Entry denied Bangkok Airport

[BritTim]

12 minutes ago, overherebc said:

44 minutes ago, mstevens said:

With a bit of luck the use of the word "blacklisted" is incorrect terminology.  Many people seem not to understand that denial of entry, deportation and blacklisting are all very different (and it is blacklisting that you most want to avoid!)

I would venture that's why you can't 'appeal' against denied entry when you're in lock up at the airport as the 'appeal' only applies to black listing or deportation after a court case.

Long thread so, sorry if someone posted the same before.

According to the law, you have an automatic right of appeal. However, you are generally (illegally) prevented from doing so, unless you can contact an influential Thai legal firm by phone. Even then, unless willing to grease palms, I would not recommend it. Upsetting immigration is liable just to make your situation worse.

[perthperson]

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

According to the law, you have an automatic right of appeal. However, you are generally (illegally) prevented from doing so,

 

Evidence for this assertion --- Where? 

 

(NB  One sided diatribes from those recently refused entry is not evidence ) 

[BritTim]

10 minutes ago, perthperson said:

15 minutes ago, BritTim said:

According to the law, you have an automatic right of appeal. However, you are generally (illegally) prevented from doing so,

 

Evidence for this assertion --- Where? 

 

(NB  One sided diatribes from those recently refused entry is not evidence ) 

http://www.thailawforum.com/database1/immigration-law-mejesty-3.html

 

See Section 22.

The only cases where an appeal is not allowed is if you lack a valid passport, or have been barred entry by order of the Minister.

[overherebc]

In addition to my last post, if you are 'denied entry' are you officially in Thailand? 

I am not a lawyer so I'm only putting my thoughts down, not stating what I know or don't know about the legal situation.

Can you appeal denied entry at a higher level than the IO supervisor/manager who made the decision?

[ubonjoe]

37 minutes ago, overherebc said:

I would venture that's why you can't 'appeal' against denied entry when you're in lock up at the airport as the 'appeal' only applies to black listing or deportation after a court case.

An appeal for denial of entry can be done while in detention. A completed TM11 form and paying a fee of 1900 baht is needed.

Read what it says on the form. https://www.immigration.go.th/download/1486548054958.pdf

[perthperson]

5 minutes ago, BritTim said:

http://www.thailawforum.com/database1/immigration-law-mejesty-3.html

 

See Section 22.

The only cases where an appeal is not allowed is if you lack a valid passport, or have been barred entry by order of the Minister.

You have FAILED to justify your claim that people are illegally being prevented from lodging an appeal ................

 

Perhaps I was not clear enough in my original post --- but I guess you will now try(and fail) to evidence this claimed illegality.

[BritTim]

2 minutes ago, overherebc said:

In addition to my last post, if you are 'denied entry' are you officially in Thailand? 

I am not a lawyer so I'm only putting my thoughts down, not stating what I know or don't know about the legal situation.

Can you appeal denied entry at a higher level than the IO supervisor/manager who made the decision?

The only appeal mentioned in the 1979 Act is to the Minister. There is a documented procedure you are supposed to be allowed to follow to accomplish this. Any agreement to allow you to talk with a more senior official would be at the discretion of the official you are talking to. By the time you are officially denied entry, you are already talking to an official fairly high in the pecking order.

[phuketjock]

3 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Good post. Even Starbucks' idea of discouraging students was quickly withdrawn!

 

5 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Very true. Not to mention two or three customers in a place is often more of a draw for people walking past than a place completely devoid of people. True of cafes and bars both. 

 

11 hours ago, blorg said:

I suspect from his name it is in Phuket. I don't get the antipathy towards digital nomads, many cafes welcome them and are specifically set up to attract them. Or indeed, Thai university students- in any town with a large university there are a load of "study cafes" specifically oriented at students who want to come and use the WiFi and study for hours.

 

If you feel your business doesn't benefit from Thai students, or digital nomads, it is pretty trivial to discourage them, don't have any electric outlets (cover them if they are there) and limit the wifi use (give an hour with a purchase) and that is probably going to dissuade most of them. If necessary you could start having minimum spends, but simply not providing these services and I doubt they will come in the first place.

 

Frankly MOST cafes in Thailand have very low customer traffic and welcome what they can get, and don't mind someone sitting there for hours whether a Thai student or a digital nomad, as long as they spend some reasonable minimum.

