Suspect of working in Thailand ... Really? Doing what?

[4675636b596f75]

Many stories of people attempting entry either to be denied, or warned.  Most say Immigration accuses them of working in Thailand or suspects them of working in Thailand. 

 

What kind of work do you suppose immigration suspects these people are doing?

 

It seems logical that it would be a digital nomad type of work, but most here think they don't care about DN work.

 

What is the truth?

[kingofthemountain]

The truth is if you are denied to entry in Thailand

it's can not be because you are working in Thailand, because at the moment

you are not inside, so it's difficult to prove.

Then it's just free accusation or suspection from the immigration

then they can use another excuse (Not enough money, too entries in thailand in one year

or whatever reason, bad or good, real or not) and denied you.

The good question could be if you are denied for a dumb reason

(For example not enough funds even if you have your atm card and a well stocked bank account)

what are your legal recourse (I mean with a correct chance of success) before to be pulled in a plane back to your country?

[Maestro]

Depending on the reason for the rejection, the foreigner can file an appeal with the Minister of the Interior according to section 22 of the Immigration Act.

[MiNombreEsFicticious]

"What kind of work do you suppose immigration suspects these people are doing?" asks the OP.

 

I am pretty sure that no Immigration Officer has pushed their thought process that far forward. They just operate with a list of 4 or 5 memorized questions (you have 20,000? why you here? why so many entries?, etc.), little to no thinking required or being done. Thinking is frowned upon here. 

[Puchaiyank]

This question about "working" in Thailand exposes the greater issue: "Shouldn't immigration be burden with evidence of proof... to support their loose allegations of wrong doing?"

 

Entirely too much bias and power in the hands of unethical people...

[Tayaout]

Most people are not denied under 12.3 (working without permission). They use 12.9 (no 20K) and/or 12.2 (could be interpreted as living in thailand under wrong visa. Not a genuine tourist). Sure they will give many reasons but it's almost always 12.2.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Tayaout

[jacko45k]

15 minutes ago, Puchaiyank said:

This question about "working" in Thailand exposes the greater issue: "Shouldn't immigration be burden with evidence of proof... to support their loose allegations of wrong doing?"

 

Entirely too much bias and power in the hands of unethical people...

If a person is living in Thailand and not working, one has to assume they have some income or savings. I don't agree with your perspective and say the onus is on the person wanting to live in Thailand and yet, for some unknown reason, refuses to pay to do so. Most of us have to work to survive, and do so well beyond 50. 

[overherebc]

2 hours ago, Maestro said:

Depending on the reason for the rejection, the foreigner can file an appeal with the Minister of the Interior according to section 22 of the Immigration Act.

True but aren't you held in detention until the decision is made? How long that would take is anyones quess

[Tayaout]

7 minutes ago, overherebc said:

True but aren't you held in detention until the decision is made? How long that would take is anyones quess

It should be up to 7 days but it is likely they let you in before if you contact an attorney and they are wrong. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by Tayaout

[alan grice]

They should employ one of these Nomad Bums as Imo Officers. Even i can spot them Teachers n E Beggars aroundTown.Poacher turned Game Keeper.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Peterw42]

5 hours ago, 4675636b596f75 said:

What kind of work do you suppose immigration suspects these people are doing?

I dont think they care less what the work maybe or even think about it. They are denying because something doesn't add up.

 

Its the same as a Playtex wonder-bra, "no visible means of support".

 

 

What I find hilarious is the guys that get pulled up being suspected of being more than a tourist, who then show immigration their long term lease, their Thai bank account, their Thai license and admit to speaking fluent Thai with the IO.

But I am a tourist, lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wasabi]

1 hour ago, FredGallaher said:

Well said. The some IO can make quick assessments about the OP intents. By showing leases, bank accounts, DL, speaking Thai,etc only proves they aren't tourists. Especially if they have a track record of tourist or ED visa stays. A simple explanation might help, but arguing the law won't. They might answer "you're living in Thailand too long", if true best to pack up and go elsewhere.

 

My wife and I were asked to speak Thai when we were interrogated. We both speak Thai very well and did as asked but I suspected this was not in my favor and it could be a trap, however I didn't want to 'play dumb'.  My wife is fluent in Lao and Thai as first languages and I studied Thai in Thailand for 2 years on an ED visa plus we speak Thai everyday. Many things can look a certain way but in my case since my ED visa I have always and only come to Thailand as a tourist. I wish when accused of working they would dig deeper because in our case they'll find no proof of what isn't there.

[Old Croc]

It's very simple.

If you are of working age and have spent many years inside the country on visas or exempt entries, with only occasional short trips over the border to renew a visa, you either have great independent wealth or a means of income inside the country.

