Reception at Suvarnabhumi immigration for Filipina

[BritTim]

48 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Thailand has stated quite clearly over and over again, it doesn't want foreigners staying in Thailand long term without the correct long term visas .

Some in Thailand have stated this. The consensus, I believe is that they want to have a limit on the number of tourists in the country, and to maximise revenue from those that are here. In times where the tourism sector is strong, that is achieved by encouraging generally shorter stays by more people from wealthy countries, while discouraging longer stays by people who are less wealthy. During the current circumstances where they cannot reach targeted tourism numbers, the consensus is to make it as easy as possible for most tourists to arrive and stay for as long as they like. Eventually, as the sector strengthens, this will change. Further, even now, there are those in positions of power in Thailand who are exceptions to this consensus.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, bradiston said:

She has a wealthy boyfriend here. They've lived together for over 5 years. Are you struggling with that, because it doesn't fit your profile of her?

Yes, but Thailand doesn't have a "wealthy boyfriend" visa category .

   Having a Retirement Visa doesn't give that person the right to get his friend from the Philippines a  long term visa 

[bradiston]

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, but Thailand doesn't have a "wealthy boyfriend" visa category .

   Having a Retirement Visa doesn't give that person the right to get his friend from the Philippines a  long term visa 

Good points, but you have heard of an ed Visa, right? I personally don't like the "wealthy boyfriend" description. Partner might have been a better expression.

[richard_smith237]

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

I don't know why you insist on putting friend in quotes.

You're getting upset by ‘quote’ marks ???....  

 

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Her ticket wasn't fake end of.

Not end of....    Immigration did not know her ticket wasn’t fake until they checked. 

Why did they check ?.... because they had profiled her as some one who may be entering to stay longer than the validity of her ticket, so the ticket could just be a ‘fake’. 

 

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Many are missing the point. We don't know what they suspected.

No... You are missing the point... WE (many of us) already know exactly what immigration were suspecting when the saw a young, single, female from a poorer country who had repeated long term stays in Thailand....   They suspected her of ‘working’.

 

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

They told her simply that she'd stayed too long in Thailand, which is not strictly true. She stages as she was permitted. They also accused her of coming here for enjoyment. Er, that's us lot barred straight away then.

Questioning her to get something out of her to back up or dismiss their profile - that their job.

 

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

You're a member of a privileged class of tourist. White, educated, married, presumably well off, confident, entitled.

I'm just another human being... If you want to project entitled, thats your projection your world. 

 

It certainly seems that you feel that a ‘friend’ of yours is beyond profiling or suspicions...  Entitled you say ???

 

25 minutes ago, bradiston said:

She isn't. It's that simple. Like my mate said. The Thais tend to treat their ASEAN neighbours with utter contempt. I'm not going to argue about it. I've seen it time and time again. And this is just another example.

Thai immigration treat everyone with contempt !!!....  it's their job to be suspicious of anyone, particularly those who fit specific criteria...  that could be a combination of age, gender, amount of visits etc...

......  IF this were a family of 4 coming for a 1 week vacation in Bangkok, there would no or very little questioning....   why ????... because the profile is ‘clean'. 

 

 

 

[bradiston]

12 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So why didn't She tell that to the Immigration officers when questioned ?

   Why didnt She say that she would get a Ed Visa once in Thailand ?

Gosh, do you think that would have helped?

[Mac Mickmanus]

4 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Some in Thailand have stated this. The consensus, I believe is that they want to have a limit on the number of tourists in the country, and to maximise revenue from those that are here. In times where the tourism sector is strong, that is achieved by encouraging generally shorter stays by more people from wealthy countries, while discouraging longer stays by people who are less wealthy. During the current circumstances where they cannot reach targeted tourism numbers, the consensus is to make it as easy as possible for most tourists to arrive and stay for as long as they like. Eventually, as the sector strengthens, this will change. Further, even now, there are those in positions of power in Thailand who are exceptions to this consensus.

Thailand have been taking measures for the last 8 years to stop long term stayers (without long term visa) and as there have been numerous recent reports of people being refused entry after spending years in Thailand on Covid extensions , that directive doesn't seem to have changed .

