Tourist visa rejected could it be racism?

[gk10002000]

5 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

There is a simple answer to this thread.  OP asks : Could it be racism?  Yes, simply sure it could be that...... 

Yep

[gk10002000]

METV's which you mentioned you had were intended for and I thought can only be gotten by people in their home countries.   You seem to indicate you haven't gone home much and just went from country to country.  In this day and age where many people do have money and means, it still can seem odd to immigration that you never went home, or don't seem to go home to work, etc.  You may look to them like an itinerant worker, or you may not have given very clear or concise answers to the questions you were asked.  Just how do you support yourself?  What were you doing in those other countries? 

[hawker9000]

"I had been living in Thailand and had gotten a multiple tourist visa. "

 

You were abusing tourist visas, and the IO(s) was/were able to suss that:  

 

"When I flew in BKK over the weekend the immigration officers asked me a bunch of questions implying that I was living in Thailand"

 

Game, set, match.   Nothing to do with race; you just didn't hear what you wanted to hear.

 

 

[gk10002000]

14 hours ago, Califoniadreaming82 said:

I will then say I had experiences with dating and with taxi drivers in my time in Thailand to get the feeling there is some racism in Thailand and I believe that extends to immigration officials. I am just not sure what else can explain the reason I was denied entry. The immigration officials were asking many questions hinting towards working here or why here  I was here so long  I am a pro trump american so its not like I am trying to play the victim card but I honestly do not know what else to think.

Well now you made the slip.  Do you really think they knew you were a pro trump american or that had anything to do with things

[heybuz]

i have had to attend court in thailand this year and again in october for the third time, the last time i entered about six weeks ago i was looked at closely as came in that time on a visa exempt the officer asked me my reasons for coming to the kingdom and after some time let me in, i only stayed 3 weeks and left. this time i have a two month visa and a letter from the court am now worried that i will be denied entry . i did not want to come back but the judge said i had to appear and apologised to me for the inconvenience. if i am denied entry who holds sway the immigration department or the courts in thailand 

         late last year and extending into this year i had a six month multiple entry visa.

[dbrenn]

The OP is out of luck if he expects that all people are treated equally in Thailand. 

[ukrules]

No, it's not racism, it's xenophobia.

 

[hawker9000]

11 minutes ago, heybuz said:

i have had to attend court in thailand this year and again in october for the third time, the last time i entered about six weeks ago i was looked at closely as came in that time on a visa exempt the officer asked me my reasons for coming to the kingdom and after some time let me in, i only stayed 3 weeks and left. this time i have a two month visa and a letter from the court am now worried that i will be denied entry . i did not want to come back but the judge said i had to appear and apologised to me for the inconvenience. if i am denied entry who holds sway the immigration department or the courts in thailand 

         late last year and extending into this year i had a six month multiple entry visa.

"who holds sway the immigration department or the courts in Thailand "

 

Neither, actually.

[jspill]

7 hours ago, lkv said:

I'm not doubting that people get grilled at a certain numbers of visa exempt entries or some getting rejected to prove a point perhaps.

 

This has made it to the UK papers. The way it has been reported though has made them to back off about the 20K requirement. They don't want to actually scare genuine tourists off.

 

But this has become a drama extended to all sorts of legally issued visas (including SETV), and let's just say, being polite here, that I am skeptical about some of those reports.

I personally know 4 people that were denied, including the Ed visa guy with 25k 

[jspill]

Some ridiculous nitpickery over the OP using the word 'living', that just means existing. He's allowed to use the METV for 9 months if it's designed to allow that length of time for him to exist here.

 

There's no visa abuse here. Immigration are concerned with people working illegally, not people using one visa for the maximum allotted time. The issue isn't 'living' whatever that means.

 

People show Thai bank books at consulates as proof of funds when applying for visas, and condo rent contracts... they aren't told oh you look like you're 'living' here because you have a bank account and live in a condo.

 

[Rc2702]

39 minutes ago, jspill said:

I personally know 4 people that were denied, including the Ed visa guy with 25k 

Spill break down the demographics of these 4 lads for us? 

 

I noted one lad in IDC was some kind of fighter and had a bit of an online showreel.  Interested to know the commonalities of the 4 guys you know?

[jspill]

4 minutes ago, Rc2702 said:

Spill break down the demographics of these 4 lads for us? 

 

I noted one lad in IDC was some kind of fighter and had a bit of an online showreel.  Interested to know the commonalities of the 4 guys you know?

All in their 20s

 

US, French, German, white

One Asian, Hong Kong

[edwardflory]

Several of the things IO'ers ( of ANY country ) look for / at and also question:

 

A) Your age - a more thorough look if a male between 24 & 44,

If you have stayed in Thailand ( or ANY country ) for longer than a 2 weeks to one month visit as most tourists would, leading to:

C) Your income - where does your money come from?.......leading to:

 

As I have said before, you ( any person ) has no "right" to enter ANY country if you are not a citizen of that country.

