Friend Visa overstay Gone but not banned

[BritTim]

Wonder if he got a receipt for his 20g being polite he might ot have asked for one..

I find the tea expensive in airports

I am pretty sure your cynicism will prove to be misplaced on this occasion. While there is plenty of corruption in Thailand's immigration department, open corruption at the major airports does not seem to exist. I actually think the immigration officials at Suwanabhumi compare favorably with many of the other airports in the region. Especially the senior officials there, I have found pleasant and efficient. Some immigration offices are a different matter, of course.

[PremiumLane]

Oh. By the way. According to the original article here,

http://www.thephuketnews.com/immigration-chief-visits-phuket-says-overstay-rules-are-to-keep-the-bad-guys-out-56773.php

If we are to take those numbers for granted,

323,575 x 20,000 = 6,471,500,000 baht (almost 6.5 billion baht) between Oct 2015 and March 2016.

Good business.

Oh I do like how he is basically saying that overstayers are destabilizing the country

And to the 'obey the law' 'string em' up' crowd, I really do hope you have never been with any ladies of ill dispute, isn't that breaking the law?

[elviajero]

I must admit to being surprised by this report. It seems the IOs are being allowed to use their judgment on who to ban and who not. I thought the rules would be inflexible. I actually wonder now if the rules are only normally intended to target specific nationalities.

Or maybe "surrendering" and getting a ban means being processed through court. So the airport could be an exception if the IOs do not want to bother with the court hassle and the passenger is ready to go.

I think it's clear. No court needed. Surrender at the border and you don't need to go through the deportation process which would require a court/judge. Immigration have the authority to impose a ban. The question that remains is how much, if any, discretion immigration officers have with the bans for overstayers of 90+ days.

Edited March 26, 2016 by elviajero

[lkv]

Immigration have the authority to impose a ban.

Are you 100% sure about that? Because i have a feeling it has to be attached to a court case.

Anyways, I will try to research further.

Edited March 26, 2016 by lkv

[elviajero]

Immigration have the authority to impose a ban.

Are you 100% sure about that? Because i have a feeling it has to be attached to a court case.

Anyways, I will try to research further.

Yep. The immigration act (section 16) gives them the power ban the group specified in the order from the MOI.

[lkv]

Yep. The immigration act (section 16) gives them the power ban the group specified in the order from the MOI.

I'm not sure which part of section 16 you feel gives the right to Immigration officers to apply a ban. The only bans I am personally aware of (I know the people) are indefinite (lifetime if you wish) bans under section 12.7 as a result of a court judgement.

[BritTim]

Yep. The immigration act (section 16) gives them the power ban the group specified in the order from the MOI.

I'm not sure which part of section 16 you feel gives the right to Immigration officers to apply a ban. The only bans I am personally aware of (I know the people) are indefinite (lifetime if you wish) bans under section 12.7 as a result of a court judgement.

English translation, but appears consistent with the Thai original:

Section 16 : In the instance where for reason of national welfare or safeguarding the public peace , culture , morality , or welfare , or when the Minister considers it improper to allow any alien or any group of alien to enter into the Kingdom , the Minister shall have power to exclude said alien or group aliens from entering into the Kingdom.

Once the Minister decides a specific group should be excluded, it is up to the immigration officials to implement the order. That is why I am surprised the IOs have any leeway in enforcement.

[luke000]

On one of the immigration info releases , it did state that "People who overstay for more than 90 days from March 20th......."

It wasnt clear whether they meant over stay for 90 days from March 20 th , or whether that was just the beginning date .

I could be that the first day of the over stay was March 20 th , and its 90 days from that date

[lkv]

On one of the immigration info releases , it did state that "People who overstay for more than 90 days from March 20th......."

It wasnt clear whether they meant over stay for 90 days from March 20 th , or whether that was just the beginning date .

I could be that the first day of the over stay was March 20 th , and its 90 days from that date

You're right.

I really don't know how I have not noticed this.

