To many entries and denied entry

[KhaoYai]

Again, no evidence that the 180 days are law but this is from the Thai Consulate at Hull's website. I note they say 'rolling period' though and not resetting in January.

 

At the end of the 60-day stay (or 90 days if you have obtained a 30-day extension) it will be necessary to exit Thailand. If exiting to a neighbouring country and re-entering Thailand by air or overland without visa as a tourist you will be allowed a stay of either 15 or 30 days according to nationality. However this is entirely at the discretion of Thai Immigration at the time. Please be aware that if entering Thailand by air without a visa you will are allowed a maximum of three 30-day entries within any rolling 6-month period.

If entering overland without a visa you are allowed a maximum of two 30-day entries within any rolling 12-month period. Also be aware that the Royal Thai Embassies and Consulates in neighbouring countries may restrict the number of visas they will grant to nationals of countries other than the country where the Royal Thai Embassy / Consulate is located.

 

https://www.thaiconsul-uk.com/tourist-visa-single-tr.php

 

I note they state 2 entries by land = 60 days. I thought you were only stamped in for 15 days overland?

[pantsonfire]

11 hours ago, owenm said:

It's a known fact that either BKK airport will give you grief with your previous travel history.. 

 

If travelling with a visa and entering via CM, I think the likely hood of being refused entry should be greatly diminished, looking at previous reports. But too many VE there, and you'll likely to be refused entry.. 

 

Do not fly into Bangkok, even transit, because you may need to clear immig again to board your forwarding flight.. Fly to KL, and take a new seperate flight to CM.. If refused you'll ONLY be sent back to KL and not to LHR.. Your visa will still be active, just then change your strategy and re-enter via land either from Malaysia or fly and enter via Laos.. Keep your min. 20k Thb or eqiv on hand, invitation from GF or hotel booking, outgoing ticket 60/90 days to anywhere outside Thailand.. Could be Vientiane and then use a land entry to extend your stay further.. 

Is this true in that transit still need to clear immigration even booking via same ticket?  I had asked Thai airways and they mention that my suitcase be forwarded onto my final destination

 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, KhaoYai said:

I note they state 2 entries by land = 60 days. I thought you were only stamped in for 15 days overland?

All regular visa exempt entries by land have been 30 days since they introduced the limit of two such entries by land in a calendar year.

[judokrab]

2 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

Again, no evidence that the 180 days are law but this is from the Thai Consulate at Hull's website. I note they say 'rolling period' though and not resetting in January.

 

At the end of the 60-day stay (or 90 days if you have obtained a 30-day extension) it will be necessary to exit Thailand. If exiting to a neighbouring country and re-entering Thailand by air or overland without visa as a tourist you will be allowed a stay of either 15 or 30 days according to nationality. However this is entirely at the discretion of Thai Immigration at the time. Please be aware that if entering Thailand by air without a visa you will are allowed a maximum of three 30-day entries within any rolling 6-month period.

If entering overland without a visa you are allowed a maximum of two 30-day entries within any rolling 12-month period. Also be aware that the Royal Thai Embassies and Consulates in neighbouring countries may restrict the number of visas they will grant to nationals of countries other than the country where the Royal Thai Embassy / Consulate is located.

 

https://www.thaiconsul-uk.com/tourist-visa-single-tr.php

 

I note they state 2 entries by land = 60 days. I thought you were only stamped in for 15 days overland?

That official Royal Thai consulate (Hull) website is wrong on a number of counts....

1. re "If exiting to a neighbouring country and re-entering Thailand by air or overland without visa as a tourist you will be allowed a stay of either 15 or 30 days according to nationality."
  (a) it makes no difference whether you exited to a neighbouring country or a faraway country.
  (b) Without a visa, the possibilities are not 15 or 30 days depending on country. Visa-free entry is 90 days for 5 countries; 30 days for 57 countries; and 14 days for 2 countries. (There is also 15 days VOA option for 18 countries, but that is not relevant here where they are talking about visa-free entry.)

2. re "if entering Thailand by air without a visa you will are allowed a maximum of three 30-day entries within any rolling 6-month period." ... there is no such limit.

3. re "If entering overland without a visa you are allowed a maximum of two 30-day entries within any rolling 12-month period." … That is not true. It is per calendar year - not rolling.