    Entry requirements haven't been relaxed and it seems that Thailand still doesnt want long term stayers without the correct visas

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, bradiston said:

15 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

So why didn't She tell that to the Immigration officers when questioned ?

   Why didnt She say that she would get a Ed Visa once in Thailand ?

Gosh, do you think that would have helped?

Possibly / possibly not, but she didn’t need it. She handled herself well and was permitted entry. 

 

The only issue seems to be that you became upset that Immigration did their job and profiled and questioned the lady. 

[Mac Mickmanus]

4 minutes ago, bradiston said:

Good points, but you have heard of an ed Visa, right? I personally don't like the "wealthy boyfriend" description. Partner might have been a better expression.

So, she is using the ED visa to stay long term in Thailand and she isn't using the ED visa for its intended purpose ?

[BritTim]

38 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I'd also like to ask you... 

 

Instead of a young Filipino lady, what if this were a 32 year old Nigerian male, with no offer of work, no business visa with a long history of being here on Visa Exempts, Ed Visas, Covid extensions ???

 

Should he be profiled and questioned ???....     Why is it wrong to profile and question either of them? and when going through the questioning and profiling process its not really good technique to make them feel welcome and at ease - the officer wants them on edge so they make a mistake. 

This is my answer to that. First, the Nigerian male will not be eligible for a visa exemption, so he is entering with a visa. I believe it is the job of the embassy in Lagos to decide if the visa should be issued, and they are known to be pretty tough in qualifying Nigerian citizens for Thai visas. Under those circumstances, unless a valid reason under Section 12 can be found to deny entry, Immigration has no business deciding to requalify the Nigerian's right to his visa (although they might well do so).

 

Taking a more comparable case of a young Filipino male trying to enter visa exempt, polite questioning is appropriate. As with a young female, attempting to pressure the male into leaving, prior to questioning, because the official did not like the fact that he had spent a lot of time here already would be legal, but unjust. Having discovered that the male was in a long term relationship with a mature Thai woman who was well able to support him ought to be enough to allow him to enter. (In practice, that might just make them more determined to get rid of him.)

[BritTim]

15 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Yes, but Thailand doesn't have a "wealthy boyfriend" visa category .

   Having a Retirement Visa doesn't give that person the right to get his friend from the Philippines a  long term visa 

True, but it is pretty strong evidence that the lady does not work illegally (likely as a whore) which is the purported reason you and others feel she should be denied entry. Immigration can deny a visa exemption based on their own prejudices, but it is unjust to do so.

[richard_smith237]

19 minutes ago, bradiston said:

She has a wealthy boyfriend here. They've lived together for over 5 years. Are you struggling with that, because it doesn't fit your profile of her?

So why doesn’t the Wealthy Boyfriend get her the correct visa ??? (i.e Thai Elite Visa). 

 

The lady can then enter on the correct visa and be profiled correctly as someone who has ‘means’ to stay here without working.

 

You have made it crystal clear that this lady is with a wealthy sponsor 42 years her elder - good luck to them both. 

 

You previously said she ‘couldn’t go home because of covid’... now you mention they are living together for 5 years....  So you really mean....  Covid was provided a convenient way of extending her stay here.

 

We all know she is gaming the system and using whatever visa is available to her to stay here.

We all know that the 1 month return ticket is a ’throw away ticket'

We all know that she was never going to return in 30 days at the end of her visa exempt permission. 

 

Nothing wrong with any of that... no judgement whatsoever, its what many people do. 

 

BUT... the judgement is on you for getting upset with immigration who are ‘doing their jobs’ to identify people who may be working here illegally or staying long term without using long term visas. 

 

 

 

 

 

[BritTim]

9 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Thailand have been taking measures for the last 8 years to stop long term stayers (without long term visa) and as there have been numerous recent reports of people being refused entry after spending years in Thailand on Covid extensions , that directive doesn't seem to have changed .

    Entry requirements haven't been relaxed and it seems that Thailand still doesnt want long term stayers without the correct visas

Why do you think Covid extensions continued for tourists long after it was easy for people to leave? Why do you think the authorities are lengthening initial stays for people entering visa exempt or with visas on arrival? I would argue it is because they want to maximise tourism revenue until the tourism sector recovers.

