Thai National With British passport Overstay

[tomato]

This is my first post to this forum so I would just like to say hello,and thanks in advance to any replies.

My question is this: My Thai stepson has a British passport and he entered Thailand on it about 3 years ago.He now wants to come back to the UK.Obviously he has overstayed on his visa but he has a Thai passport,as well.Can he check in at the airport with his British passport and show immigration his Thai passport (do immigration check for an entry visa to the UK?)?

[VisasPlus]

My view is that, being a Thai ( dual ) citizen, he cannot be an overstayer in his own country. It doesn't matter what passport he arrived on.

He can show his Thai passport at check in. When they ask for his UK visa, he can also show the British passport. At Thai immigration he again shows his Thai passport. On arrival in UK he can use his British passport.

[7by7]

Had he entered on his Thai passport then the procedure would be very simple, as described by VisaPlus above.

But I think that if a dual national enters on their non-Thai, in this case British, passport then they are treated as non Thai for immigration purposes and must use that passport when they exit.

So technically he has overstayed and will be subject to overstay fines etc.

Where and when did he obtain his Thai passport?

If he last left Thailand on his Thai passport and then entered on his British one, there will be a record of his Thai passport leaving but no record of it entering again. Similarly if he obtained his Thai passport in the UK or elsewhere outside Thailand; there will be no record of it entering Thailand.

So if he now tried to leave Thailand with a passport that immigration's records show is outside Thailand, then he may be in bigger trouble than if he has overstayed on a British passport.

However, if this is his first Thai passport, obtained in Thailand during his current stay, then he can use it to leave Thailand and then his British passport to enter the UK. He could never use his British passport again to enter Thailand, as it will not be on record as ever leaving; but better to use his Thai one for that in future anyway.

How old is he? I understand that children under 14 are not subject to overstay fines etc.

That's my understanding. I may be completely wrong.

I'm moving this to Thai visas etc., where those with more knowledge on this subject than I reside.

I've also edited your topic title to make it a little clearer what you are asking.

[Maestro]

7by7 is right. On departure from Thailand he must show the immigration officer the passport which has the arrival stamp in it.

[Thanyaburi Mac]

And, he'd better have that baht 20,000 in hand, just in case, and I'd bet he'll end up paying it, too.

Would be interested in the outcome when he does leave.

Mac

[Mario2008]

As above, he must leave and enter Thailand on the passport of the nationality he entered Thailand on. The question is if it will be counted as overstay. I agree with Visaplus, but immigration might see it different. Question is than how far you are prepared to go with it, as it ultimately could mean missing the flight.

Under 15 years there is no fine for overstay.

[lopburi3]

If you arrive on a foreign passport you are subject to immigration rules for that foreign passport and will be subject to overstay in my opinion (and I base that on immigration regulations allowing one year extensions of stay for such people if they apply - if they were treated as Thai there would be no such provision required). He did not apply so if over age 14 will be subject to max fine but if under it will not be charged. He can not leave on Thai passport without a showing a visa (which in this case would be the overstay passport).

[tomato]

Thanks for all that.He got his Thai passport after entering on his British passport so his Thai passport was issued in Bangkok and is clean.I suppose the safest way is for him to get a UK entry visa on his Thai passport.

He is travelling in August and I will let the forum know the outcome.

[keeniau96]

About 6 months ago my wife's aunt (they are both Thais) got hit with overstay even after showing her Thai ID card (no Thai passport). The aunt entered on her Denmark passport (naturalized Denmark Citizen), had 30-day visa on arrival. Did not extend but eventually went to immigration after about 3 months here. Got hit with 20k baht overstay fine. Everybody was "so sorry but that's the law". This in Phuket at Saipan Hin main station. Then she got Thai passport afterward and now knows to show that on arrival and exit from the LOS.

[samran]

Thanks for all that.He got his Thai passport after entering on his British passport so his Thai passport was issued in Bangkok and is clean.I suppose the safest way is for him to get a UK entry visa on his Thai passport.

