 

This one is new though. Hopefully a one off (though that's little comfort to the OP)

[lkv]

30 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

What is unusual, and in my view unique, is someone being denied entry on a Tourist visa with a history of Work Extensions. What is entered on the TM6 card is irrelevant, 

Ok imagine this:

 

You are the IO, and I am the traveller, ok?

 

I come to you with a visa issued by the Phnom Pehn embassy, with a blue stamp on it, saying: "Future visas may be denied if the applicant does not substantiate tourism". - Red flag

 

You look at my TM6 card where I said I will stay 60 days, perhaps 90. -Red flag

 

Yes, they look at the expected duration of stay as part of profiling a traveller.

 

This field was introduced one or two years ago on the TM6.

 

And you ask me, "sir, how many days are you coming for"

 

And I say: "well not sure, maybe 60, maybe 90, I need to sell my car first" -Red flag.

 

"Ok, do you have an exit ticket?"

 

"Yes, I have, in 90 days to Ho Chi Min with Vietjet Air (because it's the cheapest - but I am rich and can be a tourist having lost my job). -Red flag.

 

What would you then say to me?

[brewsterbudgen]

There is no limit on tourist visas. That cannot be the reason a person is denied entry.
It has not been proven to me, most certainly a person is not allowed to work on a TV, and it is issued SOLELY for tourism or medical purposes. I have shown that to you. 
So if what is written on the TM6 is irrelevant, did they put 'looking for work' or lie and claim tourism?

Correct. As with the OP, they use the insufficient funds excuse to deny entry. Your definition of what constitutes a Tourist visa is too narrow. I'm just telling you how it is. Looking for work is allowed. Working isn't.

There really isn't any point in continuing this argument. Maybe others can comment.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[lamyai3]

16 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

On the TM6 did they declare reason for visit as 'looking for a job'?

No one would do that anyway - even immigration officers advise you to write tourist. Nothing to stop someone on a tourist visa looking for a job, or a wife, or a house to buy if they're so inclined. This is irrelevant regarding the OP anyway, who has stated quite clearly that he's not looking for a job but is here to do a bit of travel, wind up his affairs and sell his car. 

[brewsterbudgen]

Ok imagine this:
 
You are the IO, and I am the traveller, ok?
 
I come to you with a visa issued by the Phnom Pehn embassy, with a blue stamp on it, saying: "Future visas may be denied if the applicant does not substantiate tourism". - Red flag
 
You look at my TM6 card where I said I will stay 60 days, perhaps 90. -Red flag
 
Yes, they look at the expected duration of stay as part of profiling a traveller.
 
This field was introduced one or two years ago on the TM6.
 
And you ask me, "sir, how many days are you coming for"
 
And I say: "well not sure, maybe 60, maybe 90, I need to sell my car first" -Red flag.
 
"Ok, do you have an exit ticket?"
 
"Yes, I have, in 90 days to Ho Chi Min with Vietjet Air (because it's the cheapest - but I am rich and can be a tourist having lost my job). -Red flag.
 
What would you then say to me?

Why would my Tourist visa be stamped "Future tourist visas may be denied"? In my case, it would be my first as previously I have been working with a work permit. It's standard practice to come back into Thailand with a Tourist visa or Visa-exempt entry after a work extension has been cancelled.

The OP's case seems different. Maybe getting a visa from Phnom Penh was a mistake. We always send our teachers to Vientiane.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[lkv]

14 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Why would my Tourist visa be stamped "Future tourist visas may be denied"

Well I don't know why, I keep asking the OP the same but he's not addressing it.

 

As I stated before, I believe that the reason I got mine without a blue stamp, the third one from them (with hassle I may add, while others were getting voided), is because I was actually going back to Europe and i needed a further short stay. And the previous ones were not blatantly stretched. 

 

I have no idea what documents he presented, or what his previous history is before the non B, but bottom line is, Consul did not buy the story. That he just wants to drive around Thailand for few months.

 

Because his story is not: "wants to look for a new job". It's: "I just want to spend a year not working, and I thought South East Asia until November does not sound bad."

 

Application form: Job: Teacher.

 

Then Phuket IO sees the blue stamp.

 

And Phuket airport is high risk by definition.

[Salerno]

11 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Why would my Tourist visa be stamped "Future tourist visas may be denied"?

To put you in the same scenario as the OP

[lkv]

My advice to people would be, after 22 pages, if you get a blue stamp of any sort, use a land border. Apart from Sadao and Poipet.

