Are you still at risk even with a re-entry permit?

[acenase]

Imagine this scenario. Person A has a valid SETV who entered Thailand through the border, because he feared being denied entry and refused entry coming into DMK, decides to travel to another country for a few days on Airasia because of their cheap flights and buys a re-entry permit to keep his SETV alive upon return, would you say he is still at risk for being scrutinized & denied entry at DMK with extensive tourist visa history when he returns? Or does the poor guy need to enter Thailand again through the land border just to be safe...has anyone ever been denied entry after buying and returning with a re-entry permit?
 

Compared to Person B, who has a valid SETV, BUT... decides to let the SETV die when he travels out and comes back hoping to get stamped in on a free 30 day visa exempt stamp? Are both still at risk or does Person A have a better chance because of his re-entry permit keeping his SETV alive?

 

[jacko45k]

I do not understand. He has already been stamped in for 60 days, and you propose leaving with a Re-Entry Permit and returning. He would only be stamped in for the remainder of the 60 days (same date as previous stamp), and I fail to see the benefit.

 

 

Edited January 15, 2020 by jacko45k

[DrJack54]

30 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I do not understand. He has already been stamped in for 60 days, and you propose leaving with a Re-Entry Permit and returning. He would only be stamped in for the remainder of the 60 days (same date as previous stamp), and I fail to see the benefit.

 

 

Yes the OP seems a confusing post. However if read all his other posts I think this is his situation. Wants to fly home (think USA) then return with setv. Worried about being denied entry as will enter at Don Mueang with his history.

Think he is asking if flying in with reentry permit after obtaining setv in nearby country is bullet proof. 

[acenase]

Asking for a friend of mine who is entering using an SETV at the land border but has onward travel plans to other counties in the region on Airasia's New Year promotional rates.  History is roughly 3 years. I have yet to see someone write up a report of being denied entry with a re-entry permit, but let's see...

 

25 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Yes the OP seems a confusing post. However if read all his other posts I think this is his situation. Wants to fly home (think USA) then return with setv. Worried about being denied entry as will enter at Don Mueang with his history.

Think he is asking if flying in with reentry permit after obtaining setv in nearby country is bullet proof. 

 

Sorry to hear you were having trouble understanding my post.  I asked about being scrutinized after entering Thailand again with a re-entry permit.  A lot of my buddies and I travel a lot while in Thailand, we don't just stay dormant for the 60 days of the visa. 

 

I just returned to Thailand at DMK with no problems after getting a fresh new METV which I applied for in my country of origin, so I can enter/exit land border for up to 9 months.  I think you were assuming I was flying into Thailand with a re-entry permit after obtaining a visa from a nearby country. That's incorrect.  I was just able to respond to your PM after being busy all week. If you have any more questions, just leave it here and I'll try my best to assist you further.

Edited January 15, 2020 by acenase

[acenase]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

I do not understand. He has already been stamped in for 60 days, and you propose leaving with a Re-Entry Permit and returning. He would only be stamped in for the remainder of the 60 days (same date as previous stamp), and I fail to see the benefit.

 

 

 

Exactly.  After being stamped in for 60 days at Padang Besar border, so he's good for 60 days. However, in a few weeks we want to get a direct flight to Rome and return back to Bangkok via DMK or BKK. He will still have more than a month left for his SETV, but curious if he would be scrutinized at DMK if he is coming back on a re-entry permit vs. letting the SETV die from leaving Thailand and coming back on a 30 day Visa exemption.

 

Has there been any reports of someone being denied entry with a re-entry permit, is the million dollar question.

Edited January 15, 2020 by acenase

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, acenase said:

 

Exactly.  He got stamped in for 60 days at Padang Besar border, so he's good for 60 days, but in a few weeks we want to go to Rome and return back to Bangkok via DMK.  He will still have more than a month left for his SETV but was curious if he would be scrutinized at DMK if he is coming back on a re-entry permit

I would not expect any more scrutiny that a person coming in on a Visa or Visa Exempt... (possibly slightly less). 

[Dumbastheycome]

19 minutes ago, acenase said:

 

Exactly.  After being stamped in for 60 days at Padang Besar border, so he's good for 60 days. However, in a few weeks we want to get a direct flight to Rome and return back to Bangkok via DMK or BKK. He will still have more than a month left for his SETV, but curious if he would be scrutinized at DMK if he is coming back on a re-entry permit vs. letting the SETV die from leaving Thailand and coming back on a 30 day Visa exemption.

 

Has there been any reports of someone being denied entry with a re-entry permit, is the million dollar question.

Perhaps apply some logic  to the answer? If a person has previously been granted entry on whatever visa and exits and returns on a re-entry permit would be very unlikely to have  problems if there were none on previous entry. Perhaps the only problem could be if a flag has been put up for reason of reported issues involved in the time in Thailand on original entry?

[acenase]

18 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Perhaps apply some logic  to the answer? If a person has previously been granted entry on whatever visa and exits and returns on a re-entry permit would be very unlikely to have  problems if there were none on previous entry. Perhaps the only problem could be if a flag has been put up for reason of reported issues involved in the time in Thailand on original entry?