He is travelling in August and I will let the forum know the outcome.

you are getting issues confused.

He doesn't need a visa for starters. The only people who care about 'visas' are UK immigration (does he have the right to enter the UK when he lands?) and the airline check in people at BKK airport (we won't let him board unless he has the right to enter the UK).

In both cases, showing the British passport to both those parties will suffice. NO VISA NEEDED.

What we are dealing with here is leaving Thailand...ie Thai immigration. Now:

- Thai immigration don't care if you have a visa or not for your final destination. That is the airlines job. Without the right to enter the final destination, the airline will have never issued a boarding pass, ergo, you'd never even make it to the immigration desk.

- Now, if he tries to exit on his Thai passport, they'll pick up the fact that many years ago he first left Thailand on a Thai passport, and somehow is now back in the country without ever having re-entered it formally. They'll want to know how he got back in.

The solution is obviously, to show that he entered legally on the Brit passport, cop the overstay and then never, ever, re-enter Thailand on a non-Thai passport.

Lesson learned.

[Badbanker]

I think the problem is he did not realise the benefit of declaring his Thai nationality on entry into Thailand. If he had done this I believe he would have got a one year visa on arrival which could have been extended painlessly enough annually or he could have exited by air to anywhere and returned on his Thai passport at his leisure.

To all intents and purposes he is British as he claimed this nationality by entering on his British passport. Now he must pay the 20k on leaving.

This is a new one to me.

BB

[alyx]

Thanks for all that.He got his Thai passport after entering on his British passport so his Thai passport was issued in Bangkok and is clean.I suppose the safest way is for him to get a UK entry visa on his Thai passport.

He is travelling in August and I will let the forum know the outcome.

you are getting issues confused.

He doesn't need a visa for starters. The only people who care about 'visas' are UK immigration (does he have the right to enter the UK when he lands?) and the airline check in people at BKK airport (we won't let him board unless he has the right to enter the UK).

In both cases, showing the British passport to both those parties will suffice. NO VISA NEEDED.

What we are dealing with here is leaving Thailand...ie Thai immigration. Now:

- Thai immigration don't care if you have a visa or not for your final destination. That is the airlines job. Without the right to enter the final destination, the airline will have never issued a boarding pass, ergo, you'd never even make it to the immigration desk.

- Now, if he tries to exit on his Thai passport, they'll pick up the fact that many years ago he first left Thailand on a Thai passport, and somehow is now back in the country without ever having re-entered it formally. They'll want to know how he got back in.

The solution is obviously, to show that he entered legally on the Brit passport, cop the overstay and then never, ever, re-enter Thailand on a non-Thai passport.

Lesson learned.

Sorry , but yes One does need a visa when travelling with a Thai passport otherwise one would not be allowed to board the plane or / and leave the country by the Thai authorities: as you may not know airlines do also check the departure stamp on the passport, and on't think that a lack of stamps on a UK passport would go unoticed, especially if there is a Consular agent at the boarding as it happens from time to time

My suggestion would be to ask for the visa, leave with the Thai passport and enter back with the same Thai passport

Upon arrival and departure from UK present the UK passport

Edited May 23, 2011 by alyx

[samran]

Alyx

Suggest you re-read my post.

Airline will want to know if one has the right to enter the UK. The British passport achieves this. No visa needed.

Exiting thailand and on what passport is an entirely separate matter.

I'm a dual Thai national and most recently exited Thailand two days ago to a western country doing a passport swap. I know what I am talking about.

[Katmanpu]

A Thai friend of mine who entered through Suvarnabuhmi on a foreign passport has now discovered that his Thai nationality may not help him with respect to overstay status and a fine. He is now enquiring with a lawyer who claims to have immigration connections. His overstay is in the range of about 60 days now.

