What to do if rejected entry at BKK?

[peterb17]

Simple 

 

Always travel business class- as stated dress well- takes no effort to wear a jacket etc- the cabin crew will hang it up for you. 

Arrange for the meet and greet- not expensive - staff will guide you  through fast track - you will have no problems- and arrive rested.

 

Easy 

[owenm]

If the OP feels that there maybe grounds for being refused entry on his 2nd METV, then I'd suggest booking your EU trip OW to KL, rather than BKK. Then a cheap ticket KL to BKK..

 

If you are unlucky enough to be not allowed entry to BKK on METV, then you'll be sent back to KL.. And if from KL, you can enter Thailand by either land, or get a cheap SR Cambodia ticket and enter by land, but avoid Poipet.. 

 

Arriving in KL you have up to 90 days stay without a visa.. You have an outgoing flight from KL to BKK.. Your bases are all covered.. K.I.S.S.. 

[uncleeagle]

42 minutes ago, peterb17 said:

Simple 

 

Always travel business class- as stated dress well- takes no effort to wear a jacket etc- the cabin crew will hang it up for you. 

Arrange for the meet and greet- not expensive - staff will guide you  through fast track - you will have no problems- and arrive rested.

 

Easy 

Last time I flew Thai airways business class into BKK and had an automatic fast track card, there was still a long queue, most of whom didnt look like business or first class travellers, with the usual shouting and rude behaviour. I had to wait about 45 minutes and it was quite chaotic. Admittedly it was about 1.30pm on a Wednesday, apparently a very busy time, but it seems to me things at BKK are getting worse and worse and there is no way to guarantee an easier time.

Edited July 22, 2019 by uncleeagle

[SpanishExpat]

33 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

Last time I flew Thai airways business class into BKK and had an automatic fast track card, there was still a long queue, most of whom didnt look like business or first class travellers, with the usual shouting and rude behaviour. I had to wait about 45 minutes and it was quite chaotic. Admittedly it was about 1.30pm on a Wednesday, apparently a very busy time, but it seems to me things at BKK are getting worse and worse and there is no way to guarantee an easier time.

Well you didn`t know that TG C/F uses a different lane? There is a lane especially for TG premium passengers left of the normal immigration. (the east side one)

Edited July 22, 2019 by SpanishExpat

[NoshowJones]

8 hours ago, Dnyy said:

Why should a genuine tourist dress professionally?

Please explain what is meant by "dressing professionally", apart from the obvious, don't wear shorts.

[jackdd]

10 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

Please explain what is meant by "dressing professionally", apart from the obvious, don't wear shorts.

Just search for "man dressing professionally" in Google image search, and you will see that this is not the style of a typical tourist, but of somebody going to work in an office job

[dbrenn]

9 hours ago, Dnyy said:

Why should a genuine tourist dress professionally?

Because Thailand isn't the same as Magaluf.

[SteveK]

Surely dressing professionally is more likely to make them think that you are working, hence massively increasing the chances of being refused entry? I always turn up in flip-flops, shorts and T-shirt. Never had an issue.

 

Not sure how many genuine tourists turn up to immigration at Suvarnabhumi after a 9-12 hour flight in a suit and tie, bound to set off alarm bells.

Edited July 22, 2019 by SteveK

[KhaoYai]

2 hours ago, jimn said:

There is too much scaremongering on TV these days based on a very small percentage of people being denied access to Thailand especially at Bangkok airports.

You are probably correct but in fact, we do not know what the % is. We only know about cases reported on here.

[peixotorms]

Avoid playing lottery and sent back to EU.

Fly to Malaysia or Singapore first, then to Bangkok.

If you are denied entry, you must go back to the origin in most cases, unless you are lucky and immigration is in good mood to let you fly anywhere else.

 

[Nordude]

3 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

if you are still only staying 2 weeks - in which case, why have a visa?

 

Or do you mean you've stayed since November 2018?

I've stayed since November 2018 with the exception of a few weeks now and then.

[Mansell]

From most of the reports of people being rejected entry that have been posted on here it was by women IO's. Personally I would pick a lane with men officers. 

When I returned from Vietnam in May I was bummed by all the long lines.....I forgot the over 70 line was available. So I walked up to a male officer in the Chinese visa line and he told me to go to one of the other lines....so I played the old card and said I am 75 and can't stand for that long......of course it was pure bullshit.....he looked long and hard at me, and then said okay. As he was processing me he said, You look strong, which I do. So I said, I wish. And off I went.

[G950]

5 hours ago, Jackie66 said:

btw did anyone ever report about getting denied flying in Business or First class?

Not sure if that has anything to do with it but i always fly in biz and first and use fast track and only once i was asked a few questions and that was it.