 

Sure, they were trying to deter long stay tourism in 2019, and certainly there are some in Immigration who want to do so even in the current climate. However, I do not think that is the feeling among most in authority.

[richard_smith237]

10 minutes ago, BritTim said:

This is my answer to that. First, the Nigerian male will not be eligible for a visa exemption, so he is entering with a visa. I believe it is the job of the embassy in Lagos to decide if the visa should be issued, and they are known to be pretty tough in qualifying Nigerian citizens for Thai visas. Under those circumstances, unless a valid reason under Section 12 can be found to deny entry, Immigration has no business deciding to requalify the Nigerian's right to his visa (although they might well do so).

Yet there are lots of people here working illegally... there are also lots of people turned around at point of entry. 

 

 

 

10 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Taking a more comparable case of a young Filipino male trying to enter visa exempt, polite questioning is appropriate. As with a young female, attempting to pressure the male into leaving, prior to questioning, because the official did not like the fact that he had spent a lot of time here already would be legal, but unjust. Having discovered that the male was in a long term relationship with a mature Thai woman who was well able to support him ought to be enough to allow him to enter. (In practice, that might just make them more determined to get rid of him.)

A fair comparison....    you wrote... 'because an official did not like the fact that he had spend a lot of time here’...  you make it sound personal.... The official is just doing their jobs and IF someone is here for a long time on lots of different short term visas, exemptions and extensions further entry draws attention, just as it always has done for someone of any nationality...  we’ve seen this time and time again on this forum and guys are questioned and told they have too many back to back Visa exempt entries or too many back to back tourist visas.

 

Conversely, IF the girl (or guy in the hypothetical comparison) had a 5 year or 20 year Thai Elite Visa there would be no issues. IF they had an 1 year extensions of a Non-Imm O based on marriage or retirement there would be no issues....  IF they had a 1 year Extension based on Non-imm B work permit, there would be no issues. 

 

The issue immigration spotted is repeat longterm visas on short term visas and someone who fits the demographic of maybe working here. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BritTim]

22 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Why did they check ?

Because they were desperately looking for a good excuse to deny entry, and she resisted their initial attempts to pressure her into buying a new ticket and leaving immediately.

[Mac Mickmanus]

2 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Why do you think Covid extensions continued for tourists long after it was easy for people to leave?

That seemed to be because some Countries were still restricted from entering . Some Countries were fully open and some Countries were fully closed , so instead of having different  visa rules for different Countries, they just had the same rules for everyone.

   Also some people needed to border hop to get their visa extended and the borders were closed .

   So, they kept the same visa rules for everyone , instead of the rules being Country specific .

   Not to forget that Immigration tried to get people to leave by only announcing they would give Covid extensions  AFTER the previous date had expired and people were on overstay , 

[richard_smith237]

11 minutes ago, BritTim said:

True, but it is pretty strong evidence that the lady does not work illegally (likely as a whore) which is the purported reason you and others feel she should be denied entry. Immigration can deny a visa exemption based on their own prejudices, but it is unjust to do so.

It's likely they did profile her as that....    thats not a reason to deny entry, suspected of working illegally in Thailand is....    

 

I think this is the difference between both sides of this debate: You feel immigration acted with prejudice where as others feel Immigration profiled the lady. 

 

The reality is profiling is using specific identifiers and prejudices to establish a conclusion...  

- In this case: Single, Young, long term stays, Short term Visa, from a poor country.

 

It could be argued that Immigration operates in an unjust manner the roll itself requires a degree of unjustness when people are profiled and suspected, targeted.... 

 

In much the same way border hopping middle aged men are questioned as to whether or not they are working here, they are asked to show proof of funds, asked to show onward tickets etc....    they’ve been profiled, in some cases rejected because repeated back to back visa exempts not permitted etc... 

 

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, BritTim said:

31 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Why did they check ?

Because they were desperately looking for a good excuse to deny entry, and she resisted their initial attempts to pressure her into buying a new ticket and leaving immediately.