I have heard that the 20,000 baht MAXIMUM overstay fine for foreigners was recently eliminated, making them subject to 500 baht X days overstayed plus jail time for over 20 days. For overstayers of more than 5 years this could add up to a million baht.

Is there still a maximum of 20,000 baht for Thai citizens who have dual nationality here??

Any comments will be appreciated.

[Mario2008]

Immigration might be of the opinion that he is on overstay, ultimately a judge has to decide that. Chances are that a judge will find that a Thai person cannot be illegally in Thailand, at the least a Thai judge will give a smaller fine than immigration asks.

[lopburi3]

I have no idea where you heard the 20k was eliminated and that you went to jail for over 20 days. There have not been any such reports.

[Soutpeel]

If you arrive on a foreign passport you are subject to immigration rules for that foreign passport and will be subject to overstay in my opinion

I humbly disagree, being a dual national myself (not Thai) I have been through these sorts of discusssions on numerous occassions with immigration in one of the countries, where I travelled in and out on the "other" passport, and was told this is "illegal", I had to travel in on that countries passport.

On reviewing the applicable immigration laws found out there is no such rule or law.,

I think in most cases immigration rules do not address the issue of dual nationality to any degree and this rule is forced upon people because immigration just dont know what to do in the case of a dual national and forcing that countries passport it makes it easier for them within their "little world" but can predjudice the person concerned as in the case of the OP.

In my particular case immigration came up with a rather elegant solution which was to stamp me in as a permanent resident in my other countries passport which affords me all the rights of a citizen as regards stay in the country. This is now on the computer and never had a problem since.

I know the above is not Thai specific, but a dual national is exactly that....they are citizens of both counties and thus afforded the citizen rights of both countries, ie don't need a visa to reside in the particular country and they fact they are citizens means they cannot be charged for over staying in a country they are citzens of...irrespective of the passport they have travelled in on, just because a dual national has travelled in on the "other passport" doesn not make them any less of a citizen of that country or have any less rights to be there.

[samran]

If you arrive on a foreign passport you are subject to immigration rules for that foreign passport and will be subject to overstay in my opinion

I humbly disagree, being a dual national myself (not Thai) I have been through these sorts of discusssions on numerous occassions with immigration in one of the countries, where I travelled in and out on the "other" passport, and was told this is "illegal", I had to travel in on that countries passport.

On reviewing the applicable immigration laws found out there is no such rule or law.,

I think in most cases immigration rules do not address the issue of dual nationality to any degree and this rule is forced upon people because immigration just dont know what to do in the case of a dual national and forcing that countries passport it makes it easier for them within their "little world" but can predjudice the person concerned as in the case of the OP.

In my particular case immigration came up with a rather elegant solution which was to stamp me in as a permanent resident in my other countries passport which affords me all the rights of a citizen as regards stay in the country. This is now on the computer and never had a problem since.

I know the above is not Thai specific, but a dual national is exactly that....they are citizens of both counties and thus afforded the citizen rights of both countries, ie don't need a visa to reside in the particular country and they fact they are citizens means they cannot be charged for over staying in a country they are citzens of...irrespective of the passport they have travelled in on, just because a dual national has travelled in on the "other passport" doesn not make them any less of a citizen of that country or have any less rights to be there.

While your logic is 110%, I'd check out post 9 in this thread.

Same story reported back to us on TV over the years. Same result each time: you entered on a non-Thai passport, you overstay, you pay the fine. Uncomfortable smiles all around. Come back in on your Thai passport next time.

Fact is that there is even a visa avaiable for Thai's to enter on their non-Thai passport. Upon production of evidence of Thai nationality, your local immigration office will give you a 1 year extension of stay on the spot - in that foreign passport. So as far as Thailand is concerned, you are subject to immigration rules if you enter on a non-Thai PP, though there are legal ways to extend your stay which involve a visa.