 

And don't stretch your stays.

[brewsterbudgen]

To put you in the same scenario as the OP

Ok. But that was hopefully a one-off. I still can't see why he got that stamp in Phnom Penh.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[dtag]

Lkv is another poster simply fabricating new details to my story that are not based on anything I have posted here.  I have repeatedly stated what my history of Thai visas was. This was my first tourist visa which I got in order to travel after I was no longer working. What is wrong with people like this ? Get a grip 

[lkv]

3 minutes ago, dtag said:

Lkv is another poster simply fabricating new details to my story that are not based on anything I have posted here.  I have repeatedly stated what my history of Thai visas was. What is wring with people like this ? Get a grip 

That's the way you see it.

 

Some may see it as "rogue IO's".

 

I see it as. These people have raised the bar. And Immigration here is not as stupid as some deem them to be.

 

So they work on red flags. I was trying to understand what failed you.

 

Because I don't work with "bad luck".

[dtag]

Yeah lkv, you just work with making stuff up instead. Get a life dude. I was detained and expelled wih a valid visa and you are so desperate to not accept it. Despite there being other posts on this stream and this site that are quite similar. Face it   youre being a jerk 

[lkv]

4 minutes ago, dtag said:

Yeah lkv, you just work with making stuff up instead. Get a life dude. I was detained and expelled wih a valid visa and you are so desperate to not accept it. Despite there being other posts on this stream and this site that are quite similar. Face it   youre being a jerk 

I'm not trying to be a jerk, I am trying to see the exact red flags, so that I know what to avoid, and help others on this forum avoid.

 

Because it's not pleasant what you have gone through, I would not want to be in that position, as nobody here would.

 

Yes, you were expelled with a valid visa, while many others weren't. You say it's pot luck, I say they work on flags.

 

Sorry for your experience nevertheless.

[dtag]

BS. If your goal was to help others you would not continually try and change what I have written. I mean you just completely fabricated a conversation you imagined I had with the IO in order to discredit me . No one who is sane and reading this thinks you are actually trying to get to the truth. 

 

 

[lkv]

11 minutes ago, dtag said:

BS. If your goal was to help others you would not continually try and change what I have written. I mean you just completely fabricated a conversation you imagined I had with the IO in order to discredit me . No one whi is sane and reading this thinks you are actially trying to get to the truth. 

 

If you think I'm spending time here just to bully you, you are completely wrong.

 

I am trying to figure: on what basis does the Phnom Pehn embassy voids visas. On what basis does the Phnom Pehn embassy put blue notes on visas. On what basis do Phuket airport IO's reject entry to people with visas.

 

[dtag]

None of your list of supossed red flags even applied to me. Besides this blue note that you have some major hard on for. Which simply just said I should not seek emplymemt as a tourist . Wow , huge "red flag" . Face it  you are beyond desperate . 

[lkv]

1 minute ago, dtag said:

None of your list of supossed red flags even applied to me. Besides this blue note that you have some major hard on for. Which simply just said I should not seek emplymemt as a tourist . Wow , huge "red flag" . Face it  ypou are beyond desperate . 

We've asked you a few more things. I have asked you if you cared to share more about PP, you haven't.

 

You had a poster ask you in a very polite way if you managed to re-enter Thailand via a land border, since you still have a valid visa.

 

Now, nobody is forcing you to answer, but your answers would have helped the forum.

 

But yes, you're under no obligation to do so, as more reports come, we will get all the answers some of us are looking for.

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

There is no limit on tourist visas. That cannot be the reason a person is denied entry.

It has not been proven to me, most certainly a person is not allowed to work on a TV, and it is issued SOLELY for tourism or medical purposes. I have shown that to you. 

So if what is written on the TM6 is irrelevant, did they put 'looking for work' or lie and claim tourism?

A Non Ed visa is issued solely for the purpose of studying. Would someone near the end of a university course be breaching the terms of their Non Ed visa (according to your strict interpretation of the rules) if they attended job interviews? Would both the prospective employer and the student need to travel to another country if they wanted to engage in a job interview, or would it be sufficient for the student alone to leave the country and conduct the interview via Skype?

[dtag]

So here is his next strategy - i have asked you things, Of course no mention of what those things are that I have not answered in my dozens of posts   No I have not have gone to a land border. I stated repearedly that I am flying to the Philippines and have no desire to even return to Thsiland except to get my posessions after being locked in a room for 3 days without cause. This guy is so full of it . 

