Entering Thailand by air several times per year for short visits

[elviajero]

17 minutes ago, Parker2100 said:

I know exactly what you are saying.  How could you possibly know what comes on their terminal?  The only way any of us know there is a rule is because of experiences of others.  How any times does someone need to get nailed for 2 or 3 before you say "oh wait...I guess this is the new rule?"

So, let me get this straight.  You are saying this is the rule, except when its not.  Hmmm...I see.  A little like the weather man saying "50% chance of rain."  He can't lose.

No I’m saying that since 2014 they have been actively on the lookout for long stay tourists ‘abusing’ the VE scheme.

 

And since then they have been denying entry to visitors with 2-3 previous stays. 

 

And the 6 flag system was introduced as an unofficial upper limit/guideline (180 days/6 months) at which point IO’s are encouraged to scrutinise entry history even more closely. 

 

The bottom line is that nothing new is happening. Denying entry with 2-3 entries is not new and doesn’t mean the 6 entry flag has changed.

[Parker2100]

11 minutes ago, elviajero said:

No I’m saying that since 2014 they have been actively on the lookout for long stay tourists ‘abusing’ the VE scheme.

 

And since then they have been denying entry to visitors with 2-3 previous stays. 

 

And the 6 flag system was introduced as an unofficial upper limit/guideline (180 days/6 months) at which point IO’s are encouraged to scrutinise entry history even more closely. 

 

The bottom line is that nothing new is happening. Denying entry with 2-3 entries is not new and doesn’t mean the 6 entry flag has changed.

Your agreeing with me then.

You say they deny 2-3 previous stays.  But are flagged for 6.  How can they get to 6 if they are denied after 2 or 3?  You seemed to be reassuring people that they can have 6 entries.  But you acknowledge that they routinely deny after 2 or 3 stays.

There was just an article in The Nation that a Chinese man was denied entry after visiting only one for 15 days (the Chinese limit for one tourist stay).  The new chief stated that 15 days was enough time for the man to see everything.  Now, if he wants to come back, he needs a Non-O.

I am not saying you are incorrect.  I am saying that things seem to be shifting.  It seems like the paradyme is starting to see 15 days as a benchmark.  For some at least.

6 stay less than 2 weeks is probably ok (spread out).  Fine, I get it.

And you need not reassure people that they can get 6 entries.  All I am saying is that something is happening.

[jacko45k]

18 hours ago, thaifarang1 said:

if I remember well, it was reported that the system flagged you for extra-scrutiny after 6 cumulative entries since mid 2015 or something like that.

It was an Visa 'agent' type and he did mention it used to be 6, was now 4, at the time. Probably 7-8 months ago. 

[Parker2100]

1 hour ago, FredGallaher said:

Parker you want to interpret the "rules" literally. That's being anal in my view. The IO interprets you intent based on a number of things. These include passport and computer record, how you present yourself, you dress, who you'r with, etc. If things don't add-up to you being a tourist and are using a tourist visa or VE, he can say no. Different IOs may have different interpretations but overall they will be in line with directives (written or not). You want hard and fast rules but won't get them. The basic rule for IO is to keep those out that are not here for tourist purposes. You seem to fit that category.  

My comment was in response to someone who is claimng there is a fixed methodology to denials.  I was simply saying that methodology seems to be changing recently.

 

Now, it seem I have been tagged with saying there are hard-fast rules.

 

I have said countless times that an IO officer has the authority to deny for anything but they are expected to make the right call.

 

Right now, making the right call is inconsequential (un important).

 

Also, the same people who are telling me to shut up and take it are probably the same one's to go bananas if the referee makes the wrong call at a Football game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 18, 2019 by Parker2100

[Caldera]

21 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

Yea. In your case the referee (IO) is saying you aren't acting as a tourist.  Does he/she have it right? 

The real problem seems to be that different IOs have different ideas about that. I think I act very touristy, and so far all IOs I've encountered seemed to agree. There's no guarantee that the next one will see it the same way though.

[Parker2100]

33 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

Yea. In your case the referee (IO) is saying you aren't acting as a tourist.  Does he/she have it right?

Actually, they specifically said I am trying to live in Thailand despite having spent more time outside of Thailand this year to that point.

 

They have the right to do their job accurately.

 

Does an Umpire have the right to call a strike when the pitch was clearly a ball? (In American baseball)

 

Actually, yes, the Umpire does but if it was a bad call, they will feel repercussions later.   We don't need people saying "Well, they are the Umpire, they can do it like they want." (Usually the opposite team)

 

In my case, the IO made the wrong assessment.  I am going to Cambodia on July 31st.  It won't be hard as I was never living here so I did not put down roots.

 

They made the wrong call and many such wrong calls will hurt Thailand. As it seems to be having that effect now.

 

So, they can shoot themselves in the foot if they want.  But I am going to call it like I see it.

Edited July 18, 2019 by Parker2100

[Parker2100]

10 minutes ago, Caldera said:

The real problem seems to be that different IOs have different ideas about that. I think I act very touristy, and so far all IOs I've encountered seemed to agree. There's no guarantee that the next one will see it the same way though.

Agreed!

[Parker2100]

57 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

So long then.

See you in Cambodia or Vietnam or Philipines when it is your turn.

 

At that time, remember, it was their right.

[lkv]

22 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

BTW I'm here to stay. 

Subject to Immigration approval you are, on a temporary extension of stay.

[lkv]

8 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

You are correct but I need yearly renewal. Not to hard.

If you meet Immigration requirements next year you are right.

 

They may include local ripoff insurance, that will make Elite look like a bargain.

 

Just keep that in mind, everybody should have a plan B during current climate, don't get too comfy.

Edited July 18, 2019 by lkv

[lkv]

12 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

I able to pay for Thai health insurance if I must, but I have coverage from my home country, Not a deal stopper. I could go home if I need specific medical care but believe the doctors here and care is just as good. 

Then your Embassy will authenticate your foreign insurance as they currently authenticate income letters, surely.

Edited July 18, 2019 by lkv

[Parker2100]

51 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

You are correct but I need yearly renewal. Not too hard.

Yet

[Parker2100]

8 hours ago, FredGallaher said:

Actually Parker your sports analogy is OK. There are wide known differences in refs. One ref might have a restricted strike zone that discourages swinging and others have a wider zone that encourages hitting. 

Immigration is not like professional sports with instant replay that can over ride calls. The number of entries is looked at as only one indicator not the only one. If you look and act like you intend to live here, they are obliged to deny your entry. 

If your driving up or down I 5 in California the speed limit is generally 70 mph, but the traffic is moving at 80-85 mph. If your going 90 mph your likely stopped by the CHP and ticketed for going 20 mph over the limit. Try telling them you were only going 5-10 mph faster. The CHP has discretion as to when to stop you. In bad weather they  might even stop you if going the posted limit. Likewise the IO has discretion to allow entry or not. 

I hope Cambodia has clearer rules for you. You seem like you need clear limits.

Yes, I do like clear rules.  But you seem to think this was a close call.  It was not.  They went back in my record as much as they needed to go (1.5 years) to get me over 180 days.  Actually, I think my disability got me sent to the Immigration Inspectors office (it can look like I am drunk when I am tired).  But then there, they already decided what they were going to do.  They kept interrupting me and not looking at the documentation they asked for so by the time they listened to me, they were almost done denying me.  That is when they let me in for 30 more days.  But now I am essentially blacklisted.

Why would a person whose plan was never to live in Thailand, pony up 800k baht and then be stuck here?  I am on a bigger Long-Term tour.

Why did you bring this up again?  I thought this topic was played out.

[jacko45k]

On 7/18/2019 at 3:50 PM, FredGallaher said:

You are correct but I need yearly renewal. Not too hard.

They are working on that.

[Leaver]

On 7/18/2019 at 2:10 PM, FredGallaher said:

Parker you want to interpret the "rules" literally. That's being anal in my view. The IO interprets you intent based on a number of things. These include passport and computer record, how you present yourself, you dress, who you'r with, etc. If things don't add-up to you being a tourist and are using a tourist visa or VE, he can say no. Different IOs may have different interpretations but overall they will be in line with directives (written or not). You want hard and fast rules but won't get them. The basic rule for IO is to keep those out that are not here for tourist purposes. You seem to fit that category.  

Fred, can you define "tourist?"

 

Is someone visiting Thailand once a year for a 2 week holiday a tourist?  Immigration's answer is, yes.  

 

Is the exact same person, who has changed a few things back home, to now visit Thailand every 2 months, a tourist?  Immigration's answer is, no.

 

Same person.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Leaver

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, Leaver said:

Fred, can you define "tourist?"

 

Is someone visiting Thailand once a year for a 2 week holiday a tourist?  Immigration's answer is, yes.  

 

Is the exact same person, who has changed a few things back home, to now visit Thailand every 2 months, a tourist?  Immigration's answer is, no.

 

Same person.

I don't believe the Thai authorities care what you are doing in the country as a 'tourist' as long as you aren't working or doing anything illegal.

 

It is all about the cumulative time spent in the country as a tourist that matters. The only time they set a limit it was 180 days per year, and Thai law says you are 'resident' if living in the country more than 180 days per year. That is why 180 days is still quoted by IO's and why the VE flag is set at 6 (6x30=180).

 

I am sure that eventually, when technology allows, they will set a limit of 6 months per year. Until then this 'discretionary power' is going to make it next to impossible to know how long term tourists will be treated. Time spent out of the country between visits and time spent in the country per visits are the main factors, but profiling definitely comes into many decisions.

[Leaver]

15 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I am sure that eventually, when technology allows,

The technology has been around for years.

 

Countries less wealthy than Thailand, like Cambodia and Malaysia, have has fingerprints for years.

 

Let's call a spade a spade and say they like to reserve the right to profile here, because they can abuse their power and / or be corrupt. 

[elviajero]

19 minutes ago, Leaver said:

37 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I am sure that eventually, when technology allows,

The technology has been around for years.

No it hasn't. As it stands the system doesn't keep a count of the number of days spent in the country for any given reason. So if they set such a limit the IO's would have to make manual counts like they did when the 90/180 day limit was in place.

 

Also, the Embassies/consulates are not yet linked to a centralised system to be able to see the full visa history. That's on it's way with the new E-Visa system.

 

Quote

Countries less wealthy than Thailand, like Cambodia and Malaysia, have has fingerprints for years.

I'm not talking about biometrics.

 

Quote

Let's call a spade a spade and say they like to reserve the right to profile here, because they can abuse their power and / or be corrupt. 

They are doing their job, and profiling is used by every border force in every country.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how IO's financially gain from refusing entry given that they aren't asking for money to turn a blind eye! 

Edited July 20, 2019 by elviajero

[Leaver]

3 minutes ago, elviajero said:

No it hasn't.

You are talking about Thailand, I am not.

 

4 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I'm not talking about biometrics.

I am.

 

4 minutes ago, elviajero said:

They are doing their job

But some are doing it differently to others.  It can simply mean what queue you get on as to whether you are allowed to enter, or not.  Fail!!!!

 

6 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how IO's financially gain from refusing entry

Fair point.  Perhaps promotion, for being "diligent." 

[KhaoYai]

On 7/16/2019 at 7:08 AM, emptypockets said:

 

See my post above.  There may have been other factors involved in your friends refusal.  I have 7 visa exempt entries 2019 year to date. 

Bear in mind a couple of these were only for three days. I've never stayed 30 days. 

I also have a non tourist reason for visiting Thailand and put my wife's full address on the immi form. 

Whether that makes a difference I really don't know. 

Like the OP I have concerns that I may be refused at some point. I enter every 8 weeks and stay for 2 weeks. My fears are because of the growing number of reports regarding refusals.  I accept however that some of these reports my not tell the whole story.

 

However, according to what I've been told by immigration, you should not be entering on exempts.

 

My history is this:  I was married to a Thai and had a Multi Entry Non Immigrant O based on that marriage.  After a while I decided that as I only stayed 2 weeks on most trips, why pay for the visa when I could enter for 30 days exempt? So when my visa expired that is exactly what I did. After a few entries - probably 4 to 6, a female I.O. spent quite a while looking at the stamps in my passport, muttered something in Thai but stamped me in.  Next trip I was taken to one side and told that as I was visiting my wife, I was not a tourist and should get a Non O, I would not be allowed in again on an exempt. So, before the next trip I obtained a new Non O and continued on with no problems.

 

Fast forward, I am now divorced but still come to Thailand every 8 weeks - initially back on exempts. Concerned by recent reports and that fact that on a couple of occasions I.O.'s have spent a little time flicking through my passport pages, I decided to get a M.E.T.V. The first one expired in April and I got another in June.  So far no problems but then I read reports of people being denied on tourist visas.  I have asked several I.O.'s what my position is - am I likley to be refused at some point?  Perhaps the best answer I got was (after looking the details on my stamps) "I think you'll be OK, we are not looking for people like you".

 

That's sort of reassuring but I still worry every time I arrive at the immigration booths. I guess the long and short of it is that the OP is 90% OK but there is no guarantee. The writer of this post (married to a Thai) states he has entered 7 times on exempts this year yet I was warned after 4, possibly 6 entries.