Re your comment, "I thought you were only stamped in for 15 days overland?" ... from 31 December 2016 aonwards, it has been 30 days for most nations. Prior to that, it was 30 days for G7 nations, and 14 days (not 15 days) for most others (by land or sea).

Edited November 19, 2019 by judokrab
add "2016"

[judokrab]

 

5 hours ago, bbi1 said:

Good to know if this is true. Was this at BKK or DMK?

 

4 hours ago, Max69xl said:

Don Muang is also located in BKK.

No it's not. 
DMK is Don Mueang AIrport
BKK is Suvarnabhumi Airport

DMK and BKK are the IATA airport codes of two different airports.
 

[judokrab]

14 hours ago, BuckBee said:

Yes it is

the time span is mentioned in immigration act, look it up, it been linked to several times on this forum, one post in last couple months had good detail and links on it .

No, there is no 180 day timespan per calendar year mentioned in the Immigration Act or in any Police Order. Look it up. 

There was a 90 day limit per rolling six months in effect between 1 October 2006 and 25 November 2008. (And it only pertained to visa-exempt entries.)

Edited November 19, 2019 by judokrab

[judokrab]

11 hours ago, Tony125 said:

Your wrong and you can spend all the time you wish and will not find it. There was a regulation for about a year that was resinded in 2008 and no longer exists. it is sometimes refered to by IO's but no longer exists.

Actually, it was in effect for a little over two years: 1 October 2006 through 25 November 2008.

[Ireland32]

I was at Udon immigration, they hate doing marriage visas, too much paperwork, try to do in your country or Laos

[KhaoYai]

2 hours ago, judokrab said:

That official Royal Thai consulate (Hull) website is wrong on a number of counts....

They may well be wrong but as many have said, including myself, much of what they state is what is being used in Thailand by I.O.'s considering entry. It may not accord with the law but at the airport, surely I.O.'s are the law?

 

That said, if I was refused entry for no good reason or something that I felt was not within the law, In would call my lawyer. I certainly wouldn't be signing any papers in Thai language that stated I did not have the required amount of cash with me.

[KhaoYai]

2 hours ago, judokrab said:

No, there is no 180 day timespan per calendar year mentioned in the Immigration Act or in any Police Order. Look it up. 

There was a 90 day limit per rolling six months in effect between 1 October 2006 and 25 November 2008. (And it only pertained to visa-exempt entries.)

With respect and without entering into the argument over whether the 180 days thing is law or not. Surely what matters here is what is happening on the ground? As you may have read, I was told, just 2 weeks ago that there was a limit of 180 days and that it "reset in January".

 

Now, I'm pretty sure that plenty of people go through immigration every day having exceeded that limit - they should consider themselves lucky as they have clearly joined a queue where the officer simply can't be botthered.

[bbi1]

14 hours ago, RyanWalker said:

Yes mate I have stayed about 8 months this year in Thailand. I won't give all the inns & outs here but anyone should be prepared when they stand infront of an IO. Have the stuff worked out in your head when they ask you any question. They can never deny me to go in, as I know what to say after 10 years in Thailand. Btw I stay in Thailand for 10 years now. All SETV's. 

Any tips or pointers on what to say to IO officers when they ask certain questions?

[madmen]

4 minutes ago, bbi1 said:

Any tips or pointers on what to say to IO officers when they ask certain questions?

When he asks " you hab more than 5 post Thai visa?" say yes because those that have less are all getting rejected..

Edited November 20, 2019 by madmen

[BritTim]

9 hours ago, KhaoYai said:

With respect and without entering into the argument over whether the 180 days thing is law or not. Surely what matters here is what is happening on the ground? As you may have read, I was told, just 2 weeks ago that there was a limit of 180 days and that it "reset in January".

 

Now, I'm pretty sure that plenty of people go through immigration every day having exceeded that limit - they should consider themselves lucky as they have clearly joined a queue where the officer simply can't be botthered.

As long as you recognise that any unofficial limit specified by an official applies (at most) only to that particular entry point, what that official says should be taken seriously. If you are using what a consulate website writes or a random official says as indicating some global unofficial rule, I think you are taking one data point too seriously.

