Entry denied Bangkok Airport

[JackThompson]

10 hours ago, lkv said:

And if they don't let you in at Pedang Besar and then they tell you to fly and you fly, and you're then being detained.

Look, I understand people here got a little scared. All I can say is: f#ck it. If it happens it happens. For whatever reason not related to too many visas.

Should that be the case we'll reconsider the situation at that time.

I'm not going to streelss myself out for the next years travelling via land borders based on "what if", trying to avoid an unfortunate event that is most likely never going to happen.

It's just ridiculous.

There are no reports for the last several years of IOs on the southern border telling people to 'fly in only'.  Only Poipet has done that recently, and the wise simply came back via another border entry-point from Cambodia.  There are many borders entry-points to Malaysia, and I would try every single one - twice, for weeks - before I would try "flying in" with a Tourist-Visa, having spent much of the last year in Thailand.

 

The OP and several others (some who managed to talk their way in, some rejected for having their money on plastic) all reported "too much time" or "too many visas" being cited by IOs.

 

Crossing at land-borders is not stressful, because you don't have to worry about being locked-up.  But it's your life - your call.

To reiterate the context of my original post (often lost in subsequent post/comments), concern at airport only concerns people who have spent considerable time in Thailand.  At least, that we have seen, so far - though we don't know "how much time" crosses the line - so, the more time you have spent here, the greater the risk of arbitrary detention and expulsion when entering at airports.

Edited July 14, 2017 by JackThompson

[PoorSucker]

To the OP, you have company now.

 

[brewsterbudgen]

To the OP, you have company now.
 

The other guy is at Don Muang. Is this guy there too?

[stevenl]

17 hours ago, JackThompson said:

I hear where you are coming from, but I don't think it is a matter of proving anything to these IOs - I doubt they really believe he is 'working' here - because they blew their credibility with the "no cash and no ATM game."  This appears to be about some subset of them thinking there "should be a law" restricting entry for "too many tourist visas" (what they purportedly said to him and others). 

 

Now let's say they do have a real-suspicion of his working-illegally.  If they hadn't played the "can't go to the ATM" game with so many - rejecting their entry for "not having cash" - we might be inclined to think they had pure-motives.  Given the context, suspicion (common sense, really) goes the other way.

I would also probably leave rather than appeal, but just come back at a land-border - having learned my lesson about airports.  Maybe after picking up a new passport at my Embassy in a neighboring country, to make it easier to get new Tourist Visas without whatever the Airport IOs will write in it - assuming they don't force him to fly 'home'.

 

I would need to see some evidence he was working here.  If that evidence should present itself - maybe pics/video of him doing so - then, sure.   But then, why not bust him working-illegally, prosecute to the fullest-extent, and set an example of him and the person who hired him?  What is coming out of this is not a good example, and someone who might have hired him can chuckle and hire another illegal-worker in his place. 

 

I absolutely agree with enforcing the law against foreigners taking jobs from natives - few things are more cruel than stripping away people's birthright to provide for themselves and their families in their own nation.

As to money - the vast-majority of people moving to the West from poorer nations come for economic reasons - not lifestyle.  Many even try to re-create their old-lifestyle when they arrive - because they prefer their own culture and traditions to their new host-country. 

OTOH, most Westerners coming to Thailand do come for the lifestyle - because they already have money - and make Thailand richer by doing so.  Thailand, being somewhat in 'the middle' of the economic-scale, also has many economic-migrants who drive down wages and take Thai jobs - but 99% come from neighboring nations, whose citizens have fewer restrictions on entry to Thailand - not more.

You would need evidence he was working here? Why?

 

The IO does not need that, all he needs is a reasonable suspicion, which he has in this case, looking at the OP's visa history.

 

Regarding reasons for coming here, you keep on hammering about 'no reason for westerners to be working here considering the lower wages than back home', and when pointed out to you that there is more to it than wages, it is the life style that is attracting westerners, you ignore that with some nice but in this respect meaningless sentences.

