Does self check-in negate need for onward flight?

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, bamnutsak said:

 

I think the OP is currently airborne on SQ 256 for BNE-SIN.

 

They could be DBed at the departure gate in SIN, assuming proof of onward travel is required for this passenger.

He only risking being detained in BKK, if unlucky 👏😁

 

Especially all full flights as it is now out of Thailand 

 

Anyway, he would be extremely unlucky if so

[Captain Monday]

6 minutes ago, Dan O said:

yes , Its the airlines that are generally the issue for checking for onward ticket based on APIS and IATA software that shows them the destination country regulations as they must pay for the return flight if they disregard the regs and you are denied entry. Immigration very seldom will ask unless you have some other issue that they stop you for on entry, 

Yes, the airlines are responsible to remove you from the country if denied entry. Now if you don't like long posts stop reading HERE.

 

• Please, read your contract of carriage carefully. The passenger is required to provide all required entry documentation visas and vaccinations and payment for return flight if denied entry. This is the point where the dullards here will mark confused.
• If you are denied entry and are actually flat brokewith no credit card , or simply cross your ams and refuse to pay the airline staff cannot literally beat payment out of you.  
• Immigration insists the denial passenger must go back.  If the airline does not take you back they will be levied some huge fines in addition to the cost  even if they have to bump another passenger on a return flight that could be 100 percent full.  
• Later they could try to get back the money you refused to pay or take other legal action

 

One or two times over the years JL or ANA asked me to sign a paper in Tokyo or KIX that I understand this. 

It is in your contract of carriage you are respsonsible for paying for return flight if denied entry so these forms should not be necessary. In my case I have been using airline staff discount standby tickets almost exclusively over the years.

Highest standard of behaviour is expected. Definitely one would get banned or sacked if you argue with them.

[impulse]

3 hours ago, Pattaya57 said:

As we are aware the risk of no onward flight lies with the airlines as immigration would rarely ask for it. However if we never have to speak to airline check-in staff, then what's the risk?

 

Flip of a coin...  The airline could have referred you to a gate agent from the auto check-in.  I get asked for an onward ticket about 3/4 of the time when checking in.  So it's not worth the risk of showing up with fingers crossed and no ticket.

My other guess is the SG looks at the cost of flying a passenger back to where they came from (Singapore), estimates the odds that errant passengers will be denied entry and the odds they won't be able to get the passenger to pay (cha-ching, because that's not going to be a discount fare) and made an economic decision not to ask for an onward ticket.  But it's up to the airline.

 

[Dante99]

35 minutes ago, Pattaya57 said:

I'm at 36,000 feet. Only SQ staff I spoke to was to order a beer 😀

 

 

So you only have to get thru and boarded at Changi(Singapore Airport), unlikely to have a problem but you never know.

[Captain Monday]

15 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

You shouldn't 

It should be provided to immigration on arrival

We had this one out before. It is a requirement with no punishment.

If Thailand Imm wants to enforce the requirement that mobile boarding passes are unacceptable they need to instruct Korean, SQ and Scoot to stop issuing them to Thai bound pax and to make cabin announcements that the paper  not be thrown in the trash, which is what I do on purpose to ridicule them.  Never once been asked by immigration

 

There are still  airports that do not accept mobile boarding passes. It setting in the passenger management system the airlines could probably make easily 

[Pattaya57]

1 hour ago, Dante99 said:

So you only have to get thru and boarded at Changi(Singapore Airport), unlikely to have a problem but you never know.

They already gave my boarding pass in Brisbane for SIN-BKK, so no further check-in required other than go to gate

[Dante99]

4 minutes ago, Pattaya57 said:

They already gave my boarding pass in Brisbane for SIN-BKK, so no further check-in required other than go to gate

So no problem unless you meet that nasty Chinese lady at the gate or upon arrival in BKK.

[oldcpu]

A few years back I was flying Thai Airways from Frankfurt to Bangkok.  I did an online checkin.  My Type-OA Visa had been previously (deliberately) invalidated by me leaving without a re-entry permit, so I was planning to (and did) enter Thailand for a 45-day visa exempt stamp (this was when 45 day visa exempt possible).  

