Jump to content

Bi Imposes Return Ticket Requirement


Recommended Posts

easy44

I got my last extension 2 weeks ago in Mandaue and wasn't asked for any onward tickets. Like many here, I'll be interested to see if this new policy is in force now or just another rumour ;)

 

I can definitely say it is not a rumor. Now whether BOI chooses to enforce it on any given day is another question. It could be that they ran into so much opposition trying to make it stick that they gave up. It wouldn't be the first time that happened here. Anything too difficult to implement will usually get swept under the rug eventually and forgotten.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • udonthani

    15

  • Skywalker

    14

  • KennyF

    8

  • MattFromGA

    5

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Well, I am back from BoI Mandaue with my latest extension.   As usual filled out TOURIST EXTENSION FORM BI FORM: MCL - 07 - 02 and the only mention of a flight on this form is the flight number and

pal airlines in lax asked me for proof and i showed them the printed out ticket for tiger airways and he took it and was gone for 5 minutes and came back and said its all good,Where did the ticket age

Matt, you and I been here long enough to know that any law is a mere suggestion, subject to being rewritten by any petty official until it says what he wants it to. I posted that article in the vain h

Posted Images

Woolf

It must be selective, based on them turning someone away. I've personally seen the issue tested in the USA and as far as we know there was no fine for the airline, and the airline didnt give a rats ass about it either.

 

The I-775 agreement between carriers that are signatories to the VWP and US CBPA states that :

 

 

The carrier will issue only tickets that are roundtrip, nontransferable, nonrefundable (except in the country of issuance or nationality or residence of the alien)... to aliens seeking transportation to and admission into the United States under the Visa Waiver Program.

 

There are some very narrowly defined exceptions to the above, one of which is that VWP citizen alien residents of contiguous territory may travel on one-way tickets terminating in contiguous territory.

 

The definition of "round trip ticket" is given by 8 CFR 217.2 and is :

 

Round trip ticket means any return trip transportation ticket in the name of an arriving Visa Waiver Program applicant on a participating carrier valid for at least 1 year, electronic ticket record, airline employee passes indicating return passage, individual vouchers for return passage, group vouchers for return passage for charter flights, and military travel orders which include military dependents for return to duty stations outside the United States on U.S. military flights. A period of validity of 1 year need not be reflected on the ticket itself, provided that the carrier agrees that it will honor the return portion of the ticket at any time, as provided in CBP Form I-775, Visa Waiver Program Agreement.

 

 

There has been no clarification issued by CBPA as to whether an onward ticket meets the definition of the roundtrip ticket, and there is inconsistent interpretation and enforcement of this regulation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyMan
This part is interesting. What about a Filipino's spouse, who is also considered a balikbayan (they get the BB stamp anyway). Do they need a return ticket? Is the airlines supposed to know about that rule too? The statement seems to indicate that a former Filipino who is now a US citizen (as an example) doesnt need a return ticket, but how is the airline supposed to manage that? By looking at their birth place on the passport?
Actually, birth place doesn't work. No anchor babies here. Mom or Dad is pinoy or no citizenship.
He said the requirement on return tickets for tourists is an international rule that is practice worldwide.
BS! WTF is a an international rule? And although there are a few other countries that have this, most don't.
"This rule is meant to guarantee that a foreign visitor will leave the host country at the lapse of his stay," the BI chief said.
More BS. Having a ticket is way short of actually getting on the plane.

 

Another thing I notice here is that there's no mention of whether the return ticket is within the visa time, 21day or 59day or 1yr if BB. And if you're coming BB with your wife, h

 

ow is the airline supposed to know you're eligible and can have a return a year out?

the Balikbayan admission is under the category of temporary visitor (tourist) and as such are required to present valid travel documents including a return ticket or an onward ticket or even a round trip ticket prior admission in the Philippines .
A BB is good for one year but you can't get an airline ticket more than 11 months out.
The said ticket does not necessarily need to be confirmed but its presentation proves that the tourist has the intention to leave the country.
So just typing up an itinerary is good enough?