[lkv]

3 minutes ago, dtag said:

So here is his next strategy - i have asked you things, Of course no mention of what those things are that I have not answered in my dozens of posts  This guy is so full of it . 

That's fine. I don't wish to know of your experience in Phnom Pehn, I have an idea of how to handle that consulate, and it's not my number one choice either.

 

As far as the land entry is concerned, you will most likely get in at a friendly border apart from Poipet if you attempt to do so.

 

Best of luck.

[HampiK]

On 7/5/2019 at 2:50 PM, dtag said:

It could had something to do with this stamp above the visa. But the problem is we can not know. But it seems strange that a person with the first tourist visa become a stamp like this. Maybe as another poster already wrote Phnom Penh is not a good place for tourist visas...

[JacobD]

I understand both LKV and dtag.

dtag shouldn't have had that situation happen to him.

Likewise, that situation all started from that blue stamp which probably raised a flag/suspicion to the IO and so he took full advantage of that.

The IO shouldn't have done that, though the history combined with blue stamps gave him an excuse to come down hard on OP.

 

That is my question too. I'm not experienced in these matters, and just lurk around here, but I wonder why PP but that blue stamp if it was only your first time there doing that and getting a Tourist Visa?

It seems the best thing to do is avoid the consulate in PP? Like to hear more feedback for future cases.

[Joe Mcseismic]

A visa from an embassy, or consulate does not guarantee the right to entry. The final decision is up to the Immigration department.

This is the same for every country. Next time you get a visa, ask the staff. They will confirm this.

[JackThompson]

On 7/6/2019 at 2:00 AM, lkv said:

"Pee in the cup" has more chances to be picked up by the media than: "foreigner was abusing tourist visas or he tried to enter Thailand broke (12.2). Beggars, begpackers....you know...we had articles.

 

As @BritTim was saying, plausible deniability.

 

PS: Actually, it was already picked up by the media. Can you not see all the examples of criminals that came to Thailand to abuse the visa system and commit all sorts of crimes, disguising themselves as tourists?

I do not understand what "abusing the visa system" is - unless you mean breaking the actual published laws and rules.  Long overstays (months or years - not a few days), and fake border runs (passport leaves, but the visitor doesn't)  were certainly abuse. 

 

Criminal activity goes beyond visa-abuse - is simply criminal activity, regardless of the form of permitted-stay involved.  Criminals who are even slightly "successful" at such, can afford agents, so immigration is happy to help them, since agent-applications can skip many of the published requirements, in addition to the unpublished "hassle you to use an agent" made-up rules.

 

Beggars can be picked up for begging and/or vagrancy - and we had one "busker" who reported here that he was kicked out for doing just that. 

 

Immigration breaking the laws at airports, breaking up families, driving-out retired people, etc have nothing to do with vagrancy or criminals.  Serious overstayers could be denied for cause individually (not some lie about "not having money").

[JackThompson]

On 7/6/2019 at 11:14 PM, Leaver said:

I think you will find those undercutting Thai's for jobs are for Thai owners that make money from those foreigners spending money here, so labor costs are minimized, for maximum profits. 

Of course.  That is what business will always do - maximize profits.  It's not a bad thing in and of itself - but is why govt controls to prevent foreigners flooding the labor-market and other sane ground-rules are necessary - so that "business" works "for the interest of the people/country." 

 

Market mechanisms are the best way to operate an economy, but sane rules are needed to keep it from eating the country and itself.  I watched those restrictions get dismantled in the USA, and the carnage which occurred, and is still resulting from it.  Throwing your people to the wolves economically is a horrible form of treason.

[Caldera]

3 hours ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

A visa from an embassy, or consulate does not guarantee the right to entry. The final decision is up to the Immigration department.

This is the same for every country.

At face value, there's nothing wrong with what you wrote. Immigration does need the power to deny entry, at least as a last line of defense.

 

What differs from one country to the next is how responsibly a country's immigration officers use that power and how well immigration and consular service are integrated. I don't think that the Thai authorities do a decent job in that regard. In the OP's case and similar other cases, I think it's obvious that they've inflicted unnecessary hardship.

[lkv]

19 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

I do not understand what "abusing the visa system" is - unless you mean breaking the actual published laws and rules.

If you look at Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, you will understand better.

 

The more developed the country, the harsher the Immigration.

 

What you don't understand is the discrepancy between the level of development of Thailand and their Immigration policies, and why they are applying the same models other countries do. You are likely right about it, i also feel there is a discrepancy, but take into account you have a Junta in power.