 

When I did the online checkin in Frankfurt (to fly to Bangkok), I did receive a popup stating an onward flight proof might be requested by Thai Airways in Frankfurt (for showing an eventual future departure from Thailand)

 

After checking in my luggage, clearing security and immigration, at the Frankfurt departure gate (while waiting for boarding to be called), I was called to the counter and asked for my passport.  The Thai airways representative spent a long time looking at the page with my Type-OA visa  (which had been invalidated by me leaving without a re-entry permit), and eventually passed me my passport back without saying anything - they did NOT ask for an onward flight ticket. I think my departing early (before a stamped date of type-OA permission to stay date associated with Type-OA visa) to invalidate the Type-OA visa confused them (and so they did not ask) ??  I did have an inexpensive (Krabi to KL) onward ticket, but I was never asked for that.

 

My view is this is all very highly airline and departure city dependent. More often than not, I think one will not be asked for an onward ticket, but it can (legally) happen at times. So its best to be prepared.

Edited April 16 by oldcpu

[bamnutsak]

29 minutes ago, Pattaya57 said:

They already gave my boarding pass in Brisbane for SIN-BKK, so no further check-in required other than go to gate

 

Departure gates at SIN are secure (air-side), so you have to pass security, and each BP gets scanned for entry into the gate's seating area. If an issue arises it would happen here. Sometimes BP's issued at remote airports for subsequent sectors, are required to be re-issued at the next point of departure.

 

My guess is that you will be fine.

 

Do you think you need to provide proof of onward travel? Are you on the return portion of a THL-BNE-THL itinerary? Do you have some sort of visa/re-entry permit?

 

 

[Pattaya57]

Some people seem to think I mean online check-in (I do that 48 hours before flight on my phone). 

 

I'm talking about unmanned check-in kiosks at airport where you scan your passport ID page and it spits out your boarding passes and baggage tags. You then take your baggage to an automated baggage check-in. There are no staff to ask you questions or to check if you have a visa or an onward flight (and no way Singapore Airlines would know that info in their little kiosk)

 

[The Fugitive]

23 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

A few years back I was flying Thai Airways from Frankfurt to Bangkok.  I did an online checkin.  My Type-OA Visa had been previously (deliberately) invalidated by me leaving without a re-entry permit, so I was planning to (and did) enter Thailand for a 45-day visa exempt stamp (this was when 45 day visa exempt possible).  

 

When I did the online checkin in Frankfurt (to fly to Bangkok), I did receive a popup stating an onward flight proof might be requested by Thai Airways in Frankfurt (for showing an eventual future departure from Thailand)

 

After checking in my luggage, clearing security and immigration, at the Frankfurt departure gate (while waiting for boarding to be called), I was called to the counter and asked for my passport.  The Thai airways representative spent a long time looking at the page with my Type-OA visa  (which had been invalidated by me leaving without a re-entry permit), and eventually passed me my passport back without saying anything - they did NOT ask for an onward flight ticket. I think my departing early (before a stamped date of type-OA permission to stay date associated with Type-OA visa) to invalidate the Type-OA visa confused them (and so they did not ask) ??  I did have an inexpensive (Krabi to KL) onward ticket, but I was never asked for that.

 

My view is this is all very highly airline and departure city dependent. More often than not, I think one will not be asked for an onward ticket, but it can (legally) happen at times. So its best to be prepared.

Agreed! When Thai Airways check-in desk staff at Munich Airport asked me to produce my Retirement Extension I found the page in my passport for them with the current extension stamp. They accepted it with no thumbing through to find my re-entry permit. Either they're not aware (or don't care) about the fact it could have been invalidated when I exited Thailand. 

[The Fugitive]

6 minutes ago, Pattaya57 said:

Some people seem to think I mean online check-in (I do that 48 hours before flight on my phone). 

 

I'm talking about unmanned check-in kiosks at airport where you scan your passport ID page and it spits out your boarding passes and baggage tags. You then take your baggage to an automated baggage check-in. There are no staff to ask you questions or to check if you have a visa or an onward flight (and no way Singapore Airlines would know that info in their little kiosk)

What people are saying is that either the airline does not require sight of return/onward ticket or 'some type of visa' or, if they do, you can be pinged for a document check by airline staff at the departure gate. 

[Dan O]

5 hours ago, Captain Monday said:

Yes, the airlines are responsible to remove you from the country if denied entry. Now if you don't like long posts stop reading HERE.

 

• Please, read your contract of carriage carefully. The passenger is required to provide all required entry documentation visas and vaccinations and payment for return flight if denied entry. This is the point where the dullards here will mark confused.
• If you are denied entry and are actually flat brokewith no credit card , or simply cross your ams and refuse to pay the airline staff cannot literally beat payment out of you.  
• Immigration insists the denial passenger must go back.  If the airline does not take you back they will be levied some huge fines in addition to the cost  even if they have to bump another passenger on a return flight that could be 100 percent full.  
• Later they could try to get back the money you refused to pay or take other legal action

 

One or two times over the years JL or ANA asked me to sign a paper in Tokyo or KIX that I understand this. 