 

When I came to Thailand, Oct 2014 for the 1st time in 40+ years, the first two things the IO asked me were ( while looking me straight in the eyes ): 1...What was the purpose of my trip, 2... How long did I intend to stay? And a few other questions for me to answer as he started beating on the computer, took my photo, stamped my passport and said, "Enjoy your visit". As far as I was concerned, these were normal IO questions.

 

First impressions are important, no matter what other people say, when interviewed by a IO.  If for some reason, you give a bad impression, and / or your passport tells a different story, THIS is where problems start.

 

As to the "" Trump"" part, what the hell has 'Trump' got to do with you being denied entry!!!!!

 

At some point I begin to question these "denied entry" postings.

[JackThompson]

I agree it's not 'race' - maybe 'xenophobia' (as ukrules said).  Stopping people entering to spend money here is self-defeating, so there must be some irrational thinking to blame.  If the concern is people not having the money - well, he had the money the specified he must have.  If they want to see more documentation of finances, that's fine, but what folks need to have and show to satisfy the question must be public.  All we have a guesses as to what might work to prove one's innocence.

 

If anyone can cite where Thai law defines "abuse" of a visa, I'd like to read it.  I understand "breaking" laws -  in this case working a Thai job or overstay - but not "abusing" them. 

To me, the word "Abuse" is some sort of spin-term, created by people who are not satisfied with the "legal" limits on the use of Tourist Visas and Visa Exempts.  Since what is being done isn't "illegal" - people just call it some undefined thing like, "abuse."

 

We, again find a term that doesn't define anything - "living" = "being alive."  He had been "living" somewhere else, for 2 solid months. It was the MFA who issued him his METV, from an "Official" (not honorary) consulate, and with considerable checking on finances, etc.  He used it according to the rules defined for its use.  Now people say, "Well, you could use it to stay here almost 9 months, but it wasn't supposed to be used for that."  According to what authority, and where's the law/rule defining the correct use of it?

 

What is missing in the law, is any definition of "how long" a person can "be" here using "tourist" (and/or "exempt") as their means of entry - even ED visas are considered an improper or "frowned upon" way to "live" here by some in Immigration, to spite being designed specifically for longer-stays while a person attends classes. 

Evidently, Immigration and the MFA - and who knows what other departments or sub-groups within them - cannot formulate a more defined policy.  That is Their Problem, and should be settled between themselves.  It is not reasonable to punish those with Zero Control over the definition of Thai laws, for obeying Thai laws as written.

[ubonjoe]

Several off topic inflammatory posts have been removed.

[jspill]

1 hour ago, edwardflory said:

As I have said before, you ( any person ) has no "right" to enter ANY country if you are not a citizen of that country.

 

First impressions are important, no matter what other people say, when interviewed by a IO.  If for some reason, you give a bad impression, and / or your passport tells a different story, THIS is where problems start.

No one in any thread is claiming they have a right to enter. The actual issues are things like:

 

- no ATMs before passport control

- 20k in cash being totally useless as it proves nothing, and the robbery risk

- no defined limits on repeated tourist visa use, consulates keep issuing them

- little actual police work in stopping illegal workers in the country, just denying people at the border, and genuine tourists get caught up in that

- people still being denied when they do have 20k

- reports of no ability to appeal once in detention, overcharging for flight ticket, general poor treatment

 

List goes on. Whole situation is a farce they could let people renew visas within the country like everywhere else in Asia, and ask for proof of funds then

 

Yes first impressions are important but it's clear there is also abuse of power going on, I know 4 people that got denied and they all dress fine, are polite etc., it can't all be down to that

[stevecourso]

It is obvious that the Thai government is trying to screen out those who claim to be tourists from

the tourists that the TAT would like to have visit the country.  The tourists the government would

like  to have are the tourists who fly into Bangkok and then head to the beach or up North to Chiang Mai

for a few days.   At the end of their visits these tourist are expected to return to their home

countries and wait a year to visit Thailand again.

How many "real" tourists stay 2, 4, or 6 months?  Or how many "real" tourists can afford

multi month holidays in Thailand?

 

The government would like to eliminate the "non real" tourists and not have them

travel to Thailand for "non" tourist reasons and take advantage of loopholes in the

visa system.   There are a number of Thai legal

visa options open to those who have valid reasons to visit.

 

There is a new wind blowing in Thailand and we will have to get use to it.

 

 

[Straight8]

Avoid queues with a female officer behind the counter. It seems every time I hear a story on denial of entry its almost always the doing of a female officer.

 

Go figure!!

 

 

[Straight8]

12 hours ago, lkv said:

You should read some of "I got denied entry" posts from 2014. I was looking at one and it was similarly worded to one I have seen recently. I will not divulge the specifics, but I do have strong reasons to believe they were written by the same person. Now and back in 2014. Different usernames obviously.

 

Now some have started having more posts (around 30), to create the impression of genuine posts.

 

Then, there are some with a high number of posts that have always supported paid options, threatening us that "the time has come". 