 

There are a few places that are popular and have high traffic, but they are very much the exception. In fact in years here I can only think of a handful of cafes which were constantly busy with customers coming and going all day. Most cafes sit virtually empty all day, and a customer is a customer. The ones that were genuinely that busy I couldn't possibly see someone trying to work in anyway, people looking to work are going to look for quieter places... and if you are empty most of the time anyway, who are you trying to free the seat up for exactly?

From your posts it is fairly obvious that none of you have or run a restaurant/coffee shop

or have the faintest idea what you are talking about.

My wife's shop is no where near a school or university nor does it sit "virtually empty" all day

so when the parasites invade they occupy seats that paying customers cannot, and believe it

or not this has an adverse affect on her business, please don't post nonsense when you don't

know what you are talking about. Thank you.

[perthperson]

Just now, BritTim said:

The only appeal mentioned in the 1979 Act is to the Minister. There is a documented procedure you are supposed to be allowed to follow to accomplish this. Any agreement to allow you to talk with a more senior official would be at the discretion of the official you are talking to. By the time you are officially denied entry, you are already talking to an official fairly high in the pecking order.

I knew it !   A Big Fail  and Zero evidence for what you claim.

 

Here is the form you will need when you find yourself wanting to appeal  from the airport ! 

 

https://www.immigration.go.th/download/1486548054958.pdf

 

 

[overherebc]

4 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

An appeal for denial of entry can be done while in detention. A completed TM11 form and paying a fee of 1900 baht is needed.

Read what it says on the form. https://www.immigration.go.th/download/1486548054958.pdf

Just a pendantic question

If you have been denied entry how can you be in the country?

If I don't let in you in my front gate ???

[BritTim]

Just now, perthperson said:

You have FAILED to justify your claim that people are illegally being prevented from lodging an appeal ................

 

Perhaps I was not clear enough in my original post --- but I guess you will now try(and fail) to evidence this claimed illegality.

Well, you have stated that only a thread where both sides are represented would be acceptable proof. On that basis, you win. I can point to no post on this board by an immigration official admitting he is illegally preventing appeals. That said, I find posts like the following persuasive: https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/992077-entry-denied-bangkok-airport/?page=12#comment-12075245

[perthperson]

8 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Well, you have stated that only a thread where both sides are represented would be acceptable proof. On that basis, you win. I can point to no post on this board by an immigration official admitting he is illegally preventing appeals. That said, I find posts like the following persuasive: https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/992077-entry-denied-bangkok-airport/?page=12#comment-12075245

You will recognise the fact that many indulge in vicious attacks on the NHS and its professional staff.  Confidentiality  and ethics prevent the NHS and its staff from delivering robust responses unless a case finds its way to court.  The RT Immigration Police are in a similar situation --- the ignorant baying mob can hurl abuse but they cannot respond.

 

Your link is not evidence -- It is a one sided account -------

Edited July 19, 2017 by perthperson

[BritTim]

3 minutes ago, perthperson said:

You will recognise the fact that many indulge in vicious attacks on the NHS and its professional staff.  Confidentiality  and ethics prevent the NHS and its staff from delivering robust responses unless a case finds its way to court.  The RT Immigration Police are in a similar situation --- the ignorant baying mob can hurl abuse but they cannot respond.

 

You link is not evidence -- It is a one sided account -------

End of argument. You believe you are better informed than someone who has regular contact with those denied entry. I am skeptical of your claim, n but neither of us can prove the other wrong.

Edited July 19, 2017 by BritTim

[perthperson]

1 minute ago, BritTim said:

You believe you are better informed than someone who has regular contact with those denied entry.

 

Are you now claiming to have delinquent acquaintances who are  regularly denied entry ?   What numbers are you talking about? 

[ubonjoe]

10 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Just a pendantic question

If you have been denied entry how can you be in the country?

If I don't let in you in my front gate ???

I don't understand why you asking that.

Perhaps you only read the title of the form. Further down the form their is this.

Quote

have received a notice from an immigration officer that I am prohibited from entering the Kingdom under Section………………..of the Immigration Act B.E. 2522 and I shall have to leave the Kingdom

If you have set a foot in country you are technically in the Kingdom.

[BritTim]

Just now, perthperson said:

 

Are you now claiming to have delinquent acquaintances who are  regularly denied entry ?   What numbers are you talking about? 

Absolutely not!! I was relying on what people like asean and badbaker report.

[perthperson]

Just now, BritTim said:

Absolutely not!! I was relying on what people like asean and badbaker report.