It is in your contract of carriage you are respsonsible for paying for return flight if denied entry so these forms should not be necessary. In my case I have been using airline staff discount standby tickets almost exclusively over the years.

Highest standard of behaviour is expected. Definitely one would get banned or sacked if you argue with them.

the airlines have no choice but return you if they fail to confirm the proper documentation on check in. The financial or fines are secondary to that and a separate issue. They can allow you to sign a waiver prior to boarding but fewer will accept that currently so end result if your denied entry you will sit in detention lock down untll you do return.  Immigration seldom ever checks exit flights at entrance but anything can happen as its not the Thailand of 5 to 10 years ago

[richard_smith237]

My experience of 'unmanned-check-in' heading towards Thailand always requires a 'passport check' by a member of staff.

 

Whenever I have used unmanned-check-in (at the airport) flying to Thailand its usually when utilising the return leg of the ticket. 

The unmanned-check-in (at the airport) always flags up that I need to 'document check' which involves one of the Roaming check-in agents to check my visa before scanning their ID so that I may proceed with the check-in formalities. 

 

I've had this in Doha,, Dubai and Tokyo (Narita), although the Narita has removed the unmanned-check-in desks for the Thai Airways flights (I suspect they caused to much issue and it was simpler to go old-school).

 

 

 

Edited April 16 by richard_smith237

[Captain Monday]

1 hour ago, Dan O said:

the airlines have no choice but return you if they fail to confirm the proper documentation on check in. The financial or fines are secondary to that and a separate issue. They can allow you to sign a waiver prior to boarding but fewer will accept that currently so end result if your denied entry you will sit in detention lock down untll you do return.  Immigration seldom ever checks exit flights at entrance but anything can happen as its not the Thailand of 5 to 10 years ago

It appears you have read my tedious  post. Not sure if you are disputing it in some way as your response is not clear

 

I would ask anyone who does dispute my submission to please check for example  KE contract of carriage specifically 

•  Article 16 paragraph 2.)  term 2)  

 

All airlines are the same.  Nobody reads the small print but any mistaken idea the airline must give passengers denied entry to any country a free flight back to their point of origin is at best a fundamental misunderstanding.

I just call it "barstool rubbish". The passenger agreed to be financially respsonsible when they agreed to the terms and conditions.

 

terms_of_carriage_eng.pdf

Edited April 16 by Captain Monday

[Jaggg88]

9 hours ago, The Fugitive said:

Individual airlines may insist on sight of return/onward ticket or 'some sort of visa'. There is a very recent report of a member being 'pinged', stopped at the departure gate and asked to provide this information. The reason given was that he had checked-in online. I have been stopped at the departure gate and denied boarding. I was told that although I had checked-in manually for my previous flight leg with an airport agent, they should have insisted upon sight of my documentation before checking me in.  

In a FB group I'm in an American had self-checked-in but was stopped at the boarding gate and asked for an onward ticket

[Polar Bear]

Not this route or airline, but I've been pinged at the departure gate for document checks after an online check in, once to confirm I had a visa and once for an onward ticket. I had the paperwork with me both times, so there was no issue, but I assume I would have been denied boarding otherwise. 

[Kopitiam]

9 hours ago, Pattaya57 said:

How would SQ know my passport travel history? I scanned my pp ID page only and I could have flown on many airlines. SQ self check-in kiosk simply does not care about visa or onward flight.

 

Why should SQ does the job of the Immigration Dept of the destination country?  If you are denied entry, you buy another ticket to fly out. Good for business. Especially no one can be 100% sure the IO will let you in even you have a valid visa.

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, Kopitiam said:

Why should SQ does the job of the Immigration Dept of the destination country?  If you are denied entry, you buy another ticket to fly out. Good for business. Especially no one can be 100% sure the IO will let you in even you have a valid visa.

 

Its widely known that the Airline can be held accountable by Immigration for return travel IF a foreigner is refused entry.... 

 

Thus, it is in their [the airlines] interests to check....  This is why the Op was surprised at the absence of airline oversight regarding his documentation.

 

This is also why its fairly common for the staff at manned-airline-check-in counters to request to see an onward ticket or existing visa. 

 

 

Edited April 16 by richard_smith237

[Georgealbert]

57 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Its widely known that the Airline can be held accountable by Immigration for return travel IF a foreigner is refused entry.... 