The onus is not on the IO to prove where your local income comes from, but on you to properly explain how you can afford to live here while pretending to be a tourist. You should prove funds in the same way that the over 50 retirees or married people have to show income or large savings. It may be difficult for those who have used Thailand's former laxness to set up a life here, but if there isn't a visa category that fits your situation, bad luck, move on.

The fact that past practices allowed people unlimited entry and stays in this way doesn't mean the country is in the wrong when they decide to tighten up on this unfettered access.  It really just means the party is over for many of those who have lived on Thailand's largess for years.

[alan grice]

Ive been here 30 years and my Thais disgusting, sadly ive only been asked one Question, that being .Is My English O.K. ?.So all i can say in Thai is “Not too bad.!.????[emoji481]


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Khon Kaen Jeff]

13 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

It's very simple.

If you are of working age and have spent many years inside the country on visas or exempt entries, with only occasional short trips over the border to renew a visa, you either have great independent wealth or a means of income inside the country.

The onus is not on the IO to prove where your local income comes from, but on you to properly explain how you can afford to live here while pretending to be a tourist. You should prove funds in the same way that the over 50 retirees or married people have to show income or large savings. It may be difficult for those who have used Thailand's former laxness to set up a life here, but if there isn't a visa category that fits your situation, bad luck, move on.

The fact that past practices allowed people unlimited entry and stays in this way doesn't mean the country is in the wrong when they decide to tighten up on this unfettered access.  It really just means the party is over for many of those who have lived on Thailand's largess for years.

 ''It really just means the party is over for many of those who have lived on Thailand's largess for years''

 

Mmmm that old chesnut. That is what you would love to think. Sadly for you it's not the case, people always find a way. I haven't heard of a single person who is not in Thailand who want to be because they can't get in or cannot stay here. 

[Old Croc]

2 minutes ago, Khon Kaen Jeff said:

 ''It really just means the party is over for many of those who have lived on Thailand's largess for years''

 

Mmmm that old chesnut. That is what you would love to think. Sadly for you it's not the case, people always find a way. I haven't heard of a single person who is not in Thailand who want to be because they can't get in or cannot stay here. 

So you, and everyone you know, are living here illegally?

[Khon Kaen Jeff]

14 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

So you, and everyone you know, are living here illegally?

Oh dear. One can only be living here illegally if they are on overstay, otherwise you have been stamped in by an IO, correct or not?

 

What made you so bitter out of interest?

Edited September 30, 2019 by Khon Kaen Jeff

[richard_smith237]

My take on all of this is that Immigration work on probability. 

 

- If you are Working here and meet the requirements for a Work Permit, no issues. 

- If you are retired here and meet the requirements for a Retirement Visa, no issues. 

- If you are married here and meet the requirements for a Marriage Visa, no issues.

 

IF you don't meet any of the above criteria, i.e. unmarried, not on a Work Visa, too young for retirement then you are a Tourist and must meet the requirements for a Visa Exempt Entry or a Tourist Visa. 

 

When staying here long term as a Tourist you are 'breaking script'.... and realistically, repeated entry of those visiting repeatedly who are not on WP, Retirement of Marriage Visas lends to questions of what exactly they are doing here for so long.

 

Perfectly normal questions: how can you fund your stay? You are a trust fund baby, fell into inheritance? BitCoin Millionaire??? The Thai Elite Visa has been set up for you. 

 

We [ThaiVisa Forum Contributors] often accuse the Thai men of being 'entitled' but what exactly 'entitles' us to a long term stay in a foreign country?

 

The requirements are simple to meet, but if you can't meet them, how can it be the fault of Thailand? all Thailand has done is firm up existing rules, Thailand has been slack in the past and for decades some / many / most  took advantage of the slack regulation and started taking for granted their 'right' to live in Thailand long term. 

 

With all of the above mentioned there are a few outstanding contradictions:

 

- Those on retirement and Marriage Visa's could still end up working illegally!

 

- The Marriage (and dependent Visa) exist so as not to separate someone who is supporting a family from their family, there are financial constraints and why wouldn't there be? if one can't meet the requirements, how can they be expected to support a family. 

- Retirement Visa - if you can't meet the requirements, how can you be expected to live here without working here?

 

One option that 'could' be made available to those who don't meet the existing requirements of Marriage, Retirement is for those who wish to stay to would be to prove a lump sum or reliable income from overseas - this would take the 'sour taste' out of the mouths of those who don't wish to pay for the Elite Visa. 

 

Realistically - there are a multitude of options for those wishing to stay in Thailand - but if you don't meet the requirements its fairly understandable that Immigration suspect you to be working in Thailand Illegally, its quite probably they are not wrong. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by richard_smith237

[ubonjoe]

A off topic inflammatory post meant to deflect the topic has been removed.

[ubonjoe]

43 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The requirements are simple to meet, but if you can't meet them, how can it be the fault of Thailand? all Thailand has done is firm up existing rules, Thailand has been slack in the past and for decades some / many / most  took advantage of the slack regulation and started taking for granted their 'right' to live in Thailand long term. 