[PoorSucker]

26 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

The other guy is at Don Muang. Is this guy there too?

 

Nope, both at Swampy.

Quote

Go through another airport (today was Suvurnabhumi)?

 

[lamyai3]

30 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

The other guy is at Don Muang. Is this guy there too?

Both guys are in Suvarnabhumi, mentioned in each of the OPs.  

[brewsterbudgen]

Both guys are in Suvarnabhumi, mentioned in each of the OPs.  

I stand corrected. There's another thread running on a Facebook visa advice thread where the OP has been detained at Don Muang, which is worded very similarly.

[lkv]

 

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

There are no reports for the last several years of IOs on the southern border telling people to 'fly in only'.  Only Poipet has done that recently, and the wise simply came back via another border entry-point from Cambodia.  There are many borders entry-points to Malaysia, and I would try every single one - twice, for weeks - before I would try "flying in" with a Tourist-Visa, having spent much of the last year in Thailand.

 

The OP and several others (some who managed to talk their way in, some rejected for having their money on plastic) all reported "too much time" or "too many visas" being cited by IOs.

 

Crossing at land-borders is not stressful, because you don't have to worry about being locked-up.  But it's your life - your call.

To reiterate the context of my original post (often lost in subsequent post/comments), concern at airport only concerns people who have spent considerable time in Thailand.  At least, that we have seen, so far - though we don't know "how much time" crosses the line - so, the more time you have spent here, the greater the risk of arbitrary detention and expulsion when entering at airports.

Yeah sure your call. You spend time discovering Malaysia's Truly Asia's borders, whereas I will book a one hour flight to Yangon or something. Should I ever find myself in that position.

 

All this fuss for two highly suspicious threads, and subsequent comments from certain posters promoting paid visa options.

 

People rejected on non B's, ED's, tourist visas, exempts.....no reason given. Detained.etc

 

Call the embassy if you are detained then!!!

 

Is ThaiVisa not part of the Nation Group now? Some mod call the paper and tell them to make an article about these "extremely worrying events".

 

 

Edited July 14, 2017 by lkv

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

You would need evidence he was working here? Why?

 

The IO does not need that, all he needs is a reasonable suspicion, which he has in this case, looking at the OP's visa history.

 

Regarding reasons for coming here, you keep on hammering about 'no reason for westerners to be working here considering the lower wages than back home', and when pointed out to you that there is more to it than wages, it is the life style that is attracting westerners, you ignore that with some nice but in this respect meaningless sentences.

Evidence - because the law does not say, "Suspected, maybe, could be, maybe might start working here some day."   And, to my knowledge, no requirement of applicants to provide specific information to counter such suspicion has been published. 

 

The OP's history has no information about work-history.

As to "more to it than wages:"  What I point out is, if there was a desire to catch some tiny percentage of Farangs who are illegal English and water-sports teachers, they could catch them at the jobsite - easily.  That would set an example, including their bosses, such that no Thai would hire an illegal again, and no Farang would dare try it.  Trying to "guess" at immigration-checkpoints would not help eradicate the supposed problem. 

[Thaidream]

While I believe there is an unwritten policy/directive given to IOs regarding the target group to watch for- I also think part of it has to do with the IO's immediate impression-of the person trying to enter- as well as their Immigration history- and the mood of the officer.  If  one is weighing risk factors- these would have to be many stamps in passport of Tourist and exemp entries within a short period (1-2 years); Age below 50;  dressed in shorts and flip flops;  bearing- nervous or natural; facial expression. Remember, the IOS are making a decision within a minute so they have  to have some frame of reference to make the decision.

 

I also believe that within the last few years there have been several incidents of mostly Western visitors breaking Thai law- such as bank robbery; murder; fighting; excessive drunkenness; massive overstays; illegal business; carrying firearms; drug dealing. And the honest answer is you don't see elderly pensioners or retirees doing these crimes.

[stevenl]

26 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Evidence - because the law does not say, "Suspected, maybe, could be, maybe might start working here some day."   And, to my knowledge, no requirement of applicants to provide specific information to counter such suspicion has been published. 