There was a guy who started a thread about getting denied about 4 months ago maybe. His story was flying in once per month on business class, staying 3 weeks per stay. He had apparently been doing it for  few years and eventually got denied. 

[lamyai3]

5 hours ago, Jackie66 said:

btw did anyone ever report about getting denied flying in Business or First class?

Not sure if that has anything to do with it but i always fly in biz and first and use fast track and only once i was asked a few questions and that was it.

This poster flew in on business from the US. Denied and sent right back there. Since he had a flexible business class r/t ticket they just changed the return date on it.

 

[Wake Up]

OP 

 

you will not be denied. No need for plan B. TVF worriers love to stir up something from nothing and then act like they are superior thinkers. And people who post misery often leave out important details. Come to BKk have fun and leave your worries at home. ????

[KhaoYai]

5 hours ago, Nordude said:

I've stayed since November 2018 with the exception of a few weeks now and then.

Then you are not really a tourist are you?

[Nordude]

2 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Then you are not really a tourist are you?

Well, I'm not working and earning money. If that was the case, it would be easy for me to get a work visa. I'm a skilled IT worker, but I'm not here for work. And I don't want to stay for five years, so the Elite Visa would be very expensive for something I potentially can get for free now.

[treetops]

23 minutes ago, Nordude said:

Well, I'm not working and earning money. If that was the case, it would be easy for me to get a work visa. I'm a skilled IT worker, but I'm not here for work. And I don't want to stay for five years, so the Elite Visa would be very expensive for something I potentially can get for free now.

Saying your not this, that or the other does not change the fact that you are not a tourist either unfortunately.

[gk10002000]

20 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

I haven't heard of someone being denied entry and then being able to fly to any place other than where they embarked. It probably has happened but I would have thought a long shot.

Most rejected threads I read were by people complaining that they had to return to where they embarked from, and not having the option of flying say back home or to another location.

[Chelseafan]

20 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

I haven't heard of someone being denied entry and then being able to fly to any place other than where they embarked. It probably has happened but I would have thought a long shot.

Agreed. I thought it was compulsory for the airline to send you back to where you flew from.

 

[Nordude]

51 minutes ago, treetops said:

Saying your not this, that or the other does not change the fact that you are not a tourist either unfortunately.

I'm not sure what my legal status is exactly. This is all very confusing. If it wasn't, there would be no need for this forum. Then the available official information would leave no doubt about if I would be allowed to enter and for how long I could stay.

 

I'm going to California later this year, and I don't have to go on some USA-visa forum to find out what the real rules are.

[KhaoYai]

12 hours ago, Nordude said:

I'm going to California later this year, and I don't have to go on some USA-visa forum to find out what the real rules are.

Even though you are not really a tourist in the normal sense of the word - I appreciate what you are saying with regard to the rules.  Unfortunately, many countries have policies that don't suit all possibilities.

 

The UK is one for example. Having read a report where someone was having problems I contacted the UK home office regarding a proposal I had for me and my then, wife.  We wanted to split our time between the UK and Thailand 50/50. I was told that such a plan would not be possible long term The report I'd read was by someone who had done exactly that - for a while.

 

The couple in question spent 6 months in the UK and 6 months in Thailand for several years until on one application the guy's wife was refused another tourist visa.  She was told that as she was more or less living in the UK, she should apply for a settlement visa.  Qualification for a UK settlement visa comes in stages and requires that a certain amount of time is spent in the UK during that qualification period. She would not qualify for that as she was spending 6 months every year in Thailand. A little more involved than your case but it exemplifies the fact that a country's policies may not suit everyone's hopes.

 

I think in your case, all you can do is continue as your are and hope you are not refused - as you say, there is no clear policy. Be ready to be questioned at some point and have some support for your case - i.e. a ticket out of Thailand etc.

[Nordude]

OP here.

 

We didn't have any problems. The lady said nothing, just stamped our passports and let us through.

 

I'm looking into long term solutions. Thanks to all.

[acenase]

On 7/22/2019 at 2:45 AM, matt9998 said:

If you are flying in from EU you will be forced to buy a ticket back to your home country or the country you departed from if they reject you. Changing your tickets doesn't work and hence you're risking a lot flying into any BKK airport these days. There are simply too many reports with arbitrary reasons given by immigration.

 

If you have spent a good amount of time back in your home country you should be less scrutinized.

 

Wrong. Immigration is not in charge of where you go after they deny you.  In fact, they don't care what you do as long as you fly out of the airport. The Airlines you flew in on are responsible for flying you out of BKK. And they have no power to force you to fly back to your home country.

 

The only thing you must do is use the same airlines that flew you to BKK. They were responsible for flying you in, so they are responsible for flying you out.  As far as where you go? That's totally up to you.