The BOI is now demanding you show an ongoing ticket when you apply for an extension. So there is a question: "Show me your ongoing ticket".

Does that onward ticket need to be within the period of the extension?

 

I this rule and the enforcement of it is somehow designed to reduce the number of carriers to the Phils. Perhaps the immigrations chief is related to some higher ups in PAL? I think with the various taxes already imposed, the profit margin to fly here isn't great. Then you shove the burden of doing RP immigrations duty before allowing passengers to board onto their ticketting agents and when a few slip by that the RP rejects they get fined and have to return those passengers. I can see a few carriers deciding the RP isn't worth the hassle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
udonthani

should anybody want to call up the Filipino Embassy in London and get the recorded voice message about what you have to do, to get a visa entitling somebody to visit the Philippines, they say that if you don't get one, you will need an onward ticket Within the 21 day period.

I would think that most countries with land borders don't require an onward ticket. It really only becomes an issue with countries that are solely accessible by way of plane or ship.

 

this is just wrong. All countries in the world, with no exceptions I know, require the tourists to have an onward ticket. The United States has huge land, and maritime borders but require onward tickets, by plane. Train, bus, and ship, is not sufficient. It has to be by plane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
udonthani

this rule and the enforcement of it is somehow designed to reduce the number of carriers to the Phils.

 

again, you just haven't realised that every single country in the world, with no exceptions at all and especially including your own, require the tourists to have an onward ticket.

 

or perhaps you could do what nobody else has ever done and find somewhere that doesn't require the tourists to have an onward ticket, so the host authorities can be sure they're getting the hell out of the country, once they've spent their money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Skywalker

Well, I am back from BoI Mandaue with my latest extension.

 

As usual filled out TOURIST EXTENSION FORM BI FORM: MCL - 07 - 02 and the only mention of a flight on this form is the flight number and date you arrived on, and last day of authorized stay!

 

Form and passport handed in. Passport and paperwork handed back. Passed to cashier with money. Passport released, all as normal.

 

At no time was I asked about any flights whatsoever. So there we are. Just a couple of hours ago. Cant get more up-to-date than that.

 

AND I STILL DON'T HAVE AN ONWARD TICKET. :yahoo:

Edited by Skywalker
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
udonthani

I booked my flight with a UK flight booker, by phone. They said I needed an onward ticket, within the 21 day period just like they always say somebody needs an onward ticket when it's Thailand, but within 30 days. Of course they also know, that in practice the airlines and Philippine immigration almost never enforce it within the 21 day period. But If they didn't caution the callers about this, then they wouldn't be doing their job properly.

 

similarly, when you book a flight online to the Philippines, this page comes up that warns the customers that they need an onward ticket if they are not possessed of the appropriate visa.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Woolf

Well, I am back from BoI Mandaue with my latest extension.

 

As usual filled out TOURIST EXTENSION FORM BI FORM: MCL - 07 - 02 and the only mention of a flight on this form is the flight number and date you arrived on, and last day of authorized stay!

 

Form and passport handed in. Passport and paperwork handed back. Passed to cashier with money. Passport released, all as normal.

 

At no time was I asked about any flights whatsoever. So there we are. Just a couple of hours ago. Cant get more up-to-date than that.

 

AND I STILL DON'T HAVE AN ONWARD TICKET. :yahoo:

 

Just because you were not asked, does not mean that you do not have to have one

Edited by Woolf
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
KennyF
again, you just haven't realised that every single country in the world, with no exceptions at all and especially including your own, require the tourists to have an onward ticket.

 

I'm surprised at this coming from a seasoned traveller as it's utter nonsense.

I've driven and flown all over Europe and never come across a request for an ongoing ticket.

Last year I flew Clark to Phuket and did not have an ongoing ticket.

I've moved between Thailand, Laos, Malaysia, Cambodia, Thailand by air and motor car all without ongoing ticket.

 

As far as I know ONLY the Philippines demands an ongoing ticket on anything like a consistent basis.

Main reason? It's 'girt' by sea as we Aussies say. No land borders.

