3 hours ago, nailbrains8 said:

Spent 8-9 months in total but was in and out visiting other countries during that time.

Thanks for posting. I've seen more and more posts here and elsewhere about people having issues with METVs.

 

Can you find out a more accurate figure for the time he actually spent in Thailand over the last 12 months? Was it more than 180 days?

 

42 minutes ago, adammike said:

If you're wearing a suit you have come to do business you are not a tourist especially traveling economy class.

On occasion, I will go to restaurants or events with a dress code. Contrary to the perception of some in this forum, jackets are not exclusively limited to business meetings.

41 minutes ago, nailbrains8 said:

2 hours ago, TooMuchTime said:

Why do they force a flight back to London?  Can he choose to take a flight somewhere else?  Do they just force your last departure origin or home country?

Yes, he wanted to fly to Vietnam but they wouldn't allow it.

There is a rule that the airline that brought you to Thailand is responsible for your removal. He arrived on British Airways. I doubt BA has flights from Bangkok to Vietnam, so that would not have been an option.

This friend has spent 8-9 months in LoS and he traveled to UK for 3 months.

Well, IO reads it as this friend lives in Thailand and he travels on holiday to UK....

That is the issue

I flew in yesterday from Munich.  The two girls about 20 yo sitting next to me sought my assistance on filling out TM6.  Seems like they had read lots of stuff about backpacking in ASEAN,, but had ignored the reality of the immigration situation.  Wasn't their first time in LOS, AND KNEW ABOUT THE FINGERPRINT scanners, didn't have a return ticket, and thought they could get away with saying they were going to explore ASEAN.  I told them that ASEAN doesn't really matter to IO, and what matters is your time in Thailand.  They had German passports, but they may have been eastern european.  Did not have show money, and left occupation and days staying in Thailand blank.  It appears, they thought they could game the system by posing as ASEAN backpackers.  They probably got in, but they were marginal, and apparently there are many others doing the same thing.  the 180 days in a year seems to be the curse of death.  The IO will play along, but in e you cross that line, look out.  ASE AN and Thailand sure as heck isn't the EU.

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by moontang

1 hour ago, nailbrains8 said:

Yes, he wanted to fly to Vietnam but they wouldn't allow it.

 

You think if I book (Before departing the US) a ticket out of Thailand (SG, PH) that departs a few hours after arrival they will let me take that flight instead of being forced to go back to the US?

 

It is a $100 just in case I am willing to spend lol.

30 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

You think if I book (Before departing the US) a ticket out of Thailand (SG, PH) that departs a few hours after arrival they will let me take that flight instead of being forced to go back to the US?

 

It is a $100 just in case I am willing to spend lol.

According to international agreements, if you are denied entry, the airline that brought you to Thailand is responsible for your removal. As I understand the situation, if you want to change airlines:

1. Immigration must agree to the transfer of responsibility for your removal.
2. The other airline must be informed of your status as an inadmissible person, and must agree to accept responsibility.

In most cases, I doubt you will be able to use a ticket on another airline. However, an onward flight on the same airline would very likely allow you to simply take that flight.

 

Of course, you could try telling immigration that you were planning only to transfer in Bangkok. If they believe you, denied entry is unlikely in the first place. What happens if you "change your mind" and fail to take the other flight, who knows?

42 minutes ago, TooMuchTime said:

 

You think if I book (Before departing the US) a ticket out of Thailand (SG, PH) that departs a few hours after arrival they will let me take that flight instead of being forced to go back to the US?

 

It is a $100 just in case I am willing to spend lol.

Sounds like a decent plan, might depend on when you tell them you are transiting.  The conundrum is seeking an unofficial denial of entry.  Sir, I know I am breaking the rules, but will you let me in, because otherwise I have a ticket to Cambodia?  Seems to go against Thai logic, where there is no such thing as in between.  A Thai waiter once asked me how spicy on a 1-10 scale..I had the nerve to say 7.5..lol, all of a sudden the guy starts acting Parisian.

