FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   American Airlines | AAdvantage (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-airlines-aadvantage-733/)
-   -   144 TWOV China- AA Issues/Questions (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-airlines-aadvantage/1837368-144-twov-china-aa-issues-questions.html)

chongcao Apr 18, 17 12:54 am


Originally Posted by rjw242 (Post 28193996)
Again - confirmation in writing from an Embassy official would almost certainly be sufficient to allow the OP entry into China if there were any dispute. AA doesn't have to accept this as evidence, however.

No, it does not. Only in Shanghai and Beijing the Chinese immigration is managed by local police force, and other parts of China the immigration is managed by armed force. Neither has anything to do with China Foreign Ministry, which manages the embassy overseas. And neither will recognise any letters from any Embassy as the evidence of entry.

Chinese immigration system is no concern of any China embassy. Obviously China Embassies can issue visas accordingly. But a visa alone does not mean you will be allowed into China (just like in any countries).

If you want to enter China with a letter, such letter must be headed with China foreign ministry with formal wording and stamps, and also had been sent to the arrival port prior your arrival. Not only that, the invited party must obtain a visa on arrival using this letter.

In OP's case, a one way ticket LAX - PVG -TYO would do the trick with another one way TYO -LAX. Or simply stay overnight in TYO would help too.

OP must obtain a formal explanation from Shanghai Pudong Airport Immigration office instead of China Embassy in the US. It will be his entry port who can decide whether he is eligible or not. China Embassy does not deal with 144 hours TWOV issues, they might answer some questions in their ability and understanding, but does not carry any legal weight.

Another point to be made is that either 72 or 144 hours TWOV is a LOCAL legislation as the procurement is that local government and immigration bureau comes up with proposals and then get approval from central government. It is not a uniform thing national wide. Thus the final explanation on criteria and entry requirement is within the local immigration bureau rather than China Embassy. We are talking about apple and orange here.

NickP 1K Apr 18, 17 12:58 am


Originally Posted by chongcao (Post 28194195)
No, it does not. Only in Shanghai and Beijing the Chinese immigration is managed by local police force, and other parts of China the immigration is managed by armed force. Neither has anything to do with China Foreign Ministry, which manages the embassy overseas. And neither will recognise any letters from any Embassy as the evidence of entry.

Reasonable view of reality, in my prior post my theoretical non standard TWOV through PEK was allowed in PEK even though CX thought it wasn't. I expected it not to be. Been to China enough over the last 20 years to know generally things do work out if you have an error on a Visa/immigration, etc but be prepared to turn back around (in my case continue onward to SFO on UA) - in prior times I've been ready to back track to HKG if needed if it doