If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
I`ve taken 2 r-t flights to Thailand from the US, one for 8 months and
one for 4, without any mention of a visa requirement by the US travel agents or the airlines on which I flew (China Airways and EVA), so I don`t know why this is such an issue in Germany. Thailand has the same visa rules for both the US and Germany, I believe, so why don`t the US travel agents mention this? Also, I`ve never been turned back by the Thais at the BKK airport for lack of visa or onward ticket, or even had the issue mentioned by Thai immigration. I simply get the 30 day entry permit, so what`s said and what`s done is very contradictory. I`ll probably end up shelling out 25 USD for the 2 month Thai visa, and hope that will be enough (though obviously it won`t cover a 6 month visit. I don`t think I can even get a 6 month visa). As I said, I`ll only be spending a month in Thailand anyway. The rest will be elsewhere. It still seems stupid. "Sjoerd" wrote in message ... "Thomas F. Unke" schreef in bericht ... (AsiaWanderer) writes: hi all, I`ll be travelling from Berlin to Bangkok for 6 months and then returning to Berlin. The travel agent here says that Lufthansa and other local airlines require a visa covering the length of your stay, or they won`t let you board. The Berlin Thai embassy will only give me a 2 month visa, so, what to do? I have the same experience with several airlines in Germany. I normally flew to Thailand without a visa at all, having my return flight several months later. At checkin, they ask for a visa. I thell them that I don't need a visa for a stay of 30 days. They complain that my return flight is later. I tell them that I travel to neighbouring countries, returning to Thailand at the end of the tour. They make a lot of noise, check their computer about Thai visa regulations. I show them my credit cards and other funds. Finally they let me fly. But it was a hassle. And I'm not sure about the future. This happened with LH, BA, KLM. In case you have a visa, the situation may be better. Thailand would not refuse you with a visa, even if your return flight is after the visa has expired. Stupid regulations. The airlines now start to do some preemptive visa check, just like a passport officer. But these are just ground stewardesses without any knowledge. Nothing stupid. Here are the official rules from Thai Immigration: Passport required (recommended to be valid 6 months after period of stay. However, Thai immigration will accept passports which are only valid for period of intended stay). Visa not required for a max. stay up to 30 days provided holding confirmed return/onward ticket. Extension up to 10 days possible. Fee THB 500.- (1 photo required). If holding APEC Business Travel Card together with passport: visa not required. Entry may be refused if of "hippy" appearance. Airline staff may travel on standby ticket together with an airline-identity card. Visitor must hold all documents for next destination. If being over 12 years of age visitor must also hold sufficient funds (e.g. letter of credit, vouchers, MCOs or well-known credit cards) to cover period of stay (not applicable if holding re-entry visa). Non-compliance with the visa regulations will result in: - refusal and immediate deportation of passenger; - fines for the airline of THB 20,000,-; - overstay fine for passenger of THB 200,- per day. Timaticweb Version 1.3 25 October 2003 |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
"AsiaWanderer" schreef in bericht om... I`ve taken 2 r-t flights to Thailand from the US, one for 8 months and one for 4, without any mention of a visa requirement by the US travel agents or the airlines on which I flew (China Airways and EVA), so I don`t know why this is such an issue in Germany. Thailand has the same visa rules for both the US and Germany, I believe, so why don`t the US travel agents mention this? Also, I`ve never been turned back by the Thais at the BKK airport for lack of visa or onward ticket, or even had the issue mentioned by Thai immigration. I simply get the 30 day entry permit, so what`s said and what`s done is very contradictory. I`ll probably end up shelling out 25 USD for the 2 month Thai visa, and hope that will be enough (though obviously it won`t cover a 6 month visit. I don`t think I can even get a 6 month visa). As I said, I`ll only be spending a month in Thailand anyway. The rest will be elsewhere. It still seems stupid. It is not stupid at all. READ THE RULES: "Visa not required for a max. stay up to 30 days provided holding confirmed return/onward ticket." So just buy a refundable ticket out of Thailand and you are all set. And you'll save USD 25. The fact that China Airlines and EVA didn't enforce the rule doesn't mean the rule didn't exist at that time. You were just lucky that they let you on the plane. Also, recently Thai immigration has become much stricter (terrorism scare) and this past August for the first time in over 15 years of regular travel to Thailand they actually asked me some questions at Thai immigration. Sjoerd |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 11:25:46 +0100, "Sjoerd"
wrote: "Kris" schreef in bericht .. . Here are the official rules from Thai Immigration: Where did you get these from? Via the www.emirates.com website. Click on traveller information, then visa/health information. Although that's only the airlines interpretation of the rules rather than anything official, there's some useful information in there. I've never seen the "no hippies" rule on any official list of requirement from Thai immigration. I'm going to look into applying for an APEC Business Travel Card as I believe I would qualify for one. That would be a neat way around the onward/return ticket requirement. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