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by moontang

4 minutes ago, BritTim said:

According to international agreements, if you are denied entry, the airline that brought you to Thailand is responsible for your removal. As I understand the situation, if you want to change airlines:

1. Immigration must agree to the transfer of responsibility for your removal.
2. The other airline must be informed of your status as an inadmissible person, and must agree to accept responsibility.

In most cases, I doubt you will be able to use a ticket on another airline. However, an onward flight on the same airline would very likely allow you to simply take that flight.

 

Of course, you could try telling immigration that you were planning only to transfer in Bangkok. If they believe you, denied entry is unlikely in the first place. What happens if you "change your mind" and fail to take the other flight, who knows?

A few years ago, Lufthansa made me sign something saying I would be financially responsible for my return, if denied entry.  I even showed them my long stay visa extension.  I guess they just can't expect their counter staff to know all the different visa rules.  Never seen it since.

2 hours ago, nailbrains8 said:

There is NOTHING more to the story. Hence the post. Other people should be aware. 

How do you know that, he is your friend but you dont know everything about his personal life do you? 

18 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Of course, you could try telling immigration that you were planning only to transfer in Bangkok. If they believe you, denied entry is unlikely in the first place. What happens if you "change your mind" and fail to take the other flight, who knows?

You'd need to put "1 day" for the length of stay on your TM6, but that might be worth doing anyway.

3 hours ago, SteveK said:

So what was he supposed to do? Ring Suvarnabhumi and ask them? How ridiculous.

The Embassy presumably did due diligence on his TV application and saw no reason to reject it. They might do better to look at past visas, entries and time spent in LOS and make a determination another tourist visa was likely to be problematic. Nevertheless, those rules/limitations need to be stipulated in the vetting process, and brought to the applicants attention. 

Too much of this being reported. Foreigners being issued valid visas and then being treated like criminals when arriving to Thailand. Someone needs to make some legal challenge. 

Edited October 10, 20196 yr by jacko45k

43 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

The Embassy presumably did due diligence on his TV application and saw no reason to reject it. They might do better to look at past visas, entries and time spent in LOS and make a determination another tourist visa was likely to be problematic. Nevertheless, those rules/limitations need to be stipulated in the vetting process, and brought to the applicants attention. 

Too much of this being reported. Foreigners being issued valid visas and then being treated like criminals when arriving to Thailand. Someone needs to make some legal challenge. 

I am often critical of the ignorance of consular staff, but they are not at fault here. In many cases, the embassy will not even be aware of the entry point you will use to enter Thailand. That being the case, even if they are aware of various different, unofficial rules being applied at some entry points. it may still be impossible for them to know if you might be denied entry.

44 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Too much of this being reported. Foreigners being issued valid visas and then being treated like criminals when arriving to Thailand. Someone needs to make some legal challenge. 

Issuing visas is revenue generating. Why they would care. It has really become so annoying and unpredictible. They should have a schengen type rule so people know in advance the possibility of rejection. If there is no rule, allow entry for at least 72 hours. The problem with Thailand is people are not innovative or creative. They still have medieval mind set and follow rigid guidelines, lack empathy, and uteerly devoid of any . original thinking, afraid to experiment, etc.

1 minute ago, onera1961 said:

Issuing visas is revenue generating. Why they would care

I realize it is pie in the sky, and @BritTim has already made valid points, but to sue a consular service for issuing and charging for Visas that do not work would be some satisfaction!

Use Cambodia if you intend to tour around Sth East Asia less hassles, cancel Thailand land of the backward.  

23 minutes ago, chainarong said:

Use Cambodia if you intend to tour around Sth East Asia less hassles, cancel Thailand land of the backward.  

Malaysia not too bad

On 10/8/2019 at 5:33 AM, paul406 said:

For the last ten years i have mailed the application package in one envelope to the LA consulate. I include a return envelope with postage stamps. I have never had a problem.

 

4 hours ago, nailbrains8 said:

He did indeed.

 

Correct.

 

Don't fly in from a country far away. Fly into a neighbouring country first. Then fly to Thailand.

Unfortunately this is not always helpful. The time my wife and I were grilled the hardest we flew in from Singapore. Only positive is we only would've had to fly back to Singapore but fortunately got through it. We're planning to return to Thailand on our 2nd METV through CNX in December. That'll be 10 months out of the country. These stories have me stressed but a better visa is not an option for another 6 months. And we'd like to be in Thailand during those 6 months.