 

I flew to BKK from Bali and was able to book a flight to any country I wanted to on the same airlines. 

Edited July 28, 2019 by acenase

[JackThompson]

On 7/28/2019 at 12:54 PM, acenase said:

 

Wrong. Immigration is not in charge of where you go after they deny you.  In fact, they don't care what you do as long as you fly out of the airport. The Airlines you flew in on are responsible for flying you out of BKK. And they have no power to force you to fly back to your home country.

 

The only thing you must do is use the same airlines that flew you to BKK. They were responsible for flying you in, so they are responsible for flying you out.  As far as where you go? That's totally up to you.

 

I flew to BKK from Bali and was able to book a flight to any country I wanted to on the same airlines. 

That is how it worked out for you.  Others have reported that immigration did dictate where they could fly.  Immigration and the airlines work together on this (possibly share the commission on the last-minute flight sale).  In one case, the detained-foreigner was an Israeli citizen, and their embassy promptly got involved, and immigration agreed to let her leave on a flight home, rather than where she had just flown from.  Unfortunately, most of us don't have embassies that would do a thing for us, in similar circumstances.

 

I would suggest entering at a safe land-border - not trying to fly in and risk being stuck in detention and trying to bargain on where you go next.  But glad it worked out OK, and the immigration-roulette wheel didn't hit the wrong number in the case of the OP.

[StayinThailand2much]

On 7/22/2019 at 10:33 AM, Sujo said:

My British friend staying in kl.

he flew from kl to singapore on visa run. On return to kl they accuse him of working. Held him for a couple of days and tossed him on a plane to UK, not Singapore from where he came in.

Last time I checked, KL was not a city in Thailand, so your friend's treatment in Malaysia has no bearing on 'how they do things' in Thailand...

[BritTim]

On 7/23/2019 at 2:47 AM, treetops said:

Saying your not this, that or the other does not change the fact that you are not a tourist either unfortunately.

According to your definition of a tourist, he is not a tourist. Thailand does not define what makes someone a genuine tourist, but their views on the subject have definitely changed over the years. It was long accepted that coming as often as you liked to Thailand without overstays and without working was fine on tourist visas. Indeed, they did not really mind if you overstayed provided you caused no trouble and paid the overstay fines. The attitude today is different, but it is still not clear what a "tourist" is. You are officially allowed, for instance, to visit trade shows, including purchasing of goods for export, and to attend business meetings all on tourist visas.

 

It seems today that you using tourist visas "appropriately" is very subjective, depending on the attitude of the individual immigration official. Apart from the reasons for denied entry prescribed by Section 12 of the Immigration Act, there is nothing in law to prevent you from enjoying visits to Thailand on tourist visas as often, and for as long, as you like.

[10years]

On 7/22/2019 at 7:55 PM, Mansell said:

From most of the reports of people being rejected entry that have been posted on here it was by women IO's. Personally I would pick a lane with men officers. 

When I returned from Vietnam in May I was bummed by all the long lines.....I forgot the over 70 line was available...

It was a male IO at a over-70 line that "caught" me trying to sneak in as a tourist and took me to the denial-of-entry desk, where I was told in no uncertain terms that I was not a [bonafide] tourist, even though I stay at a ice hotel, enjoy the local food, do a bit of shopping, and frequent the nite entertainment districts.

[BritManToo]

On 7/23/2019 at 3:35 AM, Chelseafan said:

Agreed. I thought it was compulsory for the airline to send you back to where you flew from.

 

Only if you sign the forms they give you.

Refuse, and you can buy a ticket to the destination of your choice.

[BritTim]

11 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Only if you sign the forms they give you.

Refuse, and you can buy a ticket to the destination of your choice.

I recommend that people not sign the form immigration puts in front of you. However, even should you follow that advice, it is not quite true that you can go anywhere.

 

The rule is that the airline that brings you to Thailand is responsible for your removal. They often return you to your last embarkation point for two main reasons:

• you often already have a return flight reservation back to that location, and that makes it easy for the airline to get paid for the flight; and
• many airlines that fly to Bangkok do not have alternative flights to remove you.

The airline can, in principle, force you on to any flight they have out of Bangkok (with the help of the immigration police as necessary). However, you may have leverage.

 

Most important, they do not want to be carrying you for free. They must remove you from Thailand whether or not you can or will pay. If not paid immediately, they can try to get reimbursement later, but it is obviously easier for them if you pay up willingly. The correct procedure is to be aware of the flights the airline could fly you on, make clear you know the rules, make clear you will be no trouble to them if they fly you where you want to go, and promise to make their life difficult if they try to unreasonably pressure you into going where you do not want to go. If there are other tickets you have already paid for that they are aware of, they will usually be able to grab them, and you have less leverage.

Edited August 4, 2019 by BritTim