 

Loads of misinformation here, getting harder to navigate to the truth, but we are getting there.

 

 

Oh, do people really have that much free time on their hands, and pick this form of entertainment to get their rocks off??

[tonray]

1 minute ago, Straight8 said:

Oh, do people really have that much free time on their hands, and pick this form of entertainment to get their rocks off??

YES! 

[JackThompson]

15 minutes ago, stevecourso said:

It is obvious that the Thai government is trying to screen out those who claim to be tourists from

the tourists that the TAT would like to have visit the country.  

I see no evidence that TAT, the MFA, and Immigration are on the same-page at all.

 

15 minutes ago, stevecourso said:

 

The tourists the government would

like  to have are the tourists who fly into Bangkok and then head to the beach or up North to Chiang Mai

for a few days.   At the end of their visits these tourist are expected to return to their home

countries and wait a year to visit Thailand again.

How many "real" tourists stay 2, 4, or 6 months?  Or how many "real" tourists can afford

multi month holidays in Thailand?

Many can - and do.  We would welcome a defined list of documentation which is needed to satisfy this question to the satisfaction of the authorities concerned.

 

15 minutes ago, stevecourso said:

The government would like to eliminate the "non real" tourists and not have them

travel to Thailand for "non" tourist reasons and take advantage of loopholes in the

visa system.   There are a number of Thai legal

visa options open to those who have valid reasons to visit.

 

There is a new wind blowing in Thailand and we will have to get use to it.

"The Government" is a conglomerate of varied parties with varied interests - is the nature of government.  If by "non-tourists" you mean those Breaking the Law with regard to taking Thai jobs, the enforcers of the law can go to dive resorts and schools and catch anyone working illegally with ease.  Much easier and more efficient that trying to make uneducated guesses in immigration queues.

 

The 'wind' seems to be originating from a clique of Immigration personnel at airports and the Poipet/Aranya crossing - just a fraction of one govt department.  There has been no official announcement of any changes to the rules for those staying for "longer periods" (undefined) on Tourist Visas.

[jippytum]

I have never heard of racism being given  as a reason for a refused airport entry and suggest the IO  had other reasons to refuse entry .

I know they can be fussy at times but they still have to have a valid reason or what they consider to be a valid reason to detain and deport

a US passport holder and we have not been given the 'official reason ' for refusal

[the guest]

They don't have to give you a reason. TIT

[JackThompson]

9 minutes ago, the guest said:

They don't have to give you a reason. TIT

They always stamp the official-reason in the passport of the person rejected.  Whether that reason has any relation to reality is a separate question.

[BritTim]

36 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

46 minutes ago, the guest said:

They don't have to give you a reason. TIT

They always stamp the official-reason in the passport of the person rejected.  Whether that reason has any relation to reality is a separate question.

I would qualify this just a bit. According to procedure, they are supposed to provide the reason(s) for denial in writing, as well a stamp in your passport. However, invariably at land borders, and sometimes at airports, proper procedure is not followed (sometimes to the benefit of those denied, I might add).

[Califoniadreaming82]

I am the OP of this thread. Let me clarify the specific reason I was denied by immigration was that I didn't have the 20k in funds. But that was bullshit because I had that much baht on my person.

 

My whole point in bringing this experience to Thai visa is just to share my experience, and given how I was treated I surmised that I was being discriminated against based on my race, because I have other friends of European decent with an American passport (same passport as me!) who have been in Thailand for like 18 months consecutively on multiple tourist visas. This is why I think the immigration official was discriminating because she had no right to deny me entry into Thailand when other guys I know have been in Thailand longer on tourists visas. 

 

Have any of you spent time in  the inside of a detention center? It was a horrible experience. 

 

[Jingthing]

You might be right.

You might be wrong.

No way to ever know for sure.

Another case in point that sovereign nations always have the power to enforce their immigration policies based on any criteria they like, and "fairness" has very little to do with it. 

<removed>

[bkk6060]

If anyone has ever been in the search and detention area at lets say LAX, it is full of middle eastern, asians, etc.  Not many white folks.

I think it is more profiling then racism attitudes.

Yes, who knows but I think people from certain areas of the world now are looked at more closely.

Maybe it is all a good thing considering, maybe.......

[bill38]

I don't think we're getting the full story here.

 

Post a picture of the rejection stamp on your passport.

 

What were the questions the IO asked you?

 

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, Califoniadreaming82 said:

My whole point in bringing this experience to Thai visa is just to share my experience, and given how I was treated I surmised that I was being discriminated against based on my race, because I have other friends of European decent with an American passport (same passport as me!) who have been in Thailand for like 18 months consecutively on multiple tourist visas.

Other folks for years, actually - but sometimes they, too, get put in detention - if they didn't find out that entering at airports with a longer-stay history on TR/ED/Exempt is now like playing roulette.  Just last week - a Dutch and a German went through what you did - more others before - almost all Euros.  Some were in there even longer than you were.
We are ALL foreigners, to them - and because some of us stay longer, this clique wants us out.