 

Thus, it is in their [the airlines] interests to check....  This is why the Op was surprised at the absence of airline oversight regarding his documentation.

 

This is also why its fairly common for the staff at manned-airline-check-in counters to request to see an onward ticket or existing visa. 

 

 

Yes fully agree, and confirmation to support this is found in The International Air Transport Association (IATA) guidelines. The IATA term for a passenger being refused entry is Inadmissible Passenger (INAD)

 

“Associated Costs and Responsibilities

 

In addition to fines, airlines are responsible for covering all associated costs related to INADs. These expenses encompass meals, accommodation, transportation, security, medical escorts, translation services, detention, and more. Furthermore, airlines suffer revenue losses due to seat spoilage. This is because airlines often bear the responsibility for removing INADs, including custody and care of the passenger from the moment they are deemed inadmissible until their return to the aircraft.

 

While most airlines attempt to recover costs from passengers, some go to the extent of barring future travel until these expenses are recouped. However, this often proves to be a futile endeavor, leaving airlines to endure the financial consequences of INADs.” 
 

https://www.iata.org/en/publications/newsletters/iata-knowledge-hub/understanding-inads-inadmissible-passengers-and-their-impact-on-travel/

[Dan O]

5 hours ago, Captain Monday said:

It appears you have read my tedious  post. Not sure if you are disputing it in some way as your response is not clear

 

I would ask anyone who does dispute my submission to please check for example  KE contract of carriage specifically 

•  Article 16 paragraph 2.)  term 2)  

 

All airlines are the same.  Nobody reads the small print but any mistaken idea the airline must give passengers denied entry to any country a free flight back to their point of origin is at best a fundamental misunderstanding.

I just call it "barstool rubbish". The passenger agreed to be financially respsonsible when they agreed to the terms and conditions.

 

terms_of_carriage_eng.pdf 459.66 kB · 2 downloads

First off I never said anything about giving a free flight back. I said its at the carriers expense\responsibility  and its up to them to settle with the passenger, or not. What I said was they are required to return you for not following the regulations of the destination country which they may be held accountable for the cost and any associated fines which signing a waiver does not negate. You are quoting carriage language from 1 carrier. Cost is between you and the carrier,  end of story since the destination country regulations have to be followed regardless of payment for the return trip. The whole point of the subject is that you can be denied boarding if you dont meet the entrance regs of the destination country and your blurring that point. So you may want to review that and not just the airlines carriage regs. 

Edited April 16 by Dan O

[Captain Monday]

47 minutes ago, Dan O said:

First off I never said anything about giving a free flight back. I said its at the carriers expense\responsibility  and its up to them to settle with the passenger, or not. What I said was they are required to return you for not following the regulations of the destination country which they may be held accountable for the cost and any associated fines which signing a waiver does not negate. You are quoting carriage language from 1 carrier. Cost is between you and the carrier,  end of story since the destination country regulations have to be followed regardless of payment for the return trip. The whole point of the subject is that you can be denied boarding if you dont meet the entrance regs of the destination country and your blurring that point. So you may want to review that and not just the airlines carriage regs. 

Fine "Thank you" we are in total agreement then. And see wonderful  post of Georgealbert above. However, I do not see what point I am blurring. All carriers have the same nearly identical language it comes from ICAO and international conventions.  Doubt anyone can show otherwise.

 

There are 3 (and more) horrid examples of what  I call "rubbish from the barstool" misunderstandings that I have beaten over the head with over the years that appear to be as persistent as antisemitic tropes. All of them complete nonsense.

 

• 1) Airlines are legally financially repsonsible for removing passengers who have been denied entry and not the passenger
• 2) An international passenger connecting terminal in Thailand is some kind of no mans land where Thai law does not apply
• 3) Somewhat nonrelated.. but the sad and tired trope that "Foreign Embassies are sovereign territory of Foreign countries"

 

All utter pish

Edited April 16 by Captain Monday

[DrJack54]

This thread is so run off topic.

The OP is a simple account of self check in equated with zero contact for check in and onward flight not required.

 

[Maestro]

16 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

They could be DBed at the departure gate in SIN...

 

What do you mean with "DBed"?

[Polar Bear]

28 minutes ago, Maestro said:

 

What do you mean with "DBed"?

