In detention right now about to be deported

[scubascuba3]

Its daft really, they could just say only 1 METV allowed or 2 SETVs per calendar year, etc, make it clear so people know for sure, people shouldn't have to worry about using an METV which is legit.

[tryasimight]

7 minutes ago, jeab1980 said:

Ho how would one go about proving whilst walking through immigration back into this country with say your 3rd ED visa. That infact you are genuine you are studying. The rules are the rules. They have published the rules on applying for an ED visa if you meet those rules you are therefore in the eyes of the law genuine. You may well not like the fact you can do an unarmed combat of close protection course over however many hrs a week over the year but its legal in the law.

I have no need to do that.

 

But IF I was on my third ED visa and I WAS a genuine student then it is unlikely I would have 2 SETV's, 2 METV's, 3 visa exempt entries at swampy and two land border visa exempts in the last 2 years either. (and still can only manage the odd sawadee when addressed)

 

That is what flags the immigration officers concern.  Is that so hard to understand?

 

 

Edited July 16, 2017 by tryasimight

[perthperson]

9 minutes ago, Essecola said:

Just curious since some folks are talking about ED visas.. Does anyone know if ED visas are standard 90 days or more? I am doing a 60 day course (where I will study full time 35 hrs a week). Any chance I will be allowed to use the visa to stay 30 days further after my course is done or will I be expected to leave right away?

If your course is one that is approved for the issue of an ED visa then the visa will remain valid until it expires. 

Edited July 16, 2017 by perthperson
correction of typo

[tryasimight]

6 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Its daft really, they could just say only 1 METV allowed or 2 SETVs per calendar year, etc, make it clear so people know for sure, people shouldn't have to worry about using an METV which is legit.

They are all legit.

[jeab1980]

1 minute ago, tryasimight said:

I have no need to do that.

 

But IF I was on my third ED visa and I WAS a genuine student then it is unlikely I would have 2 SETV's, 2 METV's, 3 visa exempt entries at swampy and two land border visa exempts in the last 2 years either. (and still can only manage the odd sawadee when addressed)

 

That is what flags the immigration officers concern.  Is that so hard to understand?

 

 

Really does it matter if you have a couple of Setv in passport it may well be that people came here for a holiday to start with then decided over the fullness of time that they would like to study here. How many times on here when someone mentions coming here to live do you get the coments try it for 6mths or so first!.

Is that hard to understand!

[Essecola]

3 minutes ago, perthperson said:

If you course is one that is approved for the issue of an ED visa then the visa will remain valid until it expires. 

Yes it requires an ED (course approved for sure.. it better be for an $8000 course!) visa but Im just wondering if they will issue me a 90 day visa for a 60 day course. Or if ED visas are all minimum 90 days. Guess I should call them and ask tomorrow. Apologies..

[perthperson]

Just now, Essecola said:

Yes it requires an ED (course approved for sure.. it better be for an $8000 course!) visa but Im just wondering if they will issue me a 90 day visa for a 60 day course. Or if ED visas are all minimum 90 days. Guess I should call them and ask tomorrow. Apologies..

ALL single entry Ed visas allow a 90 day stay............

[JackThompson]

12 minutes ago, tryasimight said:

It is at the airport where the issue occurs....but not for bona fide tourists...any evidence of the ten of thousands of tourist who arrive here every day being asked to show 10 or 20k baht?

It would appear to be only those who are apparently trying to  stay long term by whatever means that are getting hassled.

It is common knowledge amongst the expats and immigration that an ED visa is the point of last recourse for the serial visa abuser.

Not for the genuine ED student

Wake up.....the party is over!!

"Bona Fide" is not in the law or rules.  "By whatever means" - as in "legal" or "illegal" (like agent-procured retirement extensions)?   If illegal, we are on the same page - get 'em out. 

 

If there is something called "abuse," those who get to write the laws can kindly "define" it explicitly, so that everyone can know exactly where they stand before beginning a trip to Thailand.  Airlines would begin asking questions pre-boarding such as, "Have you spent more than X months in Thailand in the past 12 months" - or whatever standard is published - similar as how they ask for an outgoing ticket for those coming without a visa.  Every nation's "about visiting Thailand" page would have the rules and a warning.  Problem-solved.

 

I met someone on their 2nd language using ED visas - perfectly legal - and I helped him with a question on English (he was German - had already taken Thai - and could speak and write it).   Those in charge can always impose more limits on these visas, as well, if they choose - by passport-country or for everyone.