 

And by the way you can enter RP by ferry from Sandokan without an ongoing ticket.

 

KonGC

Link to post
Share on other sites
easy44

Well, I am back from BoI Mandaue with my latest extension.

 

As usual filled out TOURIST EXTENSION FORM BI FORM: MCL - 07 - 02 and the only mention of a flight on this form is the flight number and date you arrived on, and last day of authorized stay!

 

Form and passport handed in. Passport and paperwork handed back. Passed to cashier with money. Passport released, all as normal.

 

At no time was I asked about any flights whatsoever. So there we are. Just a couple of hours ago. Cant get more up-to-date than that.

 

AND I STILL DON'T HAVE AN ONWARD TICKET. :yahoo:

 

I hope that continues to hold true. I was never asked for one when applying for an extension before the last one, but they did ask last time. As I said before, they probably caught so much shit they decided to stop asking.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mailman

 

I kind of understand that logic, but not completely.

 

It seems you are insinuating that if I can walk/drive out of the country I dont need to fly out. However, that is just 1 more mode of transportation. In an island country, the other option is to take a boat, which a land locked country doesnt have as an option. In the end, each scenario has two ways out. 1. fly or take a boat, or 2. fly or drive/walk.

 

I wonder how serious of a problem it is for the Philippines to have foreigners overstay. It cannot possibly be equal to the number of Filipinos overstaying in other countries, so overall its a win for the Philippines anyway. Seems they want their cake and eat it too, as well as loose weight in the process.

 

Maybe it allows the Philippine government to feel good about themselves because they can emulate the problems of the big boy countries.

 

If you can walk or drive into a country, it would be the height of stupidity to require an onward ticket before you permitted in.

 

I believe I said that it only really becomes an issue when planes and ships are your sole means of travel and therefore, pricey. I'd assume that they only want assurances they you CAN leave once your time is up (or after all your travelling money has been stolen, swindled, and/or squandered on booze and women - LOL).

 

They certainly don't want to have to cover your return travel. I believe, and I can't say for sure, that if they officially deport you, they are required to return you to your home country. That can get quite expensive for some. Perhaps that is why a voluntary departure often comes up in these cases here as they are not funding the travel and, since it is voluntary, you can go wherever you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
udonthani

If you can walk or drive into a country, it would be the height of stupidity to require an onward ticket before you permitted in.

 

 

 

maybe it is (the height of stupidity), but that's the way it is. Look up the requirements for tourists in places like Switzerland, and Belgium. You will find that they all of them require visitors to have an onward FLIGHT ticket out.

 

for millions of people the first sight they ever got of Britain was staring at the jolly old White Cliffs of Dover while they were on an incoming boat, from France. But however they get there, matters not. They still need to show, if UK immigration decides to get fussy about it, that they can get out, not the way they came in, by boat, but by plane. A ferry ticket, is not enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
KennyF

Well earlier this year I flew Oz to Vietnam.

Vietnam never asked for an ongoing.

I then drove to Cambodia.

Cambodia never asked for an ongoing.

 

You mention Belgium? I lived and worked there for 4 years.

Went from Belgium to France, Germany and Holland many, many times and needed no onward ticket.

 

KonGC

Link to post
Share on other sites
Skywalker

The fact is that anyone with any experience of immigration will know that the demands can change on a daily basis. As I mentioned earlier, today's experience for me, may not be *your* experience tomorrow.

 

As far as any legal requirement to have an ongoing flight - legalities in this banana republic? Do me a fecking favour!

 

What I can say is that overall the Philippines people are far friendlier/tolerant to Western foreigners than Thailand. It's one of the reasons I left there - just a pervading reality that they don't like/want us, they just want our money. It's not even racism with the Thai's it's pure xenophobia.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mailman

The United States has huge land, and maritime borders but require onward tickets, by plane. Train, bus, and ship, is not sufficient. It has to be by plane.

 

Boy, do I feel sorry for the poor sap who came in by ship because he was on a no-fly list. :(

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..

Capture.JPG

I Understand...