Ah --- You "rely" on anonymous posts for info and then pass it off as fact ?   I understand ..............

[blorg]

@phuketjock I'm just giving some suggestions on what you can do if you feel it's an issue. I haven't run a coffee shop, no, but I have been in hundreds of them. Thailand is not short of coffee shops, there are probably as many if not more now as there are 7-11s and there are plenty that are perfectly happy to serve digital nomads. So if you don't like these customers there will be another shop that is happy to take them.

 

You need to look at your business model and what sort of customer you are targeting and then design your offering around that. If you find you are attracting the wrong sort of customer, tweak your offering to dissuade them.

 

I have seen other shops, that were in the very small percentage that they actually are really busy actually follow this, there was a really excellent bakery near me in Bangkok and when they started they had sofas and people would stay there a while. They got very busy and popular and they took active steps to design their space to *encourage* people not to linger. They covered all the power outlets and rearranged the seating to get more people in but reduced the amount of more "comfortable" chairs to lounge in. They got rid of private tables and replaced with long shared tables. It was about designing the space for what they were aiming for, which was more turnover, as they were genuinely busy to the point that more often than not every seat in the place would be taken. And it worked... people still went there for the bread and pastries as it was excellent but they were more likely to eat and get out, rather than lounge around all morning. Nobody in the place ever cracks out a laptop, it's just not that sort of place.

 

If you design your cafe so as to encourage turnover, I honestly don't understand why any digital nomad would go there in the first place. If your cafe is attracting them, and you don't want them, you need to look at why people go there and take active steps to discourage lingering. It's not rocket surgery. Do you provide power outlets? If so, WHY? Digital nomads are drawn to power outlets like flies to excrement, if you don't want them why are you offering power outlets? Cover them. Why are you offering unlimited wifi? There's another similar bakery I can think of here in Chiang Mai that is in a similar situation, plenty of customers, no power outlets and they just don't do wifi AT ALL. And Chiang Mai is digital nomad Mecca and this is a great cafe but you know, I have NEVER seen anyone with a laptop in that cafe. Never. It's not difficult to get rid of customers you don't want, the problem is when you actually need those customers and so can't take these steps to dissuade them but prefer to whinge about them behind their back instead.

[overherebc]

40 minutes ago, BritTim said:

http://www.thailawforum.com/database1/immigration-law-mejesty-3.html

 

See Section 22.

The only cases where an appeal is not allowed is if you lack a valid passport, or have been barred entry by order of the Minister.

So you can't appeal if you have been barred entry, you could read denied entry, by order of the 

Minister or I would read his authorised deputy/officer.

[phuketjock]

3 minutes ago, blorg said:

@phuketjock I'm just giving some suggestions on what you can do if you feel it's an issue. I haven't run a coffee shop, no, but I have been in hundreds of them. Thailand is not short of coffee shops, there are probably as many if not more now as there are 7-11s and there are plenty that are perfectly happy to serve digital nomads. So if you don't like these customers there will be another shop that is happy to take them.

 

You need to look at your business model and what sort of customer you are targeting and then design your offering around that. If you find you are attracting the wrong sort of customer, tweak your offering to dissuade them.

 

I have seen other shops, that were in the very small percentage that they actually are really busy actually follow this, there was a really excellent bakery near me in Bangkok and when they started they had sofas and people would stay there a while. They got very busy and popular and they took active steps to design their space to *encourage* people not to linger. They covered all the power outlets and rearranged the seating to get more people in but reduced the amount of more "comfortable" chairs to lounge in. They got rid of private tables and replaced with long shared tables. It was about designing the space for what they were aiming for, which was more turnover, as they were genuinely busy to the point that more often than not every seat in the place would be taken. And it worked... people still went there for the bread and pastries as it was excellent but they were more likely to eat and get out, rather than lounge around all morning. Nobody in the place ever cracks out a laptop, it's just not that sort of place.

 

If you design your cafe so as to encourage turnover, I honestly don't understand why any digital nomad would go there in the first place. If your cafe is attracting them, and you don't want them, you need to look at why people go there and take active steps to discourage lingering. It's not rocket surgery. Do you provide power outlets? If so, WHY? Digital nomads are drawn to power outlets like flies to excrement, if you don't want them why are you offering power outlets? Cover them. Why are you offering unlimited wifi? There's another similar bakery I can think of here in Chiang Mai that is in a similar situation, plenty of customers, no power outlets and they just don't do wifi AT ALL. And Chiang Mai is digital nomad Mecca and this is a great cafe but you know, I have NEVER seen anyone with a laptop in that cafe. Never. It's not difficult to get rid of customers you don't want, the problem is when you actually need those customers and so can't take these steps to dissuade them but prefer to whinge about them behind their back instead.

