Visa overstay blacklisting to begin in March

[Alex]

They could send the police to get the overstayers.

To get those overstayers who are dumb enough to leave the address they'll use for the next couple of years on their arrival form, that is. Very inefficient. Random checks in hotspot areas are more promising, and I understand that immigration police are conducting these at least from time to time.

But anyway, the question remains, why bother? Sooner or later they'll either surrender because they want or need to leave for some reason, get caught for other reasons (involvement in an accident or crime, random checkpoints, etc.), or die anyway.

Blacklisting looks like a suitable deterrent to me, but personally, I'd give people who surrender a larger "discount", simply to make it happen more often.

[Gaybutton]

I'd give people who surrender a larger "discount", simply to make it happen more often.

In a way, that's just what they're doing. The new blacklisting penalties don't start until March. That gives overstayers between now and March to surrender themselves in the current system. That won't be pleasant, but it's a lot better than they'll face if they're caught once the new system kicks in.

They can't say they weren't warned, but people overstaying long term probably have convinced themselves they won't ever be caught.

[Alex]

I'd give people who surrender a larger "discount", simply to make it happen more often.

In a way, that's just what they're doing. The new blacklisting penalties don't start until March.

I agree that it's good that they give plenty of advance warning before starting to implement blacklisting, and hopefully this will serve its purpose with many of those currently on overstay. What I've meant, however, is that I would keep giving those who surrender significantly less time banned from Thailand than those who are arrested, indefinitely. To encourage surrenders at any given time. If you look at the current sets of blacklisting periods, in some cases it doesn't make much of a difference, so in those cases offenders won't be encouraged to surrender. I think that's a design flaw. The really interesting part, in any case, will be how well it will be enforced. With these bans on the table, it's easy to see how a financial agreement between the offender and police could make both sides happy. Currently the police don't have much leeway to extract extra payments from overstayers, unlike with other offences such as DUI or drug possession.

[firecat69]

Thai authorities know of every foreigner who enters Thailand via a border checkpoint or airport. Thus, they should have a complete list of everyone who is on overstay, with address the person reported when entering Thailand (I know from coming via airport or doing visa extension that the address you provide is scrutinized). They could send the police to get the overstayers.

What are you drinking? I have flown into BKK 60 times the last 20 years. I put any Hotel I feel like for an address. The few times I have gotten a Visa I listed any Hotel I felt like at the time.

Never been asked and certainly never been scrutinized.

[Gaybutton]

What are you drinking?

Whatever it is, send a case of it to me . . .

As most know, I've lived here for years. I've never had any police officers come to my place to check. I used to have to include some sort of proof-of-address when submitting my 90-day address report. A bill, sent by mail, with my name and address on it was always sufficient - on the rare occasions when they even bothered to look at it. Now that the only requirement is the barcode form, for all they know I could be reporting my address in Pattaya, but actually living in Kalasin.

I don't know how long term overstayers manage to do it. If they need to do a transaction at a bank - even just applying for an account or debit card, they have to show their passport. And debit cards eventually expire. They have to show their passports when applying for a new debit card. They also have to show their passports if they want to check into a hotel, fly somewhere, apply for a driving license, check in to a hospital, apply for a lost, stolen, or new passport, and any number of things that could easily catch them if anyone spots discrepancies in their passports.

Oh well, they've got until March to "fess up." After that, I wouldn't want to be in their shoes if they get caught. I wouldn't even want to be in their shoes if they get caught before March. If they're ineligible for long term stays, yet overstay anyway, they must really want to be in Thailand.

Also, if Thailand blacklists them for getting caught long term overstaying, what about their home countries? Are there penalties in their home countries too - such as fines, jail, revocation of their passports?

[Alex]

Also, if Thailand blacklists them for getting caught long term overstaying, what about their home countries? Are there penalties in their home countries too - such as fines, jail, revocation of their passports?

What are you drinking? You overstay in Thailand, you get punished by Thailand. End of the story. I've never heard of any secondary punishment back home for any immigration offences abroad.

[Gaybutton]

End of the story. I've never heard of any secondary punishment back home for any immigration offences abroad.

End of story? I don't know that. What makes you think you know it? You think just because you've never heard of it, then it doesn't exist? I've never heard of it either. What I do know is if someone is misusing his passport, that's a criminal offense. Whether long-term overstaying constitutes criminal misuse of a passport in any issuing countries is something I don't know. I also don't know if long-term overstaying constitutes any kind of crime in anyone's home country. Since apparently you're an expert, I'll be glad to read your post when you tell us what you know about it and how you know it.

If I was a long-term overstayer, was caught, and eventually sent back to my home country, I wouldn't want to have to explain myself to the immigration officer once I get there - and that might be just for starters.