 

Understandable. If we go by logic then we would be saying that if a Thai Consulate approves your Visa application and issues you a new Visa in your passport then you would be guaranteed entry into Thailand without problems. Through land borders, absolutely. But Airports currently have an infamous reputation for arbitrary policies.

Edited January 15, 2020 by acenase

[Dumbastheycome]

1 hour ago, acenase said:

 

Understandable. If we go by logic then we would be saying that if a Thai Consulate approves your Visa application and issues you a new Visa in your passport then you would be guaranteed entry into Thailand without problems. Through land borders, absolutely. But Airports currently have an infamous reputation for arbitrary policies.

That was not  quite  my attempt in  meaning. Having  been issued a valid Visa in Passport is not a guarantee of entry as has been reported frequently. But if entry is granted that would indicate no initial cause for  refusal was found. Re-entry is a continuation of the eligibility previously accepted. So why would  there be  cause on re -entry to re-examine that eligibility? Other than some reason to flag that persons passport due to some reason while they were exited.

[berybert]

40 Odd million people a year are supposed to travel into Thailand.  All bar 100 people seem to come and go with no problems with immigration whatsoever. 

Why concentrate on the 100 that have a problem ?

[acenase]

People who have an extensive history are being told to avoid airports like a plague, so instead they enter through the land border to activate their visa for a worry free entry and only use airports to fly into BKK via domestic flight since you won't be faced with Immigration there.

[scottiddled]

I thought the OP's post was clear, but I can understand some confusion from people looking to read between the lines that which wasn't there.

 

It seems like there are lots of crazy stories coming from DMK, and they're willing to ignore the fact that someone's been duly issued a visa and deny them entry (despite the IOs at the airport not having appropriate grounds to do so) with the unwritten reason being they don't think the visa should've been issued.

 

All that said, I think the chances of "Person A" being denied are slim. The person in the scenario is not only granted the visa, but was admitted by IOs on that visa until a set date. They're not getting extra time in Thailand by leaving and returning, and any scrutiny by a DMK/BKK IO would be more than second-guessing--it'd be third-guessing (consulate + previous IO). If IOs started denying people in these circumstances, it'd cross a new line.

Edited January 15, 2020 by scottiddled

[clearance]

Re-entry permit is not a guarantee to enter the country. You can be stopped with it same as with any other visa/stamp.

[ChipButty]

Never assume anything in Thailand

[BritTim]

Since the re-entry permit is issued by Immigration, I personally think it is unlikely that Immigration elsewhere would fail to honour it. That said, under current circumstances, nothing is 100% certain.

[Suradit69]

11 hours ago, acenase said:

 

Compared to Person B, who has a valid SETV, BUT... decides to let the SETV die when he travels out

His SETV died when he used it to enter. His right to remain in Thailand is based on permission to stay granted by immigration when he entered or extended at Immigrations for an additional 30 days.

[natway09]

Please remember that any immigration officer anywhere in the world have discretion to refuse entry & do on any grounds they believe are not in the best interests of the country,'regardless of any visa issued wherever by anyone

[UKJASE]

i was on ED visa and went back to UK.  I returned with my re-entry stamp at suvannaphumi and was pulled aside and questioned for 30 mins re my thai skills, what i was up to etc.

 

Was a worrying thirty mins.  got in eventually

[Kalasin Jo]

I have a non O multiple entry visa based on marriage from Savanakhet, Laos, Thai Consulate. It expires tomorrow. I came in on it on Sunday at Suvarnabhumi from Paris. No problems, given 90 days. Previously used it last July.

 

So, ok it's a bit different to the OP question, but including the initial entry on it at Mukdahan Friendship Bridge, which was a back to back exit, the previous permission to stay cancelled on exit and re entry after 2 nights in Savanakhet on new visa. I have used it 3 times getting 90 days each time.

 

Hoping to get another such visa before my current permission expires.

[BritManToo]

3 hours ago, natway09 said:

Please remember that any immigration officer anywhere in the world have discretion to refuse entry & do on any grounds they believe are not in the best interests of the country,'regardless of any visa issued wherever by anyone

Thailand has specifically denied that discretion from it's immigration officers.

[buick]

IMHO, when a person has a history of long stays in thailand and therefore begins to use land borders for entry, such person should continue to use land borders.  not being questioned on a land border entry with an SETV, does not mean such person will not be questioned returning to DMK/BKK via a re-entry permit on such SETV.   i don't see a re-entry permit as a guaranteed entry at DMK/BKK.

 

 

Edited January 16, 2020 by buick

[scottiddled]

This thread seems to have lost some focus (although some posters are still contributing useful insights).

 

There is no clear answer. The best answers are telling you that the chances of a problem are minimal given that an IO has stamped the person in and given them permission to stay until a given date. Another IO is then giving you permission to leave and re-enter, keeping that permission to stay date valid. And all that followed a validly issued tourist visa. Two of those three steps in the process involved payment (and acceptance of that payment).