[KhaoYai]

11 hours ago, BritTim said:

As long as you recognise that any unofficial limit specified by an official applies (at most) only to that particular entry point, what that official says should be taken seriously. If you are using what a consulate website writes or a random official says as indicating some global unofficial rule, I think you are taking one data point too seriously.

I have never thought anything was official or happening everywhere. I was purely saying that the 180 day rulle or whatever you want to call it, seems to be backed up by the information given on at least one consulate's website.

 

I also rely on personal experience.

Edited November 20, 2019 by KhaoYai

[scottiddled]

On 11/20/2019 at 12:41 AM, KhaoYai said:

With respect and without entering into the argument over whether the 180 days thing is law or not. Surely what matters here is what is happening on the ground? As you may have read, I was told, just 2 weeks ago that there was a limit of 180 days and that it "reset in January".

 

Now, I'm pretty sure that plenty of people go through immigration every day having exceeded that limit - they should consider themselves lucky as they have clearly joined a queue where the officer simply can't be botthered.

Your take on luck is certainly valid, but I think you're missing a key theme in the debate over what is/isn't the law. 

 

This all comes down to a lack of transparency, consistency, and even common sense in Thai immigration policies. I'm used to a system in which it's hard to get something through the legislature and approved by the executive, but Thailand doesn't really have that "problem." The people in charge are perfectly capable of passing a "law" or even just promulgating official "regulations" that clarify all this. They choose not to, for whatever reason. And then you wind up with a hundred little fiefdoms all interpreting the intent of the actual laws as they see fit.

 

Been "spending too much time in Thailand?" Well, then you're "not a tourist." No real legal basis to deny you entry? Oh, we'll just say you lack the means to support yourself. Or that we suspect you're working (this is a labor department concern, really). 

 

If Thailand wants a 180-day policy or a limit on the number of entries, it can enact it. If it wants a "soft cap" that allows for exceptions, it can do that too. It wouldn't be unreasonable, and folks who feel like they have good reasons to spend more time can always try to invoke one of the exceptions or go down another path (non-tourist visas/exceptions). But when the ministry approves a tourist visa and some IO having a bad day at the border disagrees, they're often violating their own laws and fueling disdain for Thai authorities. 

[KhaoYai]

13 hours ago, scottiddled said:

but I think you're missing a key theme in the debate over what is/isn't the law. 

I've been involved with Thailand for over 18 years - I ain't missing anything.  We can complain all we want, I'll even agree with the sentiments of your post but at the end of the day, its their country and they can do exactly what they want. What we have to do (if we want to visit or live in Thailand) is to toe the line and do our best to comply with the rules - official or unofficial.

 

Having said that, if I was refused entry with no good reason, I would call my lawyer and do what I could to get around it.  In such cases they sometimes give in because they like an easy life.  People who try to 'live in Thailand' - who don't have or may not be entitled to have the correct visa must surely know they are at risk every time they leave and try to enter again.

[scottiddled]

On 11/22/2019 at 5:02 AM, KhaoYai said:

I've been involved with Thailand for over 18 years - I ain't missing anything.  We can complain all we want, I'll even agree with the sentiments of your post but at the end of the day, its their country and they can do exactly what they want. What we have to do (if we want to visit or live in Thailand) is to toe the line and do our best to comply with the rules - official or unofficial.

 

Having said that, if I was refused entry with no good reason, I would call my lawyer and do what I could to get around it.  In such cases they sometimes give in because they like an easy life.  People who try to 'live in Thailand' - who don't have or may not be entitled to have the correct visa must surely know they are at risk every time they leave and try to enter again.

We might be a bit too deep in the weeds here, as I largely agreed with you and still do. My only quibble was the tenor of your post, particularly what's implied by: (a) "what is happening on the ground" is "what matters" (underselling the disconnect between law and its enforcement), and (b) telling people they should feel "lucky" if they get through.

 

Again, I think this is a pretty slight disagreement, and its easy for people to get their radar up because of some of the more unreasonable viewpoints here (i.e. "the Salty Squad").

 

I agree with you about fighting back if one is denied entry with no good reason. I disagree with you when it comes to framing things around people "who try to 'live in Thailand.'" I also disagree with your acceptance of any and all rules ("official or unofficial") on the grounds that it's "their country." There's a lot I'm willing to accept/tolerate because I'm a guest here. And there's a point at which I'd pack up and leave. But there's plenty of room in between.

