tourist visa refusal, Phnom Penh

[tropo]

There are thousands of people entering Thailand daily. You can't make assumptions based on a few reports on here. You said "they never do that".

I'll explain again to you. One doesn't need to see all the thousands. The samples are numerous enough, it is not "few reports".

Allow me to explain it again too. The number of reports on this forum are minuscule compared to the people who enter Thailand and you can only get an idea of what's going on, but never with certainty. There is always a degree of uncertainty where Thai immigration are concerned. Bottom line, don't assume anything.

For example, note the post above where the IO reduced a standard 30 day allowance to 29 days for a Filipino. I'll bet that surprised you.

Edited July 19, 2015 by tropo

[paz]

Allow me to explain it again too. The number of reports on this forum are minuscule compared to the people who enter Thailand and you can only get an idea of what's going on, but never with certainty. There is always a degree of uncertainty where Thai immigration are concerned. Bottom line, don't assume anything.

For example, note the post above where the IO reduced a standard 30 day allowance to 29 days for a Filipino. I'll bet that surprised you.

No worries, you expressed your opinion, and I've expressed mine: this forums is an excellent place to know about all issue related to Thai immigration, because the large number of reports and the accumulated experience of moderators and admins. There is almost no unknown area when it come to Thai Immigration and consulate policies, sorry if you don't agree with that.

I'm not surprised about the statistical "black sheep". And, anyone receiving a wrong stay at arrival can have it corrected at immigration. Do you want to challenge that also?

[BritTim]

A friendly immigration officer showed me the computer screen when I was denied entry in Sungai Kolok during a Visa run... to my understanding, the computer said "No" because I had 6 Visa exemptions combined with extensions within a 6 month period... T Visa at the consulate in Kota Bharu was subsequently not a problem, and I entered the following day.

It's worth noting that it's only for entry by land that the immigration is narrowing the gaps in their enforcement of the rules, you apparently still get Visa Exemptions when you enter via Air, regardless of how many Visa Exemptions. and Extensions you have...

T Visa at the consulate in Kota Bharu was subsequently not a problem, and I entered the following day.

No doubt this is off topic for this thread, but I am very interested that you received a tourist visa easily in Kota Bharu. Would you mind telling us when this happened, and your recent record of tourist visas before that. I have considered going to Kota Bharu in the past, combining it with a trip to the islands on that side of Malaysia, but trip reports have suggested Kota Bharu can be difficult.

[elviajero]

But maybe IO's are empowered to limit the length of stay?

I think that legally they are not, but at the same time even if they do there is no consequence. Call it a purposeful mistake. Much worse can happen.

I don't see anything in Thai immigration law that prevents an IO from limiting a length of stay. Also, visas never specify the number of days stay allowed. The immigration act and the immigration bureau website use the term "not exceeding" in relation to period of stay.

IB website

".... the period of stay is granted by an immigration officer upon arrival at the port of entry and in accordance with the type of visa. For example, the period of stay for a transit visa is not exceeding 30 days, for a tourist visa is not exceeding 60 days and for a non-immigrant visa is not exceeding 90 days from the arrival date. The period of stay granted by the immigration officer is displayed on the arrival stamp."

"Not exceeding" and "granted by the immigration officer" make the difference to me. IMO an IO can grant any period of stay as long as it doesn't exceed the maximum permitted under the immigration act for the given activity/reason for the temporary stay. Such powers could feasibly be granted by Ministerial Regulations.

[paz]

IB website

".... the period of stay is granted by an immigration officer upon arrival at the port of entry and in accordance with the type of visa. For example, the period of stay for a transit visa is not exceeding 30 days, for a tourist visa is not exceeding 60 days and for a non-immigrant visa is not exceeding 90 days from the arrival date. The period of stay granted by the immigration officer is displayed on the arrival stamp."

"Not exceeding" and "granted by the immigration officer" make the difference to me. IMO an IO can grant any period of stay as long as it doesn't exceed the maximum permitted under the immigration act for the given activity/reason for the temporary stay. Such powers could feasibly be granted by Ministerial Regulations.

The website also doesn't mention a lot of other things that would be wrong.