 

The OP's history has no information about work-history.

As to "more to it than wages:"  What I point out is, if there was a desire to catch some tiny percentage of Farangs who are illegal English and water-sports teachers, they could catch them at the jobsite - easily.  That would set an example, including their bosses, such that no Thai would hire an illegal again, and no Farang would dare try it.  Trying to "guess" at immigration-checkpoints would not help eradicate the supposed problem. 

See post number 4 in this thread.

 

Looking at his history I conclude he was working here in the past, and it seems likely he wanted to continue doing so. Seems the IO is of the same opinion.

 

All he would have to do is prove the money he spent here came from abroad. All suggestions to this effect have been ignored by the OP, despite that these suggestions were done when he was still online.

[JackThompson]

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

See post number 4 in this thread.

Looking at his history I conclude he was working here in the past, and it seems likely he wanted to continue doing so. Seems the IO is of the same opinion.

All he would have to do is prove the money he spent here came from abroad. All suggestions to this effect have been ignored by the OP, despite that these suggestions were done when he was still online.

I think is is post-id #6 - "Does it make sense to appeal if I don't have a monthly income. I traveling more than 1,5 years in Asia with my savings."

This is not an unreasonable possibility.  He isn't from a poor part of the world, after all. 

That said, I absolutely support the arrest and prosecution of people working-illegally and the people who hire them.  If that's what the OP was up to, this action at Immigration solved nothing.  The OP could just come back another way; and even if he didn't, nothing would happen to the traitor who hired him, who would just make another illegal-hire.

[baboon]

On 12/07/2017 at 7:12 PM, asean said:

apologies i stand corrected. He actually states he had a tourist visa. Just had too many. Visas are issued by MFA and Immigration decides entry or extension. Having a visa does not guarantee entry.

Agreed, but if we go into the realms of all a visa granting you is the right to play immigration roulette at the point of entry - well it shows the whole system to be preposterous. 

The visa holder should arrive with the expectation of being admitted, unless the visa was applied for fraudulently. Similarly, the arivee should be afforded every opportunity to correct any honest mistake made, such as not being in possession of the required funds AND a reasonable opportunity to appeal as a last resort. Otherwise what is the point of the whole thing?

Edited July 14, 2017 by baboon

[tonray]

10 minutes ago, baboon said:

Agreed, but if we go into the realms of all a visa granting you is the right to play immigration roulette at the point of entry - well it shows the whole system to be preposterous. 

The visa holder should arrive with the expectation of being admitted, unless the visa was applied for fraudulently. Similarly, the arivee should be afforded every opportunity to correct any honest mistake made, such as not being in possession of the required funds AND a reasonable opportunity to appeal as a last resort. Otherwise what is the point of the whole thing?

Keep in mind you are talking about a country that has denied its citizens the right to choose their leaders. They are certainly not going to be extending rights to would be tourists and backpackers.

[stevenl]

13 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

I think is is post-id #6 - "Does it make sense to appeal if I don't have a monthly income. I traveling more than 1,5 years in Asia with my savings."

This is not an unreasonable possibility.  He isn't from a poor part of the world, after all. 

That said, I absolutely support the arrest and prosecution of people working-illegally and the people who hire them.  If that's what the OP was up to, this action at Immigration solved nothing.  The OP could just come back another way; and even if he didn't, nothing would happen to the traitor who hired him, who would just make another illegal-hire.

I was referring to post #4, hence my mentioning of that post.

 

 

[Maestro]

On 12/07/2017 at 5:12 AM, ubonjoe said:

You file an appeal after paying 1900  baht for it and they have 7 days to respond to it. You apply using a TM11 form. Download here: https://www.immigration.go.th/download/1486548054958.pdf

...

 

According to the information on the form, the appeal must be submitted in person to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Interior. Hopefully, the OP's embassy will help him with this.

 

เรียน นายกรัฐมนตรีและรัฐมนตรีว่าการกระทรวงมหาดไทย
To Prime Minister and Minister of Interior

...