There is are no existing regulations or rules limiting stays on tourist visas. Same for visa exempt entities other than the 2 at land border crossings per calendar year.

[Khon Kaen Jeff]

24 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

If you are here on a tourist or Ed visa and work you are illegal in most cases. 

Sure, but the phrase used was living here illegally, not 'working'., although I suppose it can flush out to be the same thing in some cases.

 

Ie one can see how this works though, if you are under 50 not married and do not have a work permit or an elite visa (unlikely) or a dependency visa, ie have children here (bit of a grey area) then it's a big red flag, and assume these are the types the gov is targeting. Must be a few thousand of them in Pattaya alone.

[Khon Kaen Jeff]

11 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

There is are no existing regulations or rules limiting stays on tourist visas. Same for visa exempt entities other than the 2 at land border crossings per calendar year.

Right, it's just random, but realistically you aren't going to keep getting issued tv's or allowed in on non exempts forever. maybe time it was made law so everyone knows where they stand at least, or maybe the gov are afraid they could lose money, plus it could create big problems for offshore workers who are under 50 and not married who come and go?

[kingofthemountain]

18 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

There is are no existing regulations or rules limiting stays on tourist visas. Same for visa exempt entities other than the 2 at land border crossings per calendar year.

Interesting.

some years ago i was under 50 yo and i often came in LOS with 30 days visa exemption

and once at the airport immigration they have counted the numbers of days i was in Thailand

in the last months and explained me you can not be here more than 180 days in the last 12 months.

Fortunately i was just under the days limit. 

[ubonjoe]

4 minutes ago, Khon Kaen Jeff said:

Right, it's just random, but realistically you aren't going to keep getting issued tv's or allowed in on non exempts forever. maybe time it was made law so everyone knows where they stand at least, or maybe the gov are afraid they could lose money, plus it could create big problems for offshore workers who are under 50 and not married who come and go?

I don't think they will make any regulations limiting stays on tourist visas or visa exempt entries. The people that would be issuing it would not do it because they are not concerned about how long people stay here as tourists. They recognize the amount of money they bring into the country and really do not harm anything. 

If concerned about people who are working here illegally they should go after those hiring them to work here.

What is occurring at some airports appears to be some immigration officers that are making up their own rules and requirements since most denials are not based upon any fact.

[digbeth]

If they say.... prostitution... from the lack of income yet able to support yourself in Thailand previously (if you had stayed and visa runned in the past)

[richard_smith237]

32 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

There is are no existing regulations or rules limiting stays on tourist visas. Same for visa exempt entities other than the 2 at land border crossings per calendar year.

 

There have been in the past? no? Rules about 3 Exempt Entries per 180 days?

 

I used to enter Thailand on 6 month ME Visas (and renew each 6 months on a home visit to my home country - I saw the landscape changing over a decade ago)

 

But, the real issue is the suspicion of work: A Perpetual Tourist definitely raises eyebrows regarding how they support themselves, they would in any nation. 

 

I guess that the majority of those here on repeated tourist Visa's or Exempt entries are working here illegally.

I don't see anything wrong whatsoever with 'computer work' i.e. online service for an overseas company etc 

 

 

[CGW]

21 minutes ago, Khon Kaen Jeff said:

plus it could create big problems for offshore workers who are under 50 and not married who come and go?

This is not a new problem or rule, as an offshore worker who has resided here many years I was given only 17 days on entry and told to get another type of visa, that was 14 years ago!

[Khon Kaen Jeff]

4 minutes ago, CGW said:

This is not a new problem or rule, as an offshore worker who has resided here many years I was given only 17 days on entry and told to get another type of visa, that was 14 years ago!

my point was what if it was made actual law about how many visits one could make on a tv or non exempt in say a calendar year...never said the current climate at immigration is a new problem per se for folk such as your goodself.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Khon Kaen Jeff

[CGW]

1 minute ago, Khon Kaen Jeff said:

my point was if it was made actual law about how many visits one could make on a tv or non exempt..never said it's a new problem for folk such as your goodself.

Yes, I should have added they should either apply the same rules for all or change the "law" as it is totally random now, luck playing a large part for some! 

[ubonjoe]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

Rules about 3 Exempt Entries per 180 days?

That was mostly intended for land border crossings. They scraped it since it was causing problems at airports for officers having to count the days of stay and people coming here for legitimate reasons. That is why the created the 15 days at land border crossing when they rescinded it and then the 2 at per calendar year that replaced it.

 

7 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I guess that the majority of those here on repeated tourist Visa's or Exempt entries are working here illegally.

Not sure how many are doing it now but not as many as in the past. As I wrote in a earlier post they should be going after the people that are hiring them.