Entering Thailand as soon as I'm 'allowed', or better to wait a while longer to be sure ?

[theVenerable]

I stayed in Thailand pretty much for 7 months straight last year (a few visa runs and a few days in Cambodia in between).
On my final entry to Thailand I was let in, but  was told I would have to wait 6 months to be able to return in the future.
I entered Thailand about 20th June, and left on 20th July.
Six months from my entry date would be 20th December, and six months after my departure date would be 20th Jan.
I guess they were referring to my departure date.
So, How fine can I cut it?  If I try to enter Thailand on 25th Jan for example, is that cutting it too fine and I run a risk of being denied entry?
Better to wait until Feb or even March? 
Or do you think any time after six months is fine, even just one day !?

Thanks
 

[Tayaout]

There is no such rule. You can come back anytime and may or may not let be in depending on officer and point of entry. 

[SteveK]

The person who told you not to come back for 6 months was just making it up as they go along. There is no such rule. I would ignore that advice completely, however on your next trip don't fly directly to BKK, go to KL or Laos first so that if you are refused entry you can cross via a land border.

[theVenerable]

36 minutes ago, SteveK said:

The person who told you not to come back for 6 months was just making it up as they go along. There is no such rule. I would ignore that advice completely, however on your next trip don't fly directly to BKK, go to KL or Laos first so that if you are refused entry you can cross via a land border.

Thing is I already have the return ticket back to Thailand dated for March. I thought I could change the dates and leave end of Jan.
Spending 7 months in Thailand last year though.. I'm just unsure there will be an issue.
The guy that told me to stay away for six month also said he put a red flag on my details on the computer - and told me to wait at least six months.
If that's true maybe I will have some kind of problem.
A grey area as usual lol..

[SpanishExpat]

He doesn’t have the power to do it . It’s just a fairy tale of IO‘s and gets me speechless how they lie into peoples faces (however Thais are great in doing that) If he was able to do it , it would be equal to a 6months blacklisting without any legal reason. They can blacklist you because of a crime or overstay, but not because you come too frequently. The only thing they can do it to deny you  (even though that’s also a grey zone, as they look for fake reasons). 

 

Just play the khor thod game and let them enjoy their 10min of power feeling . 

[theVenerable]

So the general consensus here is that since I have been away a little over six months, I should have no problem entering Thailand?
Just trying to be as clear as can be lol

[acenase]

They can't blacklist you from coming into Thailand too much. Only deny entry. A denied entry is not a ban or black list, so you can enter again at any other port. I've been denied entry at Suvarnabhumi and flew to Vientiane to enter Thailand from there without a problem.

 

Now I am back in the US, and plan to fly to Japan first then transfer to Airasia to fly to DMK. So if they give me trouble there, my Plan B is, I can use Airasia to fly to Vientiane and enter through the land border then fly domestically back to DMK.

 

I'd rather take a chance at trying to get in at DMK first then just not try at all.  If they let me in then great, if not, it's just an extra $100 out of my pocket to get into Thailand with my Plan B.

[DrJack54]

9 minutes ago, acenase said:

They can't blacklist you from coming into Thailand too much. Only deny entry. A denied entry is not a ban or black list, so you can enter again at any other port. I've been denied entry at Suvarnabhumi and flew to Vientiane to enter Thailand from there without a problem.

 

Now I am back in the US, and plan to fly to Japan first then transfer to Airasia to fly to DMK. So if they give me trouble there, my Plan B is, I can use Airasia to fly to Vientiane and enter through the land border then fly domestically back to DMK.

 

I'd rather take a chance at trying to get in at DMK first then just not try at all.  If they let me in then great, if not, it's just an extra $100 out of my pocket to get into Thailand with my Plan B.

Wishful thinking.

[ChipButty]

I think it depends on what side of the bed the IO got out off that morning

[acenase]

12 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Wishful thinking.

 

There are currently no reports and no trouble at all entering Thailand through the land borders.

 

I'm sure that if it was a problem, then there would be lots of mention of it on here which I have yet to see. 

 

The only problems people have are at either DMK or Suvarnabhumi at the moment. So flying into Vientiane and entering Thailand that way is a very good plan to have if turned away at the airport.

[DrJack54]

5 minutes ago, acenase said:

 

There are currently no reports and no trouble at all entering Thailand through the land borders.

 

I'm sure that if it was a problem, then there would be lots of mention of it on here which I have yet to see. 

 

The only problems people have are at either DMK or Suvarnabhumi at the moment. So flying into Vientiane and entering Thailand that way is a very good plan to have if turned away at the airport.

That assumes you will be able to select where you would like to be flown to after denied entry at DM (if that occurs).