[scubascuba3]

They are all legit.

Not too many visa exempts

[perthperson]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

"Bona Fide" is not in the law or rules.  "By whatever means" - as in "legal" or "illegal" (like agent-procured retirement extensions)?   If illegal, we are on the same page - get 'em out. 

 

If there is something called "abuse," those who get to write the laws can kindly "define" it explicitly, so that everyone can know exactly where they stand before beginning a trip to Thailand.  Airlines would begin asking questions pre-boarding such as, "Have you spent more than X months in Thailand in the past 12 months" - or whatever standard is published - similar as how they ask for an outgoing ticket for those coming without a visa.  Every nation's "about visiting Thailand" page would have the rules and a warning.  Problem-solved.

 

I met someone on their 2nd language using ED visas - perfectly legal - and I helped him with a question on English (he was German - had already taken Thai - and could speak and write it).   Those in charge can always impose more limits on these visas, as well, if they choose - by passport-country or for everyone.

Interestingly there is nothing in UK "laws or rules" which prevents a person applying for serial TVs. But if it becomes apparent that the TVs are being abused as a means of remaining in country long term the  delinquent WILL be banned for ten years.  Thailand should follow that example. 

[tryasimight]

11 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Bona Fide" is not in the law or rules.  "By whatever means" - as in "legal" or "illegal" (like agent-procured retirement extensions)?   If illegal, we are on the same page - get 'em out. 

 

If there is something called "abuse," those who get to write the laws can kindly "define" it explicitly, so that everyone can know exactly where they stand before beginning a trip to Thailand.  Airlines would begin asking questions pre-boarding such as, "Have you spent more than X months in Thailand in the past 12 months" - or whatever standard is published - similar as how they ask for an outgoing ticket for those coming without a visa.  Every nation's "about visiting Thailand" page would have the rules and a warning.  Problem-solved.

 

I met someone on their 2nd language using ED visas - perfectly legal - and I helped him with a question on English (he was German - had already taken Thai - and could speak and write it).   Those in charge can always impose more limits on these visas, as well, if they choose - by passport-country or for everyone.

Oh dear...another legal eagle

 

Please pin your phone number or email at the top of the thread so that the next person who has problems at immigration can contact you immediately to educate the IO about Thai law and as to where he is going wrong and demand entry to the country.

Edited July 16, 2017 by tryasimight

[tryasimight]

2 minutes ago, perthperson said:

Interestingly there is nothing in UK "laws or rules" which prevents a person applying for serial TVs. But if it becomes apparent that the TVs are being abused as a means of remaining in country long term the  delinquent WILL be banned for ten years.  Thailand should follow that example. 

It seems they are slowly starting down that path but some posters are struggling with the concept.

[JackThompson]

1 minute ago, perthperson said:

Interestingly there is nothing in UK "laws or rules" which prevents a person applying for serial TVs. But if it becomes apparent that the TVs are being abused as a means of remaining in country long term the  delinquent WILL be banned for ten years.  Thailand should follow that example. 

If that is the case, don't they want to define it?  To keep the door open to "special people" with connections?  Why is a bad-example a good reason to repeat it? 

In any case, I am sure there is an appeals-process which involves legal-representation for the person facing a possible ban.  I would bet there is also a written-warning involved, specifying the 'why' of the situation.

 

1 minute ago, tryasimight said:

Oh dear...another legal eagle

Please pint your phone number or email at the top of the thread so that the next person who has problems at immigration can contact you immediately to educate the IO about Thai law and as to where he is going wrong and demand entry to the country.

Based on one recent story, it is possible that IOs at airports do not even allow appeals, as proscribed by law; so appealing to the law might well be useless.  From many reports, they cite non-laws, but write down real ones as the 'reason for denial'.  The only solution is for those in their cross-hairs to avoid entry-points run by those who don't respect their own country's laws.

[perthperson]

8 minutes ago, tryasimight said:

It seems they are slowly starting down that path but some posters are struggling with the concept.

They belong to the vocal minority who are scared their days of manipulating the system are drawing to a close. They would be wise to take note of of the heavy hints ! 

Edited July 16, 2017 by perthperson
correction of typo

[JackThompson]

2 minutes ago, perthperson said:

They belong to the vocal minority who scared their days of manipulating the system are drawing to a close. They would be wise to take note of of the heavy hints ! 

How can those who don't control the rules be the 'manipulators' in this context?  They are not in a position to manipulate anything.  They have done Absolutely Nothing Wrong and have obeyed the rules as the authorities in charge have written them.

