1 hour ago, KhaoYai said:

You will note he says Multi. Multi Non O's based on marriage are already unavailable from at least 3 Thai embassies - including London since earlier this year.

He said Non O Multi and Non O. So I think he intended both single entry and multiple

6 minutes ago, Lacrimas said:

He said Non O Multi and Non O. So I think he intended both single entry and multiple

Point taken.

2 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

By 'frequent stay' I take it you mean the duration of those stays? For an immigration officer to state that a Multi Non O is not for frequent stays is ridiculous - they are for that exact purpose.  Do you think you might have used the wrong words? English is clearly not your first language.

You’re quite right, they are exactly for frequent stays (visits). Any complaint would be about the duration of the total time spent in the country.

I think our prisoner friend here didn't tell us all the truth. Maybe he overstayed a bit in the past? Used ED or Tourist visas inappropriately? Unclear situation and very fishy. 

On 11/21/2019 at 7:36 AM, ubonjoe said:

You are not stating facts when you say that they can legally deny entry for staying in the country to long on tourist visas.

I haven't said that!

 

I have stated the fact that they underlying reason for denial is being in the country too long. And that the reasons they give on the expulsion notice are legal as listed in section 12. 

 

On 11/21/2019 at 7:36 AM, ubonjoe said:

The only part about your post that is correct is denying entry for not having 10 or 20k baht but they do not do that. Showing any amount of cash does not matter as has been reported many times.

They do do that! They often quote both 12.2 and 12.9 on the expulsion notice, because they are different reasons to deny entry. *** However, as serial tourists started carrying cash, because people like you and I told them to, immigration were left with using 12.2 if the 'tourist' has the pocket money required under 12.9. *** 12.2 is a catch all that serial tourists have no defence against. It doesn't matter if they have 200K in their pocket they can still be denied under 12.2.

 

The game is up for long term tourism whether we like it or not. You may not like the tactics used by immigration to tackle the tactics used by serial tourists, but they are completely lawful and ordered from the top. And IMO to encourage people to appeal the unappealable is very bad advice.

 

On 11/21/2019 at 7:36 AM, ubonjoe said:

No need to discuss it further.

Don't reply if you don't want to discuss further.

On 11/20/2019 at 9:35 PM, elviajero said:

The visitor would be appealing the actual reason given on the notice. And you also well know - or should - that the IO's are working to orders from the top and they are the same people that would be deciding/influencing the appeal. So the visitor would effectively be appealing against the people instructing the IO's.

Most of the denials happen at DMK, and also at BKK. CNX is still considered to be quite safe.

Surprisingly DMK, BKK and CNX are all under immigration division 2, so if they gave such orders we should see way more denials at CNX.

So we can conclude that such orders don't even come from the top of immigration division 2, but somewhere lower (if they exist in this form).

 

Have you ever read the TM11 form or the law?

You are appealing to the minister of interior or prime minister. You can even write a name to who you appeal on the form. If i would ever be in this situation i would write Prayut on this form. Then unless Prayut had ever written a power of attorney for an IO to sign the TM11 on his behalf (i doubt this), he would have to personally confirm the denial. Can you imagine what a big loss of face for an IO it would be if Prayut gets this appeal but doesn't confirm the denial?

I think this also has alot to do with confidence and showing to the IO that you know what you are talking about, but if you are confident enough when you hand in the appeal the IO will scrap your denial together with the appeal and you will be allowed to enter.

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

Most of the denials happen at DMK, and also at BKK. CNX is still considered to be quite safe.

Surprisingly DMK, BKK and CNX are all under immigration division 2, so if they gave such orders we should see way more denials at CNX.

So we can conclude that such orders don't even come from the top of immigration division 2, but somewhere lower (if they exist in this form).

Conclude away. The evidence proves it does. Maybe the embassies denying repeat visas are being controlled by these lower powers too.

 

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

Have you ever read the TM11 form or the law?

I’ve been advising on it for years!

 

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

You are appealing to the minister of interior or prime minister. You can even write a name to who you appeal on the form. If i would ever be in this situation i would write Prayut on this form. Then unless Prayut had ever written a power of attorney for an IO to sign the TM11 on his behalf (i doubt this), he would have to personally confirm the denial. Can you imagine what a big loss of face for an IO it would be if Prayut gets this appeal but doesn't confirm the denial?

Enjoy your 7 days in detention waiting for that to happen! 555

 

If there was any chance whatsoever that an appeal would be successful they wouldn’t take the appeal and just let you in.

 

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

I think this also has alot to do with confidence and showing to the IO that you know what you are talking about, but if you are confident enough when you hand in the appeal the IO will scrap your denial together with the appeal and you will be allowed to enter.

As I’ve said. The threat of an appeal is the only way you’ll get a decision overturned. Serial tourists have no chance!

Just entered Thailand today with a NON O single entry visa. No questions asked and took me 5 minutes. 

Ok when settled in Rayong,me and my wife went to immigration because they stamp me a 60 days instead of 90 days in Bkk,so as the IO look at it my wife explained what happened in BKk,and the IO was surprised by that so he go speak to his superior and that men told me it should never happen and will investigate that was 3 weeks ago,friday my wife received a call from the superior and said that there's another Canadian man with the same name as me and that men was not clear with Thai immigration,he also said that they compared the fingerprints of the other men and me and I will have no problem next time....

 

I don't know if that true but I'm confused about that story,and no excuses....

15 minutes ago, Bigstef said:

he also said that they compared the fingerprints of the other men and me and I will have no problem next time....

Which rather confirms that the fingerprints and the photo are not compared to the Big Brother database in real time (if at all) when passing through the airport

18 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

Which rather confirms that the fingerprints and the photo are not compared to the Big Brother database in real time (if at all) when passing through the airport

Thats what i tought too,but why not make it on the spot? Instead of make me feel like a criminal,and I anticipate my next custom passage hopefully with no argues...