 

Denied boarding

[Sticky Rice Balls]

17 hours ago, The Fugitive said:

Definitely. There can be quite a few airline staff at the departure gate. They arrive well before time. You hear passengers names being called. A lot more goes on at the gate than simply checking boarding passes to passports.   

yep and they are the same ppl that check you in at the airline main kiosk as ive taken note of this..ive been coming to LOS for 15 yrs annually ..never had a visa.and always one way and there have been many threads on this....yes im aware of the risk..im an adult......i always have a carry on..no checked bags....i will return in 2 weeks..same way..one way..carry on....have been asked in my 30 times crossing the planet less than 5 times....one airline asked and i said im leaving LOS after my 30 days and signal to my carry on bag.....BKK IO asked me last year...i said the same as he can clearly see im on my 3rd PP and has access to the my patterns of travel which have been the exact since 2008----arrive bkk--30 day stamp--extend--2 allowed border hops both extended...equals 6 months --no visa..return home--rinse lather repeat...

 

my 3rd PP consists of stamps from bkk--cm IM--burma border--(now chang khong) and occas.laos trips for a thai visa but no longer see the need for an actual visa as im allowed to 2 yearly land hops...

 

bought one onward fake tix once during the covid return calamity..never asked to show it--never been asked to show money--which i carry---never been an issue--again--im aware of the risk..im an adult....

 

also aware it could depend on your PP and your origin country.....i fly from LAX each time and using US PP........perhaps my hansum-ness helps......could also be you are a seemingly self professed "fugitive" 🙂

[Sticky Rice Balls]

4 hours ago, Captain Monday said:

Fine "Thank you" we are in total agreement then. And see wonderful  post of Georgealbert above. However, I do not see what point I am blurring. All carriers have the same nearly identical language it comes from ICAO and international conventions.  Doubt anyone can show otherwise.

 

There are 3 (and more) horrid examples of what  I call "rubbish from the barstool" misunderstandings that I have beaten over the head with over the years that appear to be as persistent as antisemitic tropes. All of them complete nonsense.

 

• 1) Airlines are legally financially repsonsible for removing passengers who have been denied entry and not the passenger
• 2) An international passenger connecting terminal in Thailand is some kind of no mans land where Thai law does not apply
• 3) Somewhat nonrelated.. but the sad and tired trope that "Foreign Embassies are sovereign territory of Foreign countries"

 

All utter pish

im with you..never been an issue with me in my 15 yrs annual trips to LOS...returning in 2 weeks....one way  no visa as always......3rd PP..same airline..out of LAX...carry on bag....

[Sticky Rice Balls]

17 hours ago, Hummin said:

He only risking being detained in BKK, if unlucky 👏😁

 

Especially all full flights as it is now out of Thailand 

 

Anyway, he would be extremely unlucky if so

i flew SIn Air during the covid return rules...one way out of LAX..they only sweated me about the date of my neg coid testing results to fly..not a word about return tix..also they are jerks..not happy with the required facial rec they force you to use to board as well without option to opt out.......i recall him telling me to behave myself during the SIn layover....wtf.....they were late anyway so i had to run to catch my flight...never again with that airline..EVA for the win....

[Sticky Rice Balls]

if an airline wont let you fly they lose cash aka the bottom line..if BKK denies you entry you jump on a cheap flight to vietnam/etc and enter another route--via land

[Sticky Rice Balls]

17 hours ago, Captain Monday said:

Yes, the airlines are responsible to remove you from the country if denied entry. Now if you don't like long posts stop reading HERE.

 

• Please, read your contract of carriage carefully. The passenger is required to provide all required entry documentation visas and vaccinations and payment for return flight if denied entry. This is the point where the dullards here will mark confused.
• If you are denied entry and are actually flat brokewith no credit card , or simply cross your ams and refuse to pay the airline staff cannot literally beat payment out of you.  
• Immigration insists the denial passenger must go back.  If the airline does not take you back they will be levied some huge fines in addition to the cost  even if they have to bump another passenger on a return flight that could be 100 percent full.  
• Later they could try to get back the money you refused to pay or take other legal action

 

One or two times over the years JL or ANA asked me to sign a paper in Tokyo or KIX that I understand this. 

It is in your contract of carriage you are respsonsible for paying for return flight if denied entry so these forms should not be necessary. In my case I have been using airline staff discount standby tickets almost exclusively over the years.

Highest standard of behaviour is expected. Definitely one would get banned or sacked if you argue with them.

correct as i have had this happen once in LAX....just questioned about a visa..never denied to board..i offered to sign the waiver releasing them of duty..but they could clearly see from my 3rd PP ive been able to do my usual one way-no visa way for years with no blowback in BKK...as im in BKK with 4000 usd in pocket...why would a BKK IO say no to that........they dont......money #1 in LOS....