Perhaps you have been given that option in the past or spoken to someone who was able to do that, hence the confidence.

I can assure you in the vast majority of cases that does not occur. You are flown to where you embarked.

[Sheryl]

1 hour ago, acenase said:

 

There are currently no reports and no trouble at all entering Thailand through the land borders.

 

I'm sure that if it was a problem, then there would be lots of mention of it on here which I have yet to see. 

 

The only problems people have are at either DMK or Suvarnabhumi at the moment. So flying into Vientiane and entering Thailand that way is a very good plan to have if turned away at the airport.

People get denied entry at Poipet/Aranyaprathet all the time.

 

And there has been a recent spate of denials at Hat lej/ Koh Kong.

 

My niece's husband (British) had great trouble entering visa exempt from Koh Kong last month despite having had only 1 trip to Thailand of less than 1 week duration in the past 2 years. Before that he had been in Thailand for some 4 years or so on a atudent visa enrolled in a degree program at Mahidol. This was apoarently why they hassled him despite the 2 year gap since then. He finally was let through but only after long questioning.

 

I would suggest avoiding both of those land borders if there is anything remotely questionable in your visa history.

 

[acenase]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

That assumes you will be able to select where you would like to be flown to after denied entry at DM (if that occurs).

Perhaps you have been given that option in the past or spoken to someone who was able to do that, hence the confidence.

I can assure you in the vast majority of cases that does not occur. You are flown to where you embarked.

So that is the worst case scenario, you are flown to where you embarked. From there you can still have a turnaround flight right into Laos. There is a misconception that immigration is somehow in control of what you do on your layovers once you leave Thailand to force you back to your passport country which isn’t true at all.

 

I flew into Suvarnabhumi from Bali on Thai Airlines last year when I got denied entry and sat in the office where I booked my ticket before they could release me and they told me I can get on any flight I want as long as it is Thai Airlines operated which is why I was able to go straight to Vientiane. 
 

At the end of the day everyone at immigration will have their own arbitrary policy that differs from actual Thai law. My verbal reason for denial was that I needed to return back to my passport country for at least 1 month before coming back not just leave for 1 week and come back. Kinda similar to OP, where they told him he needs to leave for 6 months. But it’s all up to whoever you are faced with handing over your passport to who decides your fate.

[acenase]

37 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

People get denied entry at Poipet/Aranyaprathet all the time.

Definitely. Poipet/Aranyaprathet already has a reputation and is known to be avoided. There are a number of other friendly borders to choose from besides that one.

[DrJack54]

14 minutes ago, acenase said:

So that is the worst case scenario, you are flown to where you embarked. From there you can still have a turnaround flight to Laos from there. There is a misconception that they somehow are in control of what you do on your layovers once you leave Thailand to force you back to your passport country which isn’t true at all.

 

I flew into Suvarnabhumi from Bali on Thai Airlines last year when I got denied entry and sat in the office where I booked my ticket before they could release me and they told me I can get on any flight I want as long as it is Thai Airlines operated which is why I was able to go straight to Vientiane. 

Yes I read this in another thread you posted. First up I believe that occured. Point is you were lucky. Posting on Thaivisa your making it sound a given that you will be able to fly X Japan to DM airport and if denied simply let em know you wish to be flown to eg Vientiane. 

Won't happen. If does then extremely lucky.

Your post re Bali imo is implying that your experience is the norm. The opposite is the case.

Google "Thaivisa denied entry at airport"

Horror stories. Along with non Thaivisa accounts.

[Caldera]

8 hours ago, Sheryl said:

People get denied entry at Poipet/Aranyaprathet all the time.

 

And there has been a recent spate of denials at Hat lej/ Koh Kong.

 

My niece's husband (British) had great trouble entering visa exempt from Koh Kong last month despite having had only 1 trip to Thailand of less than 1 week duration in the past 2 years. Before that he had been in Thailand for some 4 years or so on a atudent visa enrolled in a degree program at Mahidol. This was apoarently why they hassled him despite the 2 year gap since then. He finally was let through but only after long questioning.

 

I would suggest avoiding both of those land borders if there is anything remotely questionable in your visa history.

 

From recent reports here and on Facebook, they don't allow "out-ins" (border runs) at Had Lek (Klong Yai) anymore and tell people they must spend a night in Cambodia.

 

Is that what your niece's husband attempted, or did he spend more time in Cambodia and was hassled nevertheless?