ำเตือน

 NOTICE
1. ผู้อุทธรณ์จะต้องยื่นอุทธรณ์ด้วยตนเอง 
 APPELLANT MUST SUBMIT THE APPEAL IN PERSON.

[perthperson]

12 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

According to the information on the form, the appeal must be submitted in person to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Interior. Hopefully, the OP's embassy will help him with this.

 

เรียน นายกรัฐมนตรีและรัฐมนตรีว่าการกระทรวงมหาดไทย
To Prime Minister and Minister of Interior

...

ำเตือน

 NOTICE
1. ผู้อุทธรณ์จะต้องยื่นอุทธรณ์ด้วยตนเอง 
 APPELLANT MUST SUBMIT THE APPEAL IN PERSON.

You appear to be interpreting that far to literally ....... 

 

 

Try this one 

 

"Appeal must be submitted the competent official within forty – eight hours beginning from the time of received said order from the competent official and must comply with the pattern ( and a fee must be paid ) an provided in the Ministerial Regulations. When appeal is submitted by the alien concerned , the competent official shall delay deportation of said alien until an order for said case is receive from the Minister. While processing under order of the competent official or while waiting for an order from the Minister " 

Source: Section 22 of the Immigration Act

 

In this case being debated the "competent official" would be a Senior Immigration Officer.

Edited July 14, 2017 by Maestro
added link to the source of the quoted text

[Maestro]

What is the standard procedure for a foreigner put into IDC? Is he automatically brought before a judge within a legally specified period, where the foreigner can apply for bail?

[Thaidream]

From what I read on the other thread regarding a German National being held in the same detention center- the Garman was sent to Laos and eventually admitted. However, the Dutch citizen was  'forced' to go to Malaysia.  I got the impression no appeal was allowed and he was also not allowed to see a Senior IO.

 

If the above is correct- he certainly was not accorded due process and in my mind this is an abuse of power and the law.  He will most likely try and enter via a a land border. This whole incident leaves a real bad taste in my mouth and  even though I and others have long stay extensions- I take no pleasure in seeing people treated with such disregard.

 

Unfortunately, nothing will change until someone takes a situation like this to court which will cost time and plenty of money. I remember a case years ago when Purachai was Interior Minister and refused to sign the final order for a permanent residence- the person took it to court and the court ruled that the Minister had to sign as the person met all requirements. He still refused to sign and nothing happened and it languished until the next Interior Minister signed the documents. Sad, but true....

[Badbanker]

If a foreigner is arrested or surrenders themselves to Immigration on an overstay charge, as long as it is before 8:30 am they will go to court that day and a judge will give decision that day.

 

A denied entry is a bit different!

 

You are not at the IDC you are at the airport.  The system is stacked against you, so unless you are on good terms with a lawyer and he is willing to act for you, you are dead meat!

 

Yes immigration seems to be clamping down on things at the moment.

[ubonjoe]

46 minutes ago, Maestro said:

What is the standard procedure for a foreigner put into IDC? Is he automatically brought before a judge within a legally specified period, where the foreigner can apply for bail?

For the normal IDC's inside the country yes.

At the airport IDC they are detained  until they leave the country or are allowed entry.

[perthperson]

2 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

If the above is correct- he certainly was not accorded due process

 

Your opening remark is correct. None of us here  know whether due process was followed or not because only one side of the story is being told. 

 

The involvement of a Senior IO is required before a refusal of entry decision can be made  or entered into a passport.  

[Wake Up]

Sorry for the OP and what happened to him. I am happy we have guys like ubonjoe and Jack Thompson and others provide us all free excellent visa and immigration advice. Many more of us would end up in the same situation as the OP without these fine men providing their assistance. Thank you 

Edited July 14, 2017 by Wake Up

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Wake Up said:

Sorry for the OP and what happened to him. I am happy we have guys like ubonjoe and Jack Thompson and others provide us all free excellent visa and immigration advice. Many more of us would end up in the same situation as the OP without these fine men providing their assistance. Thank you 

I learned almost everything about Immigration rules from reading UbonJoe's posts - and I am still learning from them - credit where it belongs.