So just buy a refundable ticket out of Thailand and you are all set. And you'll save USD 25. Do you have experience doing this? How much hassle is it to actually refund the ticket and how much do you lose? I go in and out of Thailand fairly often, always without onward tickets. So far never had any trouble, but if I can avoid the pre-immigration/boarding stress doing something simple like the refundable thing business, I'd do it. Kris |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
In message , Thomas F. Unke
writes "Sjoerd" writes: Nothing stupid. Here are the official rules from Thai Immigration: Yep. And the Thai officer is making a decision if he let me in or not. It is not the duty of a stewardess to check this. Especially when I tell her that I'm fully responsible for my flight and that I will pay for my return flight in case I'm refused entry. You're missing the point. The airline can be fined for bringing you into the country without valid papers.. The stewardess is protecting the airline - nothing to do with responsibility for you. The other poster had an even more extreme example: He arrives with a 2 months visa in BKK, but his return flight is 6 months later. The airlines threaten not to transport him. This is not the responsibility of the airline to control my onward travel. -- Philip Allum |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
"Thomas F. Unke" schreef in bericht ... "Sjoerd" writes: Yep. And the Thai officer is making a decision if he let me in or not. It is not the duty of a stewardess to check this. It is when the airline can be fined THB 20,000. No. The airline is no substitute for a passport control. Actually they are, in a way. Stewardesses have no competency to know the immigration rules of all countries in the world. That's why they have access to information systems with all the immigration rules of all the countries in the world. They can be fined only if I am an illegal immigrant, without funds. If I can pay my onward/return flight, they are not fined. You are totally clueless. Airlines are fined every day at various countries all over the world because they are transporting passengers that don't have the proper immigration paperwork. You are under no obligation to fly with any airline, but when you do, you have to follow their rules. If you don't want to, you can also take the bus. No. I pay them for travel, they do not have to put their nose into my private affairs. After they issue a ticket to me, they have to transport me. Otherwise, they should not issue a ticket. Nonsense. Next thing you say is that they should transport you if you don't have a valid passport. Admit it. You have no idea about the rules and regulations of international air travel. Sjoerd |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 23:42:21 GMT, Thomas F. Unke
wrote: "Sjoerd" writes: No. The airline is no substitute for a passport control. Actually they are, in a way. Nonsense. You don't understand the difference between a government officer and some private business. That's why they have access to information systems with all the immigration rules of all the countries in the world. They don't have the complete rules. These are much too complicate to be included in airline reservation systems. Governement officers get a regular training on these, just for their own country. You are totally clueless. Airlines are fined every day at various countries Let's see how much knowledge you have. We discuss the Thai immigration rules here. Now give us the facts: How many tourists have been refused entry because of no onward booking? How much did airlines have to pay because of that? How many airlines were fined because they transported someone who looked like a "hippy"? I'm rather interested how much clue you have. Now it's your turn. And I'm not interested in some theories, but in facts. Admit it. You have no idea about the rules and regulations of international air travel. And you have no idea of the difference of some bureaucratic rules which nobody observes, even the Thai officers do not, and stubborn checkin personel who believes to be god because they have a printed rule in their computer. And yes, I talk form experience, not from some gossip. These airlines actually just make noise, hassle the customers and finally let you fly anyway. This is what annoys me. Thomas, I think Sjoerd is right on this one. Most countries require airlines flying into them to ensure that passengers meet their entry requirements. That means checking that they hold any necessary visas, that their passports have the required amount of time remaining, and they hold any onward or return tickets that may be needed. If, on arrival, a passenger is denied entry to the country, the airline is required to return them to their point of origin at their expense and is subject to a heavy fine. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
"Thomas F. Unke" schreef in bericht ... "Sjoerd" writes: No. The airline is no substitute for a passport control. Actually they are, in a way. Nonsense. You don't understand the difference between a government officer and some private business. That's why they have access to information systems with all the immigration rules of all the countries in the world. They don't have the complete rules. These are much too complicate to be included in airline reservation systems. Governement officers get a regular training on these, just for their own country. You are totally clueless. Airlines are fined every day at various countries Let's see how much knowledge you have. We discuss the Thai immigration rules here. Now give us the facts: How many tourists have been refused entry because of no onward booking? How much did airlines have to pay because of that? How many airlines