 

[BritTim]

Summary:

• There are no official rules limiting the time you can spend in Thailand as a tourist, or the number of times you can enter.
• Immigration officials were instructed about five years ago to prevent people entering visa exempt as a means of staying longer in Thailand than required for regular tourism. This was qualified by the prime minister instructing that the rule should be "applied Flexibly".
• There is now a twice per calendar year limit on visa exempt entries at land crossings. I believe the granting of those land crossings is automatic unless there are very strong justifications for your removal.
• If you have a substantial previous tourist history in Thailand, do not try to enter visa exempt at any airport except as an absolutely last resort. It is risky. Officials can and do exercise their discretion to deny you entry.
• If you have a visa, almost all land crossings and some airports will admit you unless there are legitimate reasons under Section 12 of the Immigration Act for your denied entry.
• Immigration at some airports reserve the right to deny entry, even to those with tourist visas, to those with a long history of tourist entries to Thailand.
  • Suvarabhumi and Don Muang airports in Bangkok, Phucket airport and Krabi airport have all been known to deny entry to those with tourist visas;
  • Chiang Mai airport is generally considered to apply only the official rules;
  • U-Tapao airport may be OK but, as with all the smaller airports, there is little feedback to go on.
  • The situation at other airports is unclear
• Avoid the Poipet/Aranyaprathet land crossing that is a law unto itself. It is probably best also to avoid Padang Bear (from Malaysia) which, while not lawless, seems to look for reasons to deny you entry if possible.

There is no official "six month rule".  If you want to spend significant time as a tourist in Thailand in the future, choose your entry points, and also where you apply for visas, carefully. Use the visa exempt entries by land as your insurance policy. Do not burn them just as an easy way out when you have other options.

[bbi1]

7 hours ago, BritTim said:

• Immigration at some airports reserve the right to deny entry, even to those with tourist visas, to those with a long history of tourist entries to Thailand.
  • Suvarabhumi and Don Muang airports in Bangkok, Phucket airport and Krabi airport have all been known to deny entry to those with tourist visas;
  • Chiang Mai airport is generally considered to apply only the official rules;
  • U-Tapao airport may be OK but, as with all the smaller airports, there is little feedback to go on.
  • The situation at other airports is unclear

How many denials at Krabi airport have been reported here? I think I've only  seen one on this forum.

[FalangJaiDee]

On 1/6/2020 at 6:54 AM, SteveK said:

The person who told you not to come back for 6 months was just making it up as they go along. There is no such rule. I would ignore that advice completely, however on your next trip don't fly directly to BKK, go to KL or Laos first so that if you are refused entry you can cross via a land border.

Hypothetically, If you flew from the US to KL, then KL to BKK, and they denied you at BKK airport, would you for certain be sent back ONLY to KL, or would you be sent all the way back to the US?

[NoshowJones]

On 1/6/2020 at 6:54 PM, SteveK said:

The person who told you not to come back for 6 months was just making it up as they go along. There is no such rule. I would ignore that advice completely, however on your next trip don't fly directly to BKK, go to KL or Laos first so that if you are refused entry you can cross via a land border.

Surely it is obvious to everyone, even these deluded posters who think Thai immigration are fair to us, that you cannot rely on them to allow us entry into the country if you have any kind of tourist visa, you just don't know what any Thai immigration officers interpretation of the rules are going to be.

It must be really terrible for people who want to come to Thailand for the longer term as hardly a day goes by, are on Thaivisa giving us their tales of woe.

[acenase]

1 hour ago, FalangJaiDee said:

Hypothetically, If you flew from the US to KL, then KL to BKK, and they denied you at BKK airport, would you for certain be sent back ONLY to KL, or would you be sent all the way back to the US?

 

Of course not. Their job is to make sure you have a flight out of Thailand and that's it. So if you fly back to KL, then you are a free man to do whatever you want once you arrive there. They don't have the authority to force you to go somewhere you don't want to go.

[DrJack54]

8 minutes ago, acenase said:

 

Of course not. Their job is to make sure you have a flight out of Thailand and that's it. So if you fly back to KL, then you are a free man to do whatever you want once you arrive there. They don't have the authority to force you to go somewhere you don't want to go.

So if I don't want to be flown back to KL I don't have to go?. I could choose Vientiane as an example.

[natway09]

There is no doubt in my mind that entry at Suvarnabhumi or Don Muang is governed by 

attitude, dress, legitimacy, of the enterer to a large degree.

I know a guy who has entered at least 40 times last year from Cambodia or Laos with no hassles but never stays more than 10 days each visit

[theVenerable]

Good news is I got in through Suvarnabhoomi without question.
I arrived 28th Jan, just one week after my '6 month ban' was over.
The guy at immigration didn't ask me anything.
Not sure if there's a rhyme or reason to any of it... just glad to be here !

Thanks