Your prejudice is that they were prejudice ????

 

But.. I agree...  They saw a young female from a poor country who had been here repeatedly and staying for a long time on short visas, extensions and exemptions...   with ticket in 30 days time?...   

 

I think any immigration officer in the world would question this....      In the UK she’d also have her baggage searched and be x-rayed. 

 

 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thats part of Immigration questioning - they try to make the subject feel pressured so they crack...

Unfortunately, based on my experience with young Asian women (and taking the lady's account as factual) about 80% of comparable women in her position would have caved immediately to the demand to buy a ticket and leave. I feel really sorry for those that have been thus affected.

[StayinThailand2much]

On 8/29/2022 at 9:49 PM, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why has Jenny been in Thailand for such a long time ?

If she wants to stay in Thailand for a long time, she needs to get a long time visa .

   People cannot stay long tome on short time visas 

If she has a booked flight out in September, she probably doesn't want to stay for a long time...

[richard_smith237]

At BritTim and bradiston....  this is an interesting debate, primarily so because the opinions on something so simple differ so significantly. 

 

For the record, I too would feel aggrieved and dislike the idea that I or anyone I know is questioned in this manner by people who have the power to decide my immediate future. 

 

In fact I did feel aggrieved when I was stuck outside of Thailand and when Thailand re-opened, it only did so for those with Work Permits and those who were married had to wait a little longer - but, those were the rules made at the time and MoPH and immigration were just doing there job according the guidelines set out under Emergency Decree. 

 

Conversely, this young lady has ‘had it easier’ because of the covid extensions based guidelines set out under Emergency Decree.

 

Immigration did her some favours !

 

 

Ultimately, Immigration were doing their jobs - we may not like that. But, its still their job. 

 

[BritTim]

7 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That seemed to be because some Countries were still restricted from entering . Some Countries were fully open and some Countries were fully closed , so instead of having different  visa rules for different Countries, they just had the same rules for everyone.

   Also some people needed to border hop to get their visa extended and the borders were closed .

   So, they kept the same visa rules for everyone , instead of the rules being Country specific .

   Not to forget that Immigration tried to get people to leave by only announcing they would give Covid extensions  AFTER the previous date had expired and people were on overstay , 

They kept Covid extensions for tourists but not those on Non Immigrant visas/permissions to stay.

 

Why did they feel a need to facilitate long stay tourism with Covid extensions because people could not be long stay tourists by border hops?

 

Not everyone in authority was (and is) in agreement, but most of the decision makers want to save the economy and tourism sector. That temporarily outweighs emotional desire to throw the foreign bums out.

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, StayinThailand2much said:

On 8/29/2022 at 9:49 PM, Mac Mickmanus said:

Why has Jenny been in Thailand for such a long time ?

If she wants to stay in Thailand for a long time, she needs to get a long time visa .

   People cannot stay long tome on short time visas 

If she has a booked flight out in September, she probably doesn't want to stay for a long time...

That was a ‘throw away ticket’ to meet the entry requirements - a primary reason she was permitted entry.

 

The Op has already highlighted that the lady in question has applied for an Ed Visa... her intention all along was to game the system and stay long term - nothing wrong with that in my opinion - but it gave cause for immigration to enter a line of questioning. 

[richard_smith237]

2 minutes ago, BritTim said:

They kept Covid extensions for tourists but not those on Non Immigrant visas/permissions to stay.

 

Why did they feel a need to facilitate long stay tourism with Covid extensions because people could not be long stay tourists by border hops?

 

Not everyone in authority was (and is) in agreement, but most of the decision makers want to save the economy and tourism sector. That temporarily outweighs emotional desire to throw the foreign bums out.

I think the covid extensions were a great idea handled poorly at the beginning. 

They could have just dished out yearly exertions and been done with it. 

 

They still could... but there is also another issue of people coming to Thailand from poorer countries to work here, displacing Thai’s... it is the job of immigration to prevent this.

[StayinThailand2much]

26 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Why do you think Covid extensions continued for tourists long after it was easy for people to leave? Why do you think the authorities are lengthening initial stays for people entering visa exempt or with visas on arrival? I would argue it is because they want to maximise tourism revenue until the tourism sector recovers.