 

To deny someone re-entry under those circumstances would really be beyond the pale. If such a story were documented and disseminated it would look very bad for Thai authorities. In short, a lot of people would lose face.

 

Tourism, business, etc., all depend on image and predictability. If people read that Thai authorities are running wild and that there's no predictability in their actions--that they're willing to reverse their own decisions, including decisions you had to pay to get processed--that'd do major damage to Thailand.

 

17 hours ago, natway09 said:

Please remember that any immigration officer anywhere in the world have discretion to refuse entry & do on any grounds they believe are not in the best interests of the country,'regardless of any visa issued wherever by anyone

BritManToo has already answered this briefly, but I'll pile on.

 

You're wrong. In practice, sure, any IO can refuse entry. They do not, however, have the authority to do so "on any grounds they believe are not in the best interests of the country." They're not policymakers. 

 

They can't lawfully deny entry because they think having fewer Muslims, or Chinese, or white people, or redheads, or ugly people in the country is a good idea. They can't deny entry because they don't like your face. The only valid part of your analysis is that, in practice, people are denied for grounds that the IOs have no authority over. The IOs then officially list other grounds (e.g., "insufficient means of support") that are legitimate, but don't apply to the person being denied.

 

"Too long in Thailand" or "too many entries" are not on the list of grounds for entry denial. IOs have no lawful authority over that. Sure, they're enforcing it anyway, almost certainly with a wink and a nod (or in some cases, direct orders) from their superiors to push back on long-term tourism. So it can happen. I just think it's unlikely to happen to Person A, given the particulars of that hypothetical scenario.

[Just Weird]

On 1/15/2020 at 9:16 AM, acenase said:

If we go by logic then we would be saying that if a Thai Consulate approves your Visa application and issues you a new Visa in your passport then you would be guaranteed entry into Thailand without problems.

That would only be the case is you were under the false impression that having a visa (for any country) guarantees entry.  It does not, in any country, and to assume that it does, or even try to argue that it should be the case, is pointless because entry is entirely down to the country's IOs, not the visa.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Just Weird

[Just Weird]

On 1/15/2020 at 11:22 AM, berybert said:

40 Odd million people a year are supposed to travel into Thailand.  All bar 100 people seem to come and go with no problems with immigration whatsoever. 

Why concentrate on the 100 that have a problem ?

100?  That many?  But you're right, whatever the number is, it is insignificant.

[Just Weird]

On 1/15/2020 at 12:49 PM, acenase said:

People who have an extensive history are being told to avoid airports like a plague, so instead they enter through the land border to activate their visa for a worry free entry and only use airports to fly into BKK via domestic flight since you won't be faced with Immigration there.

"...enter through the land border...since you won't be faced with Immigration there".

 That's a new one! Which are the land borders that do not have Immigration officers?

[Just Weird]

On 1/15/2020 at 2:02 PM, scottiddled said:

It seems like there are lots of crazy stories coming from DMK, and they're willing to ignore the fact that someone's been duly issued a visa and deny them entry (despite the IOs at the airport not having appropriate grounds to do so) with the unwritten reason being they don't think the visa should've been issued.

When has it been the case that "IOs have refused entry without having grounds to do so" and who has said that the "IO's view that the visa shouldn't have been issued" is the unwritten reason?  

 

Being "duly issued a visa" means that you have been issued a visa, nothing more, once you have a visa the IOs decide if you qualify for an entry stamp or whether the evidence suggests that someone is trying to work the system and, judging from the handful of complaints posted here, those are usually the only visitors who have any problems.

[Just Weird]

22 hours ago, BritManToo said:

On 1/15/2020 at 5:41 PM, natway09 said:

Please remember that any immigration officer anywhere in the world have discretion to refuse entry & do on any grounds they believe are not in the best interests of the country,'regardless of any visa issued wherever by anyone

Thailand has specifically denied that discretion from it's immigration officers.

No, Thailand has not taken that authority away from IOs.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Just Weird

[ubonjoe]

14 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

That's a new one! Which are the land borders that do not have Immigration officers?

Try reading this again.

 

On 1/15/2020 at 12:49 PM, acenase said:

and only use airports to fly into BKK via domestic flight since you won't be faced with Immigration there.

There is no immigration when flying on domestic flights.

[BritTim]

18 hours ago, Just Weird said:

No, Thailand has not taken that authority away from IOs.

According to the Immigration Act, only the Minister has the power to exclude individuals or groups other than for the reasons specified in Section 12 of the Act.

Many people seem to think that because, for instance, US officials have full discretion to deny people entry, the same should be true for Thai immigration officials. However, US law and Thai law are not the same.

Note that with visa exempt entry, Immigration has been given the power to decide whether those arriving qualify. This is logical as Immigration in that situation is being given the same screening responsibility as consular officials have when you apply for visas.

[FritsSikkink]

On ‎1‎/‎15‎/‎2020 at 12:49 PM, acenase said:

People who have an extensive history are being told to avoid airports like a plague, so instead they enter through the land border to activate their visa for a worry free entry and only use airports to fly into BKK via domestic flight since you won't be faced with Immigration there.

Let them get a proper visa then as these people are not tourists.