Edited May 24, 2011 by samran

[Soutpeel]

Fact is that there is even a visa avaiable for Thai's to enter on their non-Thai passport. Upon production of evidence of Thai nationality, your local immigration office will give you a 1 year extension of stay on the spot - in that foreign passport. So as far as Thailand is concerned, you are subject to immigration rules if you enter on a non-Thai PP, though there are legal ways to extend your stay which involve a visa.

Suppose its all academic but personally, believe the above undermines the rights of that Thai citizen as regards the right of abode in their own country and if someone was inclined to test this in a court, believe they would win.

In my eyes the above implies that a Thai citizen is something less than a Thai citizen if forced to aquire an extension of stay to live in their own country because they have used a "different" travel document to enter the country.

A passport is a travel document used to travel between countries not to imply somebodies Citizenship/right of abode ie in Hong Kong under the British, A Hong Kong territoral passport give the right to travel as a British citizen but not right of abode in the UK.

For my interest are there actual promulgated laws or rules stated somewhere as regards this or is this something immigration has come up with, as in my case was told similar things and when researched there were in fact no such "laws/rules" and the rule was "made up" by immigration

[samran]

Fact is that there is even a visa avaiable for Thai's to enter on their non-Thai passport. Upon production of evidence of Thai nationality, your local immigration office will give you a 1 year extension of stay on the spot - in that foreign passport. So as far as Thailand is concerned, you are subject to immigration rules if you enter on a non-Thai PP, though there are legal ways to extend your stay which involve a visa.

Suppose its all academic but personally, believe the above undermines the rights of that Thai citizen as regards the right of abode in their own country and if someone was inclined to test this in a court, believe they would win.

In my eyes the above implies that a Thai citizen is something less than a Thai citizen if forced to aquire an extension of stay to live in their own country because they have used a "different" travel document to enter the country.

A passport is a travel document used to travel between countries not to imply somebodies Citizenship/right of abode ie in Hong Kong under the British, A Hong Kong territoral passport give the right to travel as a British citizen but not right of abode in the UK.

For my interest are there actual promulgated laws or rules stated somewhere as regards this or is this something immigration has come up with, as in my case was told similar things and when researched there were in fact no such "laws/rules" and the rule was "made up" by immigration

Again, your logic is flawless. Suspect if you sent a PM to 'Arkady' he might have something in his treasure trove of Thai nationality rules and regulations.

An interesting aside, I know the US requires US citizens to enter the US on their own passports, and I've had a friend who was born in the US (though grew up in OZ) who was refused a US visa due to her being a US citizen.

Australia has similar rules, though I do note there is a paper sticker type visa which can be put into the other passport of an Australian dual national if they are unable to procure an Australian passport for travel to Australia. Usually only happens on extreme emergencies.

Even the Brits as I recall have done away with a similar visa a few years back where basically a 'right of abode' or something similar was stamped into a foreign passports.

All of the above gets me wondering if there is a legal principal somewhere under international law which essentially requires entry into your home country on your home passport. Mind you, this is just me wondering out loud.

[Soutpeel]

Even the Brits as I recall have done away with a similar visa a few years back where basically a 'right of abode' or something similar was stamped into a foreign passports.

I guess the same logic was applied to my case now that I can get into one of my countries on the "other" passport hence the reason they chop me in as a Permanent Resident ie inferring the right of abode, "technically" the only thing I can't do in country while on this PR stamp is vote....which is no great loss anyway...

I guess this whole thing may come down to how a country view's dual nationals eg

Countries which legally recognise Dual Nationals ie the UK, my "other" country, Aussie etc, and countries which "tolerate" dual nationals, but there is no "legal" recognition or frame work in place per se

In case of "legal" recognition....no problem stamping the "other" passport with right of abode or similar and can travel in and out on that PP

While countries which tolerate dual nationality have no "legal" framework and therefore force travelling in on the countries P/ P or making citizens get visa's for their own country when they travel in on the "other" passport.