Blorg thank you very much for your, totally no experience of running a restaurant/coffee shop,

sage like advice but had you taken the time to actually read ALL the posts on the subject you

would have seen that the problem has been solved for now.

[BritTim]

Just now, overherebc said:

So you can't appeal if you have been barred entry, you could read denied entry, by order of the 

Minister or I would read his authorised deputy/officer.

I have not read the entire law in the original Thai, so I cannot be sure. However, I think the law is careful everywhere to distinguish between officials and the Minister. Anyway, your interpretation is pretty nonsensical as all denied entries are by officials who you refer to as authorized deputies. It means no appeals could ever be allowed, so why a Section 22 at all?

[blorg]

1 minute ago, phuketjock said:

Blorg thank you very much for your

sage like advice

np, anytime

[ubonjoe]

5 minutes ago, overherebc said:

So you can't appeal if you have been barred entry, you could read denied entry, by order of the 

Minister or I would read his authorised deputy/officer.

Probably best to read section 22.

Quote

Section 22 : In the instance where the competent official discovers that an alien is forbidden from
entering into the Kingdom under the provisions of Section 12 , the competent official shall have authority
to order said alien by written notification to leave the Kingdom. If said alien is not satisfied with the
competent official’s order , he ( alien ) may appeal to the Minister. The order of the Minister shall be final.
Appealling cases are not allowed under Section 12 (1) or (10) , but if the Minister does not have an order
within seven days beginning from the date of submitting the appeal, it is considered that the Minister has
ordered that said alien is not forbidden from entering into the Kingdom under Section 12. 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 , as the case may be ,
the provisions of Section 20 shall not be applied.

 

[overherebc]

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

I have not read the entire law in the original Thai, so I cannot be sure. However, I think the law is careful everywhere to distinguish between officials and the Minister. Anyway, your interpretation is pretty nonsensical as all denied entries are by officials who you refer to as authorized deputies. It means no appeals could ever be allowed, so why a Section 22 at all?

May I suggest section 22 is probably referring to a blacklisted person attempting entry into Thailand?

PS

Last post was meant to have a question mark at the end.

 

[BritTim]

5 minutes ago, overherebc said:

May I suggest section 22 is probably referring to a blacklisted person attempting entry into Thailand?

PS

Last post was meant to have a question mark at the end.

See @ubonjoe's post of Section 22 above, ad my own post of Section 12 earlier if you want confirmation that it refers to denying entry on arrival.

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, overherebc said:

May I suggest section 22 is probably referring to a blacklisted person attempting entry into Thailand?

PS

Last post was meant to have a question mark at the end.

 

It clearly mentions section 12 in section 22.

Quote

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

 

[overherebc]

The first sentence of 22 says appealing not allowed if under 12 (1) (10)  ?

That's the way I read it. No means of support or to take up employment etc.

The rest I see as other situations ref appeals where appeals are allowed.

?? Not a statement by me just interpretation.

[ubonjoe]

5 minutes ago, overherebc said:

The first sentence of 22 says appealing not allowed if under 12 (1) (10)  ?

That's the way I read it. No means of support or to take up employment etc.

The rest I see as other situations ref appeals where appeals are allowed.

?? Not a statement by me just interpretation.

 

These are two sections that  cannot be appealed.

Quote

1. Having no genuine and valid passport or document used in lieu of passport ; or having a
genuine and valid passport or document used in lieu of a passport without Visaing by the Royal Thai
Embassies or Consulates in Foreign countries ; or from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs , excepting if a visa
is not required for certain types of aliens in special instances.
Visaing and visa exemption will be under the learn and conditions as provided in the Ministerial
Regulations.

10. Being a person prohibited by the Minister under Section 16.

 

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

 

[scubascuba3]

That's the theory but one of the two guys who wanted to appeal wasn't allowed?

 

 

 

Interesting....tapatalk won't isn't including the post i relied to, oh well

[perthperson]

Just now, scubascuba3 said:

That's the theory but one of the two guys who wanted to appeal wasn't allowed?

How do you know that ? 

 

Stop spreading unevidenced rumour.