If you want a case of what I'm drinking, you'll get a case of bottled water.

[firecat69]

Questions about how they do it is not so difficult. ATM cards from other countries never expire so always easy to get money from their home accounts. If they rented or bought an apartment , not likely they will ever have to show their passport again unless they move. Then they have a problem. They probably are restricted in moving around but as long as they have a friend to rent a room then he will be able to join them with no need to show passport.

Certainly not the way I would like to live and the chickens may or may not come home to roost with this new situation. However I have never been impressed with Thai Government officials instituting laws in the past.

Which of course is why so many are doing it !

[Gaybutton]

The next question is why do people long-term overstay in the first place? It seems to me the reasons would be people who wants so much to live in Thailand, even if they have to try to stay in Thailand illegally, that they're willing to take the risk. That, I believe, would be people who don't qualify for the retirement visa or any other long-term visa, have reasons to avoid going to their embassies, have reasons to avoid going to immigration, or have reasons to avoid returning to their home countries - facing criminal charges for example. Why else would people do it?

One thing is for sure - if the US embassy ever starts requiring people to prove their income instead of just taking their word for it when they apply for the proof-of-income statement, there's going to be Americans in trouble. They would either have to leave Thailand because they can no longer prove the minimum monthly income requirement or they too will choose to risk becoming long-term overstayers. Those who have been lying to the embassy about their income in order to get the proof-of-income statement have been perjuring themselves, defrauding the embassy, and defrauding Thailand. Those are crimes. Whether the US would really prosecute those people is another question, but there would certainly be legal grounds to do so.

If they overstay and get caught, and if they're still held in Thailand when it comes out they've been cheating about their monthly income, I don't think I'd want to be in their shoes. Maybe the US might choose not to bother prosecuting them, but I'll bet Thailand probably would.

[Smiles]

' ... One thing is for sure - if the US embassy ever starts requiring people to prove their income instead of just taking their word for it when they apply for the proof-of-income statement, there's going to be Americans in trouble ... '

Has anyone heard that the US Embassy income rules - i.e. providing actual proof - may be changing in the near future?
I'm Canadian and our Embassy has always asked for proof of income [usually the Best Proof is one's tax return from the previous year], so for some time I had always assumed that the US was doing the same. An American friend living in Thailand filled me in to the reality a few years ago.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On my small Soi here in Hua Hin at least 3 foreigners on retirement visas are playing-the-game in various ways ... and this almost always requires paying, under the table, bribes of around 30,000 baht every year. The money, or good portions of it, always ends up in the hands of the Immigration Police. So in fact, the end game of whether they will end up in big trouble is weighted in their own favour; the Immigration boys and girls don't want to see their cash cow[s] all of sudden dry up. So, the 30,000 baht becomes protection money as well. No problem, they say.
The Embassy income letter is essentially moot because no proof is necessary. They know it, and most importantly, the Imm Police know it.
The money-in-the-Bank letter is actually technically true ... but part of the shenanigans is that the deposited money - for the proper number of months - has been loaned to them at a very high interest rate. After receiving the the 12 month Extension they pay the money back.

To me, this whole annual rigmarole must be very stressful.
If the rules change, and especially the Embassy income rules, I have no doubt that the little cabal of the farang, the Imm Police, and the necessary loan shark will figure out a way to get around any problem ... it is after all, the Thai way. The loss of 30,000-plus Baht [for each farang ... and the price will undoubtedly rise in lock step with the risks] is not to be taken lightly.

I was sitting in New Guy Bar the other night and an Englishman who I had never seen before asked me if he could join me. Certainly.
He was from Phuket where he had lived for 7 or 8 years.
The subject did in fact get around to visas etcetcetc [his was a Retirement Visa] and after some questioning he told me that he also was in the position of having not enough income, or deposited money in a Thai bank to qualify for his annual extensions.
I thought, yes, well I've certainly heard kind of stuff before. Talking a bit longer regarding this he then told me that around 80 percent of the farangs he knew in Phuket were in exactly the same boat.
Given the fact that I did not know this guy - a perfectly nice fellow I should add - and giving some leeway for exaggeration, that percent number is still a formidable one.
Add in my experience with 3 farang on my quite small Soi [about 90 percent of the farangs I know fairly well on this soi], and I would not be very surprised if the Dark Way of getting a retirement extension is much more prevalent that I would have thought. And I am a pretty serious cynic on some issues.


For myself, my annual Extension requires a sit-down of about 15 minutes [not including wait time] and an outlay of 1500 baht for the income letter, and 1900 baht for the Extension. No stress.
I wouldn't/couldn't enjoy living in Thailand always [theoretically] under a Damocles sword. And it never goes away ... other than a big lottery win.