 

Most of that acceptance/tolerance is cultural. I'm respectful of the people who were here before me, even when it means I have to bite my tongue a bit. That acceptance/tolerance is not unlimited, however. And for me, culture transcends the whims of whoever claims to be in charge at a given time, so acceptance/tolerance of arbitary authority is lower. 

 

At the end of the day, "they" can do a lot. And we'll take it. To a point. At certain points--well before the "pack up and leave" line has been crossed--"they" will notice that people will complain and/or disobey. It's strategic. Like it here, overall, but have an issue with some requirements you find unfair? Find the right balance between obedience, obediance with objections, and disobedience. 

 

Maybe that's a bit too rebelious or Western of a perspective for Thailand.

[KhaoYai]

On 11/25/2019 at 2:38 AM, scottiddled said:

Maybe that's a bit too rebelious or Western of a perspective for Thailand

No its not and I do believe we agree far more than 'we' might think.  Taking things beyond immigration issues but also including them, there seems to be a general sentiment that a 'farang' always loses - be that on immigration matters, divorce, car accidents, whatever - the general opinion that's put about is that we ain't going to win.

 

I have always challenged that as simple hearsay and the opinion of those who haven't really fought or simply rolled over.  When I say 'challenged', I mean actually challenged. I had a case against a hospital (Thai) a couple of years ago, even my lawyer wouldn't touch it saying the hospital had big money to spend on top lawyers and the case would get buried for years. Long story short, I fought them myself and won.

 

Although it doesn't seem to happen much now - people used to say its easier to just pay the police when they stop you for some trumped up traffic offence.  Apart from 2 occasions (in 18 years) when I was actually doing something wrong, I don't do that and stand my ground.  Without exception, on those occasions, in the end I've been simply waved through.

 

In my experience (so far), the concept that the 'farang always loses' is nothing more than 'bar stool talk' from people who haven't stood their ground even when they know they're in the right.

 

However, when it comes to entering the country, I think that's an entirely different matter. Although I would challenge any 'unlawful' denial, even be prepared to be 'banged up' for a few nights, I believe that if they really don't want to let you in there's little you can do. I'm of the opinion that on many occasions, immigration will back down - possibly because they can't be bothered with the hassle (and the fact that they probably don't have any lawful grounds).  But as for those who have flaunted the system, countless visa runs and extensions, ED visas when they aren't actually learning, etc. etc. I think they will have to count their chickens and accept what happens.

Edited November 28, 2019 by KhaoYai

[aspenbkk]

On 11/18/2019 at 7:20 PM, Timwin said:

It seems a repeat customer is now bad for business! Totally new, brave world tourist economy!

they want us to pay for visas now as they dont get money otherwise from farangs on 30 days or less never happy but tell you otherwise .

[Maestro]

Removed an off-topic post and the replies to it.

[Langkawee]

On 11/19/2019 at 1:06 AM, BuckBee said:

Yes, it getting silly, be far better if let him in even if only for 7 days but stamped a remark in passport so can't do it again with a time lapse or requiring a visa from home country .
 

That would be the humane thing to do, and would stem but not stop the social media destruction of Thai tourism to Vietnam's advantage. Horrific how the 41 year American was murdered by suspected terrorists in immigration jail. There should be a grace period of a week before you end up in a cell of 150 people where there's a chance you can be beaten to death. After all it is 2019, not 1819, nor the middle ages. 

[Langkawee]

15 hours ago, aspenbkk said:

they want us to pay for visas now as they dont get money otherwise from farangs on 30 days or less never happy but tell you otherwise .

But they make it so difficult to get 60 day visa. Why not an option for evisa for visa exempt nationalities (it's not rocket science) or pay 1000 bath at land border or airport. Thailand's tourist visa system is not modern, so old hat and backwards, because country is run by old men with no forward thinking, we must wait for the new generation to rule for positive modern changes. 

[KhaoYai]

On 11/29/2019 at 3:42 AM, Langkawee said:

But they make it so difficult to get 60 day visa.

Really? What's difficult about obtaining a single entry tourist visa?