were fined because they transported someone who looked like a "hippy"? I'm rather interested how much clue you have. Now it's your turn. And I'm not interested in some theories, but in facts. Admit it. You have no idea about the rules and regulations of international air travel. And you have no idea of the difference of some bureaucratic rules which nobody observes, even the Thai officers do not, and stubborn checkin personel who believes to be god because they have a printed rule in their computer. And yes, I talk form experience, not from some gossip. These airlines actually just make noise, hassle the customers and finally let you fly anyway. This is what annoys me. Whatever. Again, you are totally ignorant about international travel. Believe whatever you want to be believe. Du hast recht und ich meine Ruhe. Sjoerd |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 20:23:03 +0000, the renowned Philip Allum
wrote: In message , Thomas F. Unke writes "Sjoerd" writes: Nothing stupid. Here are the official rules from Thai Immigration: Yep. And the Thai officer is making a decision if he let me in or not. It is not the duty of a stewardess to check this. Especially when I tell her that I'm fully responsible for my flight and that I will pay for my return flight in case I'm refused entry. You're missing the point. The airline can be fined for bringing you into the country without valid papers.. The stewardess is protecting the airline - nothing to do with responsibility for you. Can't they also be forced to take him right back again? Meaning that they might have to bump a legitimate passenger (and presumably compensate them) on their next flight back. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany -- "it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Stupid european airlines require Thai visa before boarding
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 08:03:02 GMT, Thomas F. Unke
wrote: Chris Blunt writes: Thomas, I think Sjoerd is right on this one. Most countries require airlines flying into them to ensure that passengers meet their entry requirements. That means checking that they hold any necessary visas, that their passports have the required amount of time remaining, and they hold any onward or return tickets that may be needed. If, on arrival, a passenger is denied entry to the country, the airline is required to return them to their point of origin at their expense and is subject to a heavy fine. Chris, I don't deny that. Airlines do have to check _obvious_ entry requirements. This includes the need for a visa or valid passport. It does _not_ include a complete substitute for a immigration officer in the destination country. The fines have the following background: In the past, people (from some poor countries) travelled with a single ticket and without any funds to some richer country, asking asylum and such. The destination country then had a lot of problems handling this. But note: What we actually talk here is the (Western) tourist who comes for 30 days to Thailand and does not hold a visa. These people are _not_ denied entry. If the airline has any substantial reason to believe that this would cause a fine, they could demand an onward booking. But the "fine" in this case just consists in theory. The other case we talked here, from the OP, is the person who comes to Thailand with a 2 months visa, but his return flight is 6 months later. Again: These people are never denied entry. Thailand is one of Asia major transportation hubs. It is completely normal that people arrive there, stay a few days, travel to neighbouring countries. Thailand would get a very bad reputation if they would start to really enforce the rules of onward booking or "hippy look". And let's face it: Most airlines in the world, especially Asian airlines, do not hassle people in such a unreasonable way. It is a few European airlines, namely checkin personel of Lufthansa, who recently started to try to enforce unreasonable rules. They are a minority here. BTW: The deal with the airline, by buying a ticket, includes the duty for transportation and the duty of the passenger not to cause harm to the airline. In the unprobable case that I'm refused entry and that the airline must pay some fines, they could sue me and demand the money back. So why all this inconvenience? Because some airlines have lost the idea of delivering good service and us being customers. The 30-day permission to enter is granted on the condition that the passenger is holding an onward or return confirmed ticket for not more than the 30-day period. If they don't meet that requirement then technically they are not entitled to enter the country. Its true that the immigration authorities seldom check, but that's probably because they believe the airline will have done that for them at check-in. I think the rule is kind of stupid because, as you say, many travellers use Thailand as a base to travel around Asia, but that's the way the law is in Thailand. If the airline allows a passenger on board that they know does not meet the requirements then they too are breaking the law and can be fined. You can't blame the airline for trying to protect itself and not damage their relationship with the authorities there. If anyone, I think its the Thai immigration authorities that you should be criticising. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 0 | April 17th, 2004 12:28 PM |
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 0 | February 16th, 2004 10:03 AM |
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 0 | January 16th, 2004 09:20 AM |
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 0 | November 9th, 2003 09:09 AM |
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ | Edward Hasbrouck | Air travel | 0 | October 10th, 2003 09:44 AM |