[Maestro]

There are several topics on this forum specifically discussing the Elite Visa, but posts about the Elite Visa are off topic in this here topic and I have removed them.

[Thaidream]

It appears that if one is at detention at the airport- they will not accept an appeal.  From the other thread  it would seem the Op was 'put' on an airplane to Malaysia.  Until we hear from him- we don't know if he actually wanted to file the appeal and was refused or how it all went down.

By law- I am led to believe one has 48 hours to file the appeal and one must remain in detention until the appeal is settled and if not ruled on within 7 days- entry is granted.

 

There is a difference between refusal of entry to Thailand and being 'deported'.  How that plays out legally- I do not know. From my limited understanding- if there is a refusal of due process- meaning not allowed to file an appeal- one has to bring suit against Immigration via the Administrative Court. To do this , one has to front the court costs and legal fees of a lawyer. The 'system' appears tough to crack unless one has deep pockets; a great lawyer and a sound case.

[lazygourmet]

19 hours ago, Badbanker said:

If a foreigner is arrested or surrenders themselves to Immigration on an overstay charge, as long as it is before 8:30 am they will go to court that day and a judge will give decision that day.

 

A denied entry is a bit different!

 

You are not at the IDC you are at the airport.  The system is stacked against you, so unless you are on good terms with a lawyer and he is willing to act for you, you are dead meat!

 

Yes immigration seems to be clamping down on things at the moment.

Being in good term with one of your local immigration officers and keeping his/her contact in your phone book helps even better.

Few years ago, around the last coup, they started to deny numerous of people ; and I was in lot, on suspicion of working illegally.

After folks stamped my passport denied, I made one phone call while locked downstairs ; and one hour after that order was cancelled with the apologizes of the lady in charge , at time of Swampy airport immigration.

NB: my full story (with scan of stamp and cancellation) must be somewhere in ThaiVisa archives but cannot find it

 

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by lazygourmet

[JackThompson]

8 minutes ago, lazygourmet said:

Being in good term with one of your local immigration officers and keeping his/her contact in your phone book helps even better.

Few years ago, around the last coup, they started to deny numerous of people ; and I was in lot, on suspicion of working illegally.

After folks stamped my passport denied, I made one phone call while locked downstairs ; and one hour after that order was cancelled with the apologizes of the lady in charge , at time of Swampy airport immigration.

NB: my full story (with scan of stamp and cancellation) must be somewhere in ThaiVisa archives but cannot find it

This sounds like a very good plan.  Can you give some suggestions as to how one develops such a relationship?  Bottle of whiskey for new-years, you knew them from the gym or...?  I can't think how that conversation would start in the immigration-office - but am open to ideas.

[lazygourmet]

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

This sounds like a very good plan.  Can you give some suggestions as to how one develops such a relationship?  Bottle of whiskey for new-years, you knew them from the gym or...?  I can't think how that conversation would start in the immigration-office - but am open to ideas.

No need... Just basic human to human relationships.

Bring some small cakes or snacks for all the staff (I am lucky my immigration office is small!) when doing extension and/or 90 days report: total cost one hundred bahts and they are all happy.

A bottle of Chivas, Black Label or whatever tea-money could be taken as insult as they all pretend to be incorruptible.

Low profile is the best effective way...

The little snacks that you gave to them will always be remembered ; while the alcohol and/or the money: no way!

 

Edited July 15, 2017 by lazygourmet

[scubascuba3]

No need... Just basic human to human relationships.
Bring some small cakes or snacks for all the staff (I am lucky my immigration office is small!) when doing extension and/or 90 days report: total cost one hundred bahts and they are all happy.
A bottle of Chivas, Black Label or whatever tea-money could be taken as insult as they all pretend to be incorruptible.
Low profile is the best effective way...
The little snacks that you gave to them will always be remembered ; while the alcohol and/or the money: no way!
 

I think I'd rather risk detention