"4. If you have already overstayed beyond your permitted date before the orders enforced date (20 March 2016), you may surrender to the authorities at the Immigration Checkpoint (land border, seaport, and airport). You must pay a fine of 500/day, but not exceeding 20,000 baht before you are allowed to leave the Kingdom of Thailand."

http://overstay.immigration.go.th/advice.html

Edited March 26, 2016 by lkv

[TacoHell]

it this what a Banned stamp in passport would look like ? this is 2010. cant find any new ones 2016 be nice to see some, to see what they would look like

This appears to be a phony photoshopped photo. Too little info and nothing in Thai. Very lame troll attempt.

good job

https://www.google.co.th/search?q=overstay+stamp+on+passport&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSigEahwELEKjU2AQaAAwLELCMpwgaYgpgCAMSKNUH1gfYB9QH5AjSB7oD9gK1A9MHgT3CNII9-TnHNIE4uzTmM4M9_1igaMC46K1JA_1bTkJJKTUUc4WjEaqf-lYYUV51uM4wLEJ-RiZSAw1KMA7m9wvzEMePdKaSADDAsQjq7-CBoKCggIARIEWezVYww&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQv8LorN7LAhWRGI4KHc4KBosQ2A4IGSgB&biw=1440&bih=715

Terrible photshop

Edited March 26, 2016 by TacoHell

[elviajero]

Yep. The immigration act (section 16) gives them the power ban the group specified in the order from the MOI.

I'm not sure which part of section 16 you feel gives the right to Immigration officers to apply a ban. The only bans I am personally aware of (I know the people) are indefinite (lifetime if you wish) bans under section 12.7 as a result of a court judgement.

Immigration Act

Section 16 : In the instance where for reason of national welfare or safeguarding the public peace , culture , morality , or welfare , or when the Minister considers it improper to allow any alien or any group of alien to enter into the Kingdom , the Minister shall have power to exclude said alien or group aliens from entering into the Kingdom.

Section 5 : The Minister of Interior shall be in charge and have control for the executive of this Act and shall have power to appoint competent officials , and Issue Minister Regulations ; to fix fees and other expense not exceeding rates annexed to this Act and to fix other activities for the execution of this Act. Such Ministerial Regulations shall become effective after having been published in the government Gazette

Order of Minister of Interior No. 1/2558 (Published in the Gazette per section 5)

"It appears that a number of aliens who have Temporary Permission to Stay in the Kingdom of Thailand have overstayed beyond their permitted date, putting the safety of people and the national’s security at risk.

In order to maintain the peace of the nation, the Prime Minister and Minister of Interior exercise the power under section 16 of the Immigration Act, B.E. 2522 and refuse classes of aliens ineligible for admission to the Kingdom of Thailand under certain condition and specific period of time shown in the details below:"

In short. Section 16 gives the Minister of Interior the power to ban a specified group from entry. Section 5 gives the Minister the power to appoint competent officials (Immigration Officers) to enforce the Act and regulations that have been published in the Gazette. The order published in the gazette specifies aliens that have overstayed as the group that the MOI want banned/excluded from entry under section 16, and the conditions that must apply for the alien to get banned. It makes a clear distinction between surrendering and being arrested/prosecuted.

Edited March 26, 2016 by elviajero

[2fishin2]

Birds of a feather flock together....

[lkv]

@elviajero.

Yup ok fair enough. So that's the logic they will follow.

How about point 4 in my previous post? My interpretation of it is that someone

who found himself in an overstay situation before March 20th is not affected by this order.

Meaning anyone that had his visa expire before March 20th can still clear their overstay anytime without a ban.

Edited March 26, 2016 by lkv

[TacoHell]

Nobody cares about "point 4"

Get out.

You had enough warning.

[lkv]

One guy that was contemplating about "getting out" in yesterday's thread that got deleted would be very interested in point 4.

But thanks for your contribution nevertheless.

[metisdead]

An inflammatory post has been removed as well as a reply.

[elviajero]

@elviajero.

Yup ok fair enough. So that's the logic they will follow.

How about point 4 in my previous post? My interpretation of it is that someone

who found himself in an overstay situation before March 20th is not affected by this order.

Meaning anyone that had his visa expire before March 20th can still clear their overstay anytime without a ban.