So, I don't think that are allowed to. The officer working the desk doesn't have the necessary knowledge or authority to grant a length of stay different from what the regulations prescribes. Neither his/her superiors are. And in fact they don''t.

Length of stay is dictated by MFA and immigration regulations, not individual officers.

[elviajero]

IB website

".... the period of stay is granted by an immigration officer upon arrival at the port of entry and in accordance with the type of visa. For example, the period of stay for a transit visa is not exceeding 30 days, for a tourist visa is not exceeding 60 days and for a non-immigrant visa is not exceeding 90 days from the arrival date. The period of stay granted by the immigration officer is displayed on the arrival stamp."

"Not exceeding" and "granted by the immigration officer" make the difference to me. IMO an IO can grant any period of stay as long as it doesn't exceed the maximum permitted under the immigration act for the given activity/reason for the temporary stay. Such powers could feasibly be granted by Ministerial Regulations.

The website also doesn't mention a lot of other things that would be wrong.

So, I don't think that are allowed to. The officer working the desk doesn't have the necessary knowledge or authority to grant a length of stay different from what the regulations prescribes. Neither his/her superiors are. And in fact they don''t.

Length of stay is dictated by MFA and immigration regulations, not individual officers.

"The officer working the desk doesn't have the necessary knowledge or authority to grant a length of stay different from what the regulations prescribes."

The regulations do not prescribe a set period of stay. The use of "not exceeding" would be deliberate if the intention was for a maximum but no minimum. So based on prescribed regulation as long as the IO grants a length of stay not exceeding the regulated limit IMO they have authority and are conforming to the regulations and law.

It makes perfect sense to give IO's such power as long as they can back up the decision. For example; Suspicion of working or someone arriving on visa exemption with an outbound flight after 15 days.

[mamgo]

Once they reduced my entry visa to 15 days even gave for my 5 years old daughter 30 days. We entered together in Suvarnabhumi.

Ther reason was I forgot about return ticket.

[paz]

"The officer working the desk doesn't have the necessary knowledge or authority to grant a length of stay different from what the regulations prescribes."

The regulations do not prescribe a set period of stay. The use of "not exceeding" would be deliberate if the intention was for a maximum but no minimum. So based on prescribed regulation as long as the IO grants a length of stay not exceeding the regulated limit IMO they have authority and are conforming to the regulations and law.

It makes perfect sense to give IO's such power as long as they can back up the decision. For example; Suspicion of working or someone arriving on visa exemption with an outbound flight after 15 days.

Yes, the regulations prescribes a fixes amount of time for each time of entry. And that is what the officers do.

So far we have reports of a visa exempt entry for a Philippino shortened to 29 days, and one baby to 15 in BKK (strange, as ithere a returned ticket is not asked and length was not reduce for parents), but we have countless reports of people having the wrong length corrected with a trip to immigration office.

The officer doesn't have all the power some people imagine. Setting allowed time at discretion included.

[elviajero]

"The officer working the desk doesn't have the necessary knowledge or authority to grant a length of stay different from what the regulations prescribes."

The regulations do not prescribe a set period of stay. The use of "not exceeding" would be deliberate if the intention was for a maximum but no minimum. So based on prescribed regulation as long as the IO grants a length of stay not exceeding the regulated limit IMO they have authority and are conforming to the regulations and law.

It makes perfect sense to give IO's such power as long as they can back up the decision. For example; Suspicion of working or someone arriving on visa exemption with an outbound flight after 15 days.

Yes, the regulations prescribes a fixes amount of time for each time of entry. And that is what the officers do.

So far we have reports of a visa exempt entry for a Philippino shortened to 29 days, and one baby to 15 in BKK (strange, as ithere a returned ticket is not asked and length was not reduce for parents), but we have countless reports of people having the wrong length corrected with a trip to immigration office.

The officer doesn't have all the power some people imagine. Setting allowed time at discretion included.

the period of stay for a transit visa is not exceeding 30 days

the period of stay for a transit visa is 30 days

Do you not see the difference in meaning of these two statements!

