Originally Posted by
Mabuk dan gila
Didn't IATA create Timatic in the first place to resolve these issues? CZ is an IATA member. Seems to me that if an IATA member airline is saying Timatic is wrong, they better be able to back it up and get Timatic updated so the issue does not recur.
I'm inclined to believe in this situation, Timatic is probably right. US Gov web sites are irrelevant. Thai immigration law experts generally aren't English speaking web designers, and Thai English speaking web designers generally aren't Thai immigration law experts, so Thai government English web sites are probably best taken with a grain of salt. I suspect CZ screwed up, OP is owned compensation based on CZ unilaterally making up a rule inconsistent with Timatic.
Well said. It is a fact of life that getting a straight answer about the laws and regulations of some countries -- especially non-English-speaking countries in the developing world -- is difficult. That's part of why international law firms make so much money.
Timatic is supposed to resolve this ambiguity by providing an authoritative, up-to-date source of information. We aren't talking about Sweden here: it shouldn't surprise anyone that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has out of date or incorrect information posted on its embassy's websites. The actual rules regarding entry into the Kingdom are made by the Immigration Bureau which is a division of the Royal Thai Police, not by the MFA.