I can see how you could interpret it that way, but IMO it is just clarifying that even those with overstays in excess of 90 days can surrender before the 20th and not get banned.

[BritTim]

On one of the immigration info releases , it did state that "People who overstay for more than 90 days from March 20th......."

It wasnt clear whether they meant over stay for 90 days from March 20 th , or whether that was just the beginning date .

I could be that the first day of the over stay was March 20 th , and its 90 days from that date

You're right.

I really don't know how I have not noticed this.

"4. If you have already overstayed beyond your permitted date before the orders enforced date (20 March 2016), you may surrender to the authorities at the Immigration Checkpoint (land border, seaport, and airport). You must pay a fine of 500/day, but not exceeding 20,000 baht before you are allowed to leave the Kingdom of Thailand."

http://overstay.immigration.go.th/advice.html

Personally, I cannot see how anyone could logically believe the slightly ambiguous point 4 could override the completely unambiguous points 2 and 3.

2. If you have already overstayed beyond the permitted date, you must leave the country before the order’s enforced date (20 March 2016).

3. If you have already overstayed beyond the permitted date and do not leave the country before the order’s enforced date (20 March 2016), you will be banned from re-entering the Kingdom of Thailand as shown in the details below:

<snip>

Edited March 26, 2016 by BritTim

[SoFarAndNear]

Seriously... OP is a very strange figure. Registered a few weeks ago and just write about topics like, overstaying, getting arrested, being under influence of illegal substances.....

[elviajero]

Yep. The immigration act (section 16) gives them the power ban the group specified in the order from the MOI.

I'm not sure which part of section 16 you feel gives the right to Immigration officers to apply a ban. The only bans I am personally aware of (I know the people) are indefinite (lifetime if you wish) bans under section 12.7 as a result of a court judgement.

English translation, but appears consistent with the Thai original:

Section 16 : In the instance where for reason of national welfare or safeguarding the public peace , culture , morality , or welfare , or when the Minister considers it improper to allow any alien or any group of alien to enter into the Kingdom , the Minister shall have power to exclude said alien or group aliens from entering into the Kingdom.

Once the Minister decides a specific group should be excluded, it is up to the immigration officials to implement the order. That is why I am surprised the IOs have any leeway in enforcement.

I agree. It's an order that Immigration seem obliged under law to carry out and I don't see any leeway written in to the order.

[eddybangkok]

Eljavaro yest its all true unfortunetlt.I dont think its lucky it cost me i was reckless.You are a good poster mate umlike some but these stories are all real.I have tried to post photo evidence but its against tv rules.

By the way i have no problems with the new rules.I just think some posters arebvery vindictive towards overstayers.At least you debate in a sensible no confrontational way

Sorry if spelling is off am in go go bar with a nice sort

[eddybangkok]

So far an so near i registed in december..that is not weeks ago buddy get ur facts straight..

[ldiablo]

One guy that was contemplating about "getting out" in yesterday's thread that got deleted would be very interested in point 4.

But thanks for your contribution nevertheless.

Why did that post get deleted by the way?

[ldiablo]

Eljavaro yest its all true unfortunetlt.I dont think its lucky it cost me i was reckless.You are a good poster mate umlike some but these stories are all real.I have tried to post photo evidence but its against tv rules.

By the way i have no problems with the new rules.I just think some posters arebvery vindictive towards overstayers.At least you debate in a sensible no confrontational way

Sorry if spelling is off am in go go bar with a nice sort

In another topic you started 4 days ago you stated you were on a 40 day overstay and the police let you go fully aware you were on overstay and that you were heading to Bangkok to fly to Singapore and spend a week chilling, and now you're saying you're sitting in a go go bar which I'm pretty sure means you are still in Thailand. So either you're still in Thailand on overstay or completely full of s..t!!!

Which is it?

Am I the only one that is seeing a pattern here.

[seancbk]

Oh. By the way. According to the original article here,

http://www.thephuketnews.com/immigration-chief-visits-phuket-says-overstay-rules-are-to-keep-the-bad-guys-out-56773.php

If we are to take those numbers for granted,

323,575 x 20,000 = 6,471,500,000 baht (almost 6.5 billion baht) between Oct 2015 and March 2016.