 

I believe that what they are really looking for is people effectively living in Thailand without a long stay visa but that my be subject to the opinion of an individual I.O.

 

It seems that the only rule is, there are no rules and it may even come down to which particular I.O. is in the booth on the day.

Edited July 20, 2019 by KhaoYai

[Leaver]

4 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

it may even come down to which particular I.O. is in the booth on the day.

Correct, and as an immigration policy, that is a BIG FAIL. 

[elviajero]

10 minutes ago, Leaver said:

17 minutes ago, elviajero said:

No it hasn't.

You are talking about Thailand, I am not.

Okay, I misunderstood your point. Yes, it has no doubt been around for years, but until it's available in Thailand they can't practically set limits that require manual counting.

 

12 minutes ago, Leaver said:

19 minutes ago, elviajero said:

They are doing their job

But some are doing it differently to others.  It can simply mean what queue you get on as to whether you are allowed to enter, or not.  Fail!!!!

Agreed, and that's not going to change with a system of discretional power. They clearly decided not going to wait for technology before doing something about long stay tourists and went for a soft clampdown. It could be a lot worse.

 

16 minutes ago, Leaver said:

23 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how IO's financially gain from refusing entry

Fair point.  Perhaps promotion, for being "diligent."

That doesn't really do it for me. If there was a prize it would be happening a lot more.

 

[elviajero]

6 minutes ago, Leaver said:

11 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

it may even come down to which particular I.O. is in the booth on the day.

Correct, and as an immigration policy, that is a BIG FAIL. 

Not for the country policing their border.

[Leaver]

Just now, elviajero said:

Not for the country policing their border.

Really? 

 

So a person who is denied entry, then flies to a nearby country, and enters by land, on the same day. 

 

Care to explain how that is good policy and enforcement?

[elviajero]

Just now, Leaver said:

Really? 

 

So a person who is denied entry, then flies to a nearby country, and enters by land, on the same day. 

 

Care to explain how that is good policy and enforcement?

Fair point, but I think that's a separate issue. The orders have always varied at the different entry points. 

 

I believe the clampdown at the airports is because the long term tourist MO changed due to the limits in Laos. More have to fly to trawl SEA for visas. VE is catered for at the land border with the 2 entry limit, and so far only a few 'westerners' are being denied entry with TR's. I guarantee that if many tourists denied at the airport started to use the land borders in the way you describe it would be shut down.

[Leaver]

3 minutes ago, elviajero said:

I guarantee that if many tourists denied at the airport started to use the land borders in the way you describe it would be shut down.

I agree.

 

Would you care to put a % figure on the amount of those people crossing by land that MUST be working illegally here. for no other reason that they are using tourist visas? 

[elviajero]

36 minutes ago, Leaver said:

I agree.

 

Would you care to put a % figure on the amount of those people crossing by land that MUST be working illegally here. for no other reason that they are using tourist visas? 

No idea, but I think there are very few long term 'western' tourists working for Thai employers on TR's these days.

 

I think that stopping repeated land entries, pushing people to get visas, and then limiting the availability of visas locally has the desired result of pushing many to get WP's. The others have given up and gone home.

 

The issue these days is more with under 50's able to work remotely and hang around in Thailand indefinitely. That means the IO's are still seeing long term tourists in numbers significant enough to warrant the most recent airport clampdown. They've no real idea if they are remote workers or working in Thailand, but probably assume the latter.

[KhaoYai]

Could Moderators please confirm that they have removed a post of mine which contained information about people working illegally in Thailand. The post has disappeared from both this thread and from 'My Activity'.

Edited July 21, 2019 by KhaoYai

[ubonjoe]

9 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

Could Moderators please confirm that they have removed a post of mine which contained information about people working illegally in Thailand. The post has disappeared from both this thread and from 'My Activity'.

There have been several clean ups of this topic to remove some bickering sessions. If your post was quoting one of those it may of been removed.

[KhaoYai]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

There have been several clean ups of this topic to remove some bickering sessions. If your post was quoting one of those it may of been removed.

No, no bickering involved Joe, I was referring to being offered a job doing SEO work in Sukhumvit a few years ago - no work permit available - plenty of foreigners working in the large offices and didn't see any Thai people. I made comments as to the probability of other work illegal work being available that people may not be aware of.

 

It was in response to Elviajero's post #100 and Leaver's post #99 which are still in place so I can't see that it was linked to any bickering.

Edited July 21, 2019 by KhaoYai