 

By contrast, an IO who cites non-rules, then writes up something else as the 'real reason', is manipulating the system.

[perthperson]

1 minute ago, JackThompson said:

How can those who don't control the rules be the 'manipulators' in this context?  They are not in a position to manipulate anything.  They have done Absolutely Nothing Wrong and have obeyed the rules as the authorities in charge have written them.

 

By contrast, an IO who cites non-rules, then writes up something else as the 'real reason', is manipulating the system.

Take a glance at my earlier post. The ones who earn a 10 year ban "do nothing wrong" apart from attempt to manipulate the system to their own advantage. 

[tryasimight]

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

If that is the case, don't they want to define it?  To keep the door open to "special people" with connections?  Why is a bad-example a good reason to repeat it? 

In any case, I am sure there is an appeals-process which involves legal-representation for the person facing a possible ban.  I would bet there is also a written-warning involved, specifying the 'why' of the situation.

 

Based on one recent story, it is possible that IOs at airports do not even allow appeals, as proscribed by law; so appealing to the law might well be useless.  From many reports, they cite non-laws, but write down real ones as the 'reason for denial'.  The only solution is for those in their cross-hairs to avoid entry-points run by those who don't respect their own country's laws.

I don't recall any suggestion of a ban. I believe the Op was about denial of entry...significantly different.

I recall the reasons for denial were legal. Insufficient funds...suspected of working/no means of support or something similar.

 

Where are the entry points  'run by those who don't respect their own countries laws'?  Can I get an entry stamp there?  Let us all in to the secret places

Sure to be very popular!!

[JackThompson]

Just now, perthperson said:

Take a glance at my earlier post. The ones who earn a 10 year ban "do nothing wrong" apart from attempt to manipulate the system to their own advantage. 

When you ever enter a country other than your passport-country, you are "manipulating the system to your advantage" using the laws on the books which allow you to enter. 

I am sure that, in the UK, there is more to it than showing up and getting a 'banned' stamp absent any warning.  You are likely talking about those who commit criminal acts, are deported, then try to re-enter.  But, in any case, this is not the UK, and even if they indeed have horrible, arbitrary-ban policies, that would not excuse what happened here.
 

Just now, tryasimight said:

I don't recall any suggestion of a ban. I believe the Op was about denial of entry...significantly different.

I recall the reasons for denial were legal. Insufficient funds...suspected of working/no means of support or something similar.

 

Where are the entry points  'run by those who don't respect their own countries laws'?  Can I get an entry stamp there?  Let us all in to the secret places

Sure to be very popular!!

The "Ban" was to do with the other fellow's comments on the UK. 

Yes, those who cite a non-rule as reason the person cannot enter, then write down another rule which is not-applicable (not having funds when they do, or 'intending to work' with no evidence of such), clearly do not respect their country's laws.  It would seem you can get entry-stamps from them, arbitrarily, at some airports.

[perthperson]

12 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

I am sure that, in the UK, there is more to it than showing up and getting a 'banned' stamp absent any warning

And I can assure you that anyone who abuses the UK visa system WILL be banned for 10 years --- It works not by "stamp" but by refusing any further visas. Although the IOs can and do refuse entry. 

 

Getting caught overstaying is another matter but that is also robustly dealt with. 

Edited July 16, 2017 by perthperson

[stevenl]

55 minutes ago, jeab1980 said:

Really does it matter if you have a couple of Setv in passport it may well be that people came here for a holiday to start with then decided over the fullness of time that they would like to study here. How many times on here when someone mentions coming here to live do you get the coments try it for 6mths or so first!.

Is that hard to understand!

Sure, just make sure you can prove you're bringing money in to the country and are not working here to make a living.

[Momofarang]

40 minutes ago, perthperson said:

Take a glance at my earlier post. The ones who earn a 10 year ban "do nothing wrong" apart from attempt to manipulate the system to their own advantage. 

Just like some former French presidential candidate...

[tryasimight]

19 minutes ago, perthperson said:

And I can assure you that anyone who abuses the UK visa system WILL be banned for 10 years --- It works not by "stamp" but by refusing any further visas. Although the IOs can and do refuse entry. 

 

Getting caught overstaying is another matter but that is also robustly dealt with. 

Back in 2004 my then US girlfriend and I were doing her 3 month day visa run from Australia (yes on a 12 month tourist visa) but we stuffed up the dates. Booked a flight to PNG from Cairns on 1st March, we thought (90 days) but as luck would have it was a leap year, one day over. The exiting IO called his supervisor...her Visa was immediately cancelled and she was arrested and put in detention.

