Sceptical Immigration officer despite tourist visa and only brief history

[ronmnk]

Sceptical Immigration officer despite tourist visa and only brief history

Been mostly in Thailand for the past 12 months and plan to continue to do so for a bit longer. Im here on a tourist visa, have funds that pay for my life here, so I dont work here. Ive never had a problem with getting the visas, extending it or at immigration at the airport.

But last week flying into Don Mueang with a tourist visa, Ive been asked by the immigration officer what Im doing in Thailand, I said Im a tourist. She asked why Im coming to Thailand so often and spend so much time her. Ive explained to her, that Ive worked like crazy the past 10 years, have money from that and am currently taking some time off and dont work. She seemed very sceptical, but in the end let me in.

Im now worried that I might have trouble in the future. Im currently on the last entry of a triple entry tourist visa. When that runs out, I will fly back to Germany for two weeks, get a new passport (the current one is expiring soon) and apply for a new triple entry visa there.. then fly back to Thailand.

Do you guys think there is anything I have to worry about or did I just have bad luck with her? I can show proof of my funds.. Are bank printouts enough? Ive also read that 20k baht in cash are helpful? Anything else I can show to avoid trouble? I can show that I still rent an apartment in Germany, have insurances there, that Im still registered there. But all of that would be in German, so not sure if it would be useful at the immigration at the Bangkok airport.

My history:

1 visa exempt in december 2013 (only been here for 2 weeks)

then, since August 2014:

1 visa exempt (only been here for 1 week)

1 visa exempt with extension

1 tourist visa with extension

1 triple entry tourist visa, extended only one of the entries. Currently on the last one.

Except for the first two, Ive always left 4 or 5 days before the visa ran out. Between them always stayed 1-3 weeks in another country.

[ubonjoe]

Just bad luck of getting an officer that was probably just curious. It is certainly not something to worry about.

[ronmnk]

Thanks for the fast reply. So you think just to be safe, bank printouts and 20k baht in cash are enough?

[ubonjoe]

Having the cash and proof you have money coming in from abroad to prove you are not working here would be good to have with you. That would cover the two denial of entry clauses of section 12 of the immigration act that are used the most.

[ronmnk]

Thank you

[laislica]

If I were you - I would keep my hotel receipts and show them. As a genuine tourist would like to travel to different places and explore the area for a while.

If however, you rent somewhere for long periods of time, I could understand why immigration could be suspicious.

[ubonjoe]

If I were you - I would keep my hotel receipts and show them. As a genuine tourist would like to travel to different places and explore the area for a while.

If however, you rent somewhere for long periods of time, I could understand why immigration could be suspicious.

Many tourists rent s place to stay on a long term basis.

Immigration would not be interested in seeing hotel receipts.

[laislica]

If I were you - I would keep my hotel receipts and show them. As a genuine tourist would like to travel to different places and explore the area for a while.

If however, you rent somewhere for long periods of time, I could understand why immigration could be suspicious.

Many tourists rent s place to stay on a long term basis.

Immigration would not be interested in seeing hotel receipts.

Joe, my suggestion would be in addition to showing funds, not instead.

If I were in the OP's position and I was travelling and staying in hotels I am quite sure that immigration would find it easier to know that I was not working.

They could look on their computer and see where I stayed from the reports made by the hotel or house owner but why should they?

Tourism is usually visiting and touring somewhere for fairly short periods and if someone wants to stay for extended periods of time then - as indeed the OP is trying to do - they should make it as easy as possible for the immigration officer to understand their unique situation.

I quite understand that there are many young people who have sufficient funds to allow them to have extended holidays. The only real options for a young single person seems to be a tourist visa(s) or pay a million Baht for the special five year visa.

[Time Traveller]

Having the cash and proof you have money coming in from abroad to prove you are not working here would be good to have with you. That would cover the two denial of entry clauses of section 12 of the immigration act that are used the most.

What is section 12 exactly?

Because what you ask seems quite ridiculous. To put it another what you are saying is you need to prove you are not breaking the law. And that is impossible without being followed around 24hours by the police.

[ubonjoe]

Having the cash and proof you have money coming in from abroad to prove you are not working here would be good to have with you. That would cover the two denial of entry clauses of section 12 of the immigration act that are used the most.

What is section 12 exactly?

Because what you ask seems quite ridiculous. To put it another what you are saying is you need to prove you are not breaking the law. And that is impossible without being followed around 24hours by the police.

What is ridiculous I asked for nothing..

"Section 12 : Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom"

These are the 2 clauses I mentioned.

"2. Having no appropriate means of living following entrance into the Kingdom.