Good business.

Assuming all overstayers were at the 20,000 limit.

I've overstayed a few times because the price of flights was a bit higher on the days I should have flown. I'd rather pay 500 THB to immigration than 1000 THB to AirAsia.

[eddybangkok]

Eljavaro yest its all true unfortunetlt.I dont think its lucky it cost me i was reckless.You are a good poster mate umlike some but these stories are all real.I have tried to post photo evidence but its against tv rules.

By the way i have no problems with the new rules.I just think some posters arebvery vindictive towards overstayers.At least you debate in a sensible no confrontational way

Sorry if spelling is off am in go go bar with a nice sort

In another topic you started 4 days ago you stated you were on a 40 day overstay and the police let you go fully aware you were on overstay and that you were heading to Bangkok to fly to Singapore and spend a week chilling, and now you're saying you're sitting in a go go bar which I'm pretty sure means you are still in Thailand. So either you're still in Thailand on overstay or completely full of s..t!!!

Which is it?

Am I the only one that is seeing a pattern here.

I came back to thailand aftera few days i am.allowed to change plans am i i can show you flight tickets everything..i am sorry that this is upsetting you..relax

[ldiablo]

Eljavaro yest its all true unfortunetlt.I dont think its lucky it cost me i was reckless.You are a good poster mate umlike some but these stories are all real.I have tried to post photo evidence but its against tv rules.

By the way i have no problems with the new rules.I just think some posters arebvery vindictive towards overstayers.At least you debate in a sensible no confrontational way

Sorry if spelling is off am in go go bar with a nice sort

In another topic you started 4 days ago you stated you were on a 40 day overstay and the police let you go fully aware you were on overstay and that you were heading to Bangkok to fly to Singapore and spend a week chilling, and now you're saying you're sitting in a go go bar which I'm pretty sure means you are still in Thailand. So either you're still in Thailand on overstay or completely full of s..t!!!

Which is it?

Am I the only one that is seeing a pattern here.

I came back to thailand aftera few days i am.allowed to change plans am i i can show you flight tickets everything..i am sorry that this is upsetting you..relax

Would love to see it, but most Importantly a current visa.

You can PM me if you so choose.

[2fishin2]

Oh. By the way. According to the original article here,

http://www.thephuketnews.com/immigration-chief-visits-phuket-says-overstay-rules-are-to-keep-the-bad-guys-out-56773.php

If we are to take those numbers for granted,

323,575 x 20,000 = 6,471,500,000 baht (almost 6.5 billion baht) between Oct 2015 and March 2016.

Good business.

Assuming all overstayers were at the 20,000 limit.

I've overstayed a few times because the price of flights was a bit higher on the days I should have flown. I'd rather pay 500 THB to immigration than 1000 THB to AirAsia.

Hahahahahahahaahahaahahahaha

[Eclipse]

Eljavaro yest its all true unfortunetlt.I dont think its lucky it cost me i was reckless.You are a good poster mate umlike some but these stories are all real.I have tried to post photo evidence but its against tv rules.

By the way i have no problems with the new rules.I just think some posters arebvery vindictive towards overstayers.At least you debate in a sensible no confrontational way

Sorry if spelling is off am in go go bar with a nice sort

In another topic you started 4 days ago you stated you were on a 40 day overstay and the police let you go fully aware you were on overstay and that you were heading to Bangkok to fly to Singapore and spend a week chilling, and now you're saying you're sitting in a go go bar which I'm pretty sure means you are still in Thailand. So either you're still in Thailand on overstay or completely full of s..t!!!

Which is it?

Am I the only one that is seeing a pattern here.

No you are not the only one. It is too obvious.

[uksomchai]

Lets hope they do start to ban people soon, there is no excuse for it, it's not cool, clever or right to break the law.

Why are people so filled with hate over something that has no impact at all on their own visa status ?

Why do you hoe they start banning people ? There are various reasons for people overstaying and these have nothing to do with you.

I just don't get it