Yes, but there seems to be a 'disconnect' between in-country Immigration and border-Immigration, esp. at the two Bangkok airports. The latter Immigration branch seems to have a different agenda.

[AsianAtHeart]

3 hours ago, bradiston said:

She was stuck here during COVID. She went home for 3 months. She came back. Where's the problem? It's just absurd. Destined for tourists? Like there's only so many they're going to issue? As Joe has pointed out, ASEAN citizens are allowed a 30 day visa. The IOs just have nothing better to do.

Over the course of reading through this thread, I've begun to be persuaded that there must be some reason the IOs want people to come in on purchased visas, as opposed to (legally) entering on a visa-exempt status.

 

Seriously, if both methods are legal, there should be no problem with either one.  Theoretically, we might even see things reversed to where those coming in on purchased visas took more flak than those without.  There has to be some rationale for the present preferences.

 

Do the IOs get some form of kickback from the cost of the pre-arranged visas?  What would their motive be for wanting those visas as opposed to handling a visitor via the visa-exempt category?  Is the paperwork harder for them with the visa-exempt entries?

 

If someone knows the answers to these questions, I'd sure appreciate enlightenment.

[StayinThailand2much]

16 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The Op has already highlighted that the lady in question has applied for an Ed Visa... her intention all along was to game the system and stay long term (...)

Yes, okay, I read over this fact. But good to know. If applying for an ED visa to study Thai or whatever, is seen, as you say, 'gaming the system', then I'll make sure to never apply for such a visa. - I personally had trouble arriving in Thailand after my first METV expired in late 2019. I'm taking the consequences and spending a lot of money that otherwise would have benefited the Thai economy in other countries. (I'm planning to update the TAT in regular emails.)

[StayinThailand2much]

5 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

If someone knows the answers to these questions, I'd sure appreciate enlightenment.

No idea. But I suspect a more 'sinister' reason, like a certain 'quota' of denials they have to meet.

[bradiston]

4 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

At BritTim and bradiston....  this is an interesting debate, primarily so because the opinions on something so simple differ so significantly. 

 

For the record, I too would feel aggrieved and dislike the idea that I or anyone I know is questioned in this manner by people who have the power to decide my immediate future. 

 

In fact I did feel aggrieved when I was stuck outside of Thailand and when Thailand re-opened, it only did so for those with Work Permits and those who were married had to wait a little longer - but, those were the rules made at the time and MoPH and immigration were just doing there job according the guidelines set out under Emergency Decree. 

 

Conversely, this young lady has ‘had it easier’ because of the covid extensions based guidelines set out under Emergency Decree.

 

Immigration did her some favours !

 

 

Ultimately, Immigration were doing their jobs - we may not like that. But, its still their job. 

 

A very fair appraisal. She's not my girlfriend, so it was a sort of proxy debate for me. I do know there's been trouble in the past with immigration, of a similar description, locked up in the detention centre at the airport, no access by boyfriend, and involved the purchase of a return ticket for her on the spot. So you might say the treatment isn't working. She keeps coming back for more!

[StayinThailand2much]

12 hours ago, BritTim said:

More difficult, but not impossible. I have had dates with two "respectable" Filipinas in Thailand, though neither lead to a physical relationship.

I met a Filipina on a dating site who has clips on YouTube about travelling in Thailand. I invited her on an all-expenses-paid trip abroad. She was keen, but then blew it, asking me for a money transfer on her birthday, even though we hadn't met in person yet.

[Mac Mickmanus]

7 minutes ago, bradiston said:

A very fair appraisal. She's not my girlfriend, so it was a sort of proxy debate for me. I do know there's been trouble in the past with immigration, of a similar description, locked up in the detention centre at the airport, no access by boyfriend, and involved the purchase of a return ticket for her on the spot. So you might say the treatment isn't working. She keeps coming back for more!

She must love her boyfriend very much indeed .

Must be crazily in-love with him to take such measures just to be with him .

   Taking all those risks just to be by his side .

So romantic , pure love.....................................