3. Having entered into the Kingdom to take occupation as a laborer or to take employment by using physical without skills training or to work in violation of the Ministerial Regulations."

Immigration Act 2522 en.pdf

[ronmnk]

Tourism is usually visiting and touring somewhere for fairly short periods and if someone wants to stay for extended periods of time then - as indeed the OP is trying to do - they should make it as easy as possible for the immigration officer to understand their unique situation.

Yeah, for a short stay with a visa exempt that would make sense. But they offer a triple entry tourist visa that expires after 6 months and allows to stay 2 months for every entry. So that seems like longer stay is official accepted.. and not everybody can afford to stay for such a long time at hotels. Some people just do a different sort of tourism where they will rent an apartment and stay at the same place for a bit longer.

[laislica]

Tourism is usually visiting and touring somewhere for fairly short periods and if someone wants to stay for extended periods of time then - as indeed the OP is trying to do - they should make it as easy as possible for the immigration officer to understand their unique situation.

Yeah, for a short stay with a visa exempt that would make sense. But they offer a triple entry tourist visa that expires after 6 months and allows to stay 2 months for every entry. So that seems like longer stay is official accepted.. and not everybody can afford to stay for such a long time at hotels. Some people just do a different sort of tourism where they will rent an apartment and stay at the same place for a bit longer.

Indeed, but if there are some hotel bills, why not?

[Danielsiam]

What the amount to showing to the officier with a 30 days visa exempt ? 10 k or 20 k

[ubonjoe]

Immigration will want to see 20k baht.

[Tomtomtom69]

Many people stay with friends or family. They are as much tourists as those moving around staying in hotels. To try and make the assumption that only those staying in hotels are tourists and thus not subject to scrutiny is beyond absurd and just plain stupid. There are many types of tourists and I have yet to meet anyone who has ever spent weeks or months touring around Thailand and staying only in hotels. That's too expensive and very few people can afford that. Not mention it would be kind of weird. Lobg term tourists usually stay in either a rented house or apartment or with friends/family. Perfectly normal and if I were an immigration official I'd be more suspicious of a traveller claiming to stay in hotels for 2 months than someone who has an apartment for that period. Seriously, where do people come up with such ridiculous ideas?

[jabis]

I'd stick with the same paradigm as working with any bureaucratic system - never provide any other documents you are not asked to provide. This applies even more when there is a language barrier - providing receipts or crapload of other non-essential paperwork will just confuse "the bureaucrat", and could result in even larger scrutiny of your stay. I'd go with providing proof of adequate means of living (20k฿) - and should one ask - proof of regular income outside the Kingdom (bank receipts).

[arunsakda]

Same with every country. Thailand is just catching up. I know a Thai woman whos Japanese husband wanted to take her to Hawaii for vacation. She has a University degree, good job in Japan for a medical device manufacturer, properties, kids in school, everything. (She is decent looking and much younger than him.) Anyway, U.S. Embassy Tokyo Turned her down 2 years in a row then approved a tourist visa third time.

When they arrived in Honolulu they only let her in after taking her to a private room (without her husband) and telling her not to "run away". She felt the whole time insulted and treated like a common Trollop. Not interested in returning.

[Tomtomtom69]

I'd stick with the same paradigm as working with any bureaucratic system - never provide any other documents you are not asked to provide. This applies even more when there is a language barrier - providing receipts or crapload of other non-essential paperwork will just confuse "the bureaucrat", and could result in even larger scrutiny of your stay. I'd go with providing proof of adequate means of living (20k฿) - and should one ask - proof of regular income outside the Kingdom (bank receipts).

Exactly. Never provide more than you need to. In general, Thai immigration officials continue to remain flexible and largely don't even talk to people coming in at all. The fact that they sometimes do, just means they are doing their job nothing more. However, interrogations in private rooms are not something that is likely to happen here anytime soon.

Last year I returned from Cambodia and I agreed to bring a Thai/Cambodian dual national, who was the wife of my driver from Phnom Penh to Koh Kong to a hospital 15km away in Khlong Yai to visit her mother as it was on my way back to Bangkok anyway. 1km down the road, there's a military checkpoint. She took our her Thai ID card - I told her, don't do that. There is no need to show something when you're not asked for it. Indeed, the military guys didn't ask for anything and in general are more interested in the goods you're bringing along, than your identity, which only 5 mins earlier was already established by Thai immigration anyway.

However, some people seem to be paranoid about the authorities and try to show them all sorts of unnecessary documents, which, as you have rightfully eluded to, often results in greater than necessary scrutiny.