 

 

[scubascuba3]

Interestingly there is nothing in UK "laws or rules" which prevents a person applying for serial TVs. But if it becomes apparent that the TVs are being abused as a means of remaining in country long term the  delinquent WILL be banned for ten years.  Thailand should follow that example. 

What's the big deal anyway? The people are spending money, its not as if they are on benefits or something. Complete over reaction.

 

The biggest risk is probably with the old guys who haven't got health insurance and don't have enough money when they go to hospital

 

 

 

[bkk6060]

7 minutes ago, tryasimight said:

Back in 2004 my then US girlfriend and I were doing her 3 month day visa run from Australia (yes on a 12 month tourist visa) but we stuffed up the dates. Booked a flight to PNG from Cairns on 1st March, we thought (90 days) but as luck would have it was a leap year, one day over. The exiting IO called his supervisor...her Visa was immediately cancelled and she was arrested and put in detention.

 

 

So, sorry but she broke the law.  Thanks good info. for people to check everything regarding their dates of travel. 

[Zikomat]

I was stopped 1 year ago at Suvarnabhumi for too many Tourist visas. IO (she was a woman) looked at my passport pages with some kind of disgust. Then she called for a higher rank officer (who was a man).  I told him that I had a Thai GF waiting for me and that she was a reason I stay in the Kingdom for so long time. He asked me to call her by mobile phone. He talked to my GF in Thai language , then smiled a little bit and let me go (these are the moments I like Thailand the most). Since then I take my girlfriend with me whenever I go to get a new tourist visa. But until today I was never stopped at the immigration again so those trips were just a waste of money.

[jeab1980]

35 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Sure, just make sure you can prove you're bringing money in to the country and are not working here to make a living.

Yes thats what this topic is about 20k

[ubonjoe]

Two off topic inflammatory posts have been removed.

[Asiantravel]

3 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Agree on the routes - many would be better to Kuala Lumpur -> Penang (still a possible layover). 

 

I would probably do the bus if returning from Vietnam on a serial Tourist-Visa - but some hate taking buses.  Are you sure the Giant Ibis bus runs straight through to Bangkok?  If so, does it pass through Poipet?  If so - useless.  Also note that most so called "PP to Bangkok" routes actually drop you at one side of the border, and give you a ticket for a bus on the other side;  then you have to wait a while for the "other bus" (often a mini-van) to pick you up.  When I last checked this, one pays a premium for purchasing the Thailand-route part of the journey in Cambodia.  This may have changed recently. 

 

There is one "real" international bus I know of, which runs from Bangkok to Siem Reap, but last I checked, they cancelled the one running to Phnom Penh.  Again, this may have changed recently. 

 

If there is a 'real' 3-seat-across VIP from Thailand to Phnom Penh, preferably with decent shock-absorbers, that would be a godsend for many.  I have been packed-in with motorcycle parts, fruit, wicker-goods (a huuuuge fish-trap), etc (in seats and down the isles), as the Cambodian bus-companies try to maximize profits.  Virak Buntham used to be the "least bad" option of which I was aware - but they put a moto underneath and packed the isle with our luggage (after dumping it all in the dirt, first - at the pastry shop / last-stop out of PP), on my last trip with them.

I only responded because you were addressing the point about how to avoid flying in from Vietnam. As I said previously it’s astonishing how expensive it is to fly from Phnom Penh to Laos because these routes are not served by budget carriers. And because you are flying via other destinations they charge you even more for an unnecessarily longer journey

It wouldn’t be fair to compare Giant Ibis buses to Virak Buntham (or the standard of service that is offered) because they are a different league. You might want to read posts 3 and 4 in the following thread. Yes you would have to do it in three stages- Ho Chi Minh city to Phnom Penh, Phnom Penh to Siem Reap  and finally Siem Reap  to Bangkok which can all be done with the same company.

 

 

 

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, jeab1980 said:

Yes thats what this topic is about 20k

No, you did not get it.

 

This topic is about suspecting people of working, the 20k is just an excuse.

[tryasimight]

21 minutes ago, Zikomat said:

Let's say your stay in Pattaya and sometimes clean your apartment by yourself. In my opinion - you work in Thailand illegally.  Am I right? 

By the way - I don't work IN THAILAND. All my work is on the internet. None of the internet servers I use in my work are located in Thailand.

I bet at least one is