Did they not ask your friend for a Donation? 

6 hours ago, onera1961 said:

Thai IOs have become adept at spotting people who come to Thailand for living. Not having money is a ruse they use as there is no other option for them to select. 

Ruse is the right word - it means a trick intended to deceive someone. With no proof other than a gut feeling and a general xenophobia, they're denying people entry based on a false premise. 

7 hours ago, BritTim said:

When I travel, most of the time I have a variety of clothing items with me. If trying to travel light, it is actually convenient to wear the more bulky items that include long trousers and a jacket as you do not then need to fit them in your bag.

Agree, I always arrive in heavier Western clothes at airport immigration since it's lighter to wear them than carry them, and also due to the fact that aircraft temperatures are unpredictable. Nothing worse than trying to nap on a long haul flight when the aircon is set too cold - I even travel with a scarf in my carry on bag. 

I believe there is a rule somewhere (maybe not within law) that states entry is refused if foreigner has been in Thailand more than 180 days, in the current calendar and without a long-term visa.

 

 

5 hours ago, nailbrains8 said:

There is NOTHING more to the story. Hence the post. Other people should be aware. 

Be aware of what? That someone has posted on TV that may or not be true OK? The rest of us can carry on as normal and not worry about such nonsense.

6 minutes ago, Banana7 said:

I believe there is a rule somewhere (maybe not within law) that states entry is refused if foreigner has been in Thailand more than 180 days, in the current calendar and without a long-term visa.

 

 

No, but one gets an impression some IOs may agree with you. 

2 minutes ago, Banana7 said:

I believe there is a rule somewhere (maybe not within law) that states entry is refused if foreigner has been in Thailand more than 180 days, in the current calendar and without a long-term visa.

Rescinded in 2008. Though you'll still hear people quoting it (including immigration officers), perpetuating the belief that the rule still exists. 

13 hours ago, G950 said:

What does he dress and look like? IMHO it does matter when crossing a border.

better not wear formal clothes, right, they might think you come here to work

 

slippers , short pants, this is the way I fly

10 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Rescinded in 2008. Though you'll still hear people quoting it (including immigration officers), perpetuating the belief that the rule still exists. 

It may no longer be a rule, but a sporadically used guideline, making it even less predictable.. I guess the limit on land entries isn't law, either.  Many say there is no law on simply living here on TV, but the law does give discretion to the IO on who is in, and who is on the 6 bunks at airport detention.  Saw the free shuttle in front of Swampy a few weeks ago. 

18 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Rescinded in 2008. Though you'll still hear people quoting it (including immigration officers), perpetuating the belief that the rule still exists. 

Immigration also used the 180 day rule in my case, but the other way around. I work for a Thai company and often travel abroad for work. Two years ago I was only 178 days in Thailand, and immigration used that as a reason to deny my extension of stay based on employment. Since then I need to get a new visa abroad every 3 months. Sigh. 

1 minute ago, justin case said:

better not wear formal clothes, right, they might think you come here to work

 

slippers , short pants, this is the way I fly

Well speaking only of myself, I could board a plane slim, elegant and Savillerowed, windsor perfect, coif tres chic and roll off that plane 24 hours later fat and frazzled, rumpled and redeyed, looking like a tubercular zek after 6 years in the Kolyma and smelling like last weeks airplane toilet at the end of the Nairobi-Khartoum run.

 

So in my case, if I saw me looking like me, I would deny myself entry

15 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

That is really strange. I suspect he may of had a previous history he failed to mention.

Was he asked to show at least the equivalent of 20k baht in cash and did he have it?

What was the reason for the denial of entry? It will shown on the document given him and stamp as a number that indicates the reason under section 12 of the immigration act.

Strange is a very typical thing in Thailand. Wealth of evidence it is a Hub of both airport and land border denials of entries and deportations without any evidence or cause. The only solution is to fly over the Thailand. Avoid the cockroach infested deportation jail cells and smelly urine 555