Clearly IO's are issuing stays less than the maximum allowed for the visa in question. The question, which neither you nor I can answer, is whether they have authority to do so. I agree people do have stays stamped in error. No argument there, but it's different than a conversation with an IO that results in a reduced stay.

I agree IO's do not have the power some imagine and regularly abuse their positions.

Not much point in discussing this further. I'm not claiming to be right, but I believe the evidence points to IO's having the authority to grant a period of stay up to the maximum allowed under the immigration act.

[mamgo]

And many also do report here, so it is known what actually are Immigration policies. If one receives less days than per regulations, it's by mistake.

I agree it could be mistake. That time I did not have idea check it in immigration.

One time in Laos border they canceled my Non-O visa on entry used tourist entry stamp by mistake. I knew it in Bangkok. Could edit in Bangkok immigration. Another mistakes or forgetting also happened with visas.

[tropo]

Allow me to explain it again too. The number of reports on this forum are minuscule compared to the people who enter Thailand and you can only get an idea of what's going on, but never with certainty. There is always a degree of uncertainty where Thai immigration are concerned. Bottom line, don't assume anything.

For example, note the post above where the IO reduced a standard 30 day allowance to 29 days for a Filipino. I'll bet that surprised you.

No worries, you expressed your opinion, and I've expressed mine: this forums is an excellent place to know about all issue related to Thai immigration, because the large number of reports and the accumulated experience of moderators and admins. There is almost no unknown area when it come to Thai Immigration and consulate policies, sorry if you don't agree with that.

I'm not surprised about the statistical "black sheep". And, anyone receiving a wrong stay at arrival can have it corrected at immigration. Do you want to challenge that also?

You can never assume correct information based only on what you read on here as individual circumstances differ. One of the main reasons is that Thailand Immigration treat different foreigners differently. Another is that Immigration policy is constantly changing, which will affect people who are unaware of the changes.

I have a personal example to illustrate this point. I made a wasted trip to Laos for a double entry tourist visa based on assumptions gained from this forum back in 2010. My Filipino girlfriend (at the time) was refused a tourist visa while I got one although we had identical stamps and tourist visas in our passports... and had lived together for 6 years. This was after having already been a member on here for 4 years. I assumed and it lead to a lot of wasted time and money.

You have no idea how people from at least 200 countries other than your own and the few others are handled at the airport. One major reason is that this is primarily an English speaking forum not used by most non-English speaking foreigners as a source of information.

Don't make travel plans based only on what you read on here.

Yes, I challenge your last statement. It is yet another one of your assumptions.

I doubt that even the main forum moderators who constantly post here offer a 100% guarantee for advice given on here.

[paz]

You can never assume correct information based only on what you read on here as individual circumstances differ. One of the main reasons is that Thailand Immigration treat different foreigners differently. Another is that Immigration policy is constantly changing, which will affect people who are unaware of the changes.

...

I doubt that even the main forum moderators who constantly post here offer a 100% guarantee for advice given on here.

No problem, you're welcome to keep your opinions.

People reading here can judge by themselves: virtually zero reports about officers purposely shortening the allowed stay at entry. That has never changed.

Edited July 19, 2015 by paz

[tropo]

You can never assume correct information based only on what you read on here as individual circumstances differ. One of the main reasons is that Thailand Immigration treat different foreigners differently. Another is that Immigration policy is constantly changing, which will affect people who are unaware of the changes.

...

I doubt that even the main forum moderators who constantly post here offer a 100% guarantee for advice given on here.

No problem, you're welcome to keep your opinions.

People reading here can judge by themselves: virtually zero reports about officers purposely shortening the allowed stay at entry. That has never changed.

I'm sure it has happened many times to various Asian, African and South American nationals. Of course you have no way of knowing this.

[paz]

I'm sure it has happened many times to various Asian, African and South American nationals. Of course you have no way of knowing this.

Do you? Bring the reports here, they are always welcome.

[fey]

No stamp in the passport at the border. Reasons for refusal of visa by the embassy unclear too. They conducted a telephone interview and said she had too many visa exemptions and tourist visas.

Telephone interviews almost always point to a personal issue involved with the refusal, usually by a clerk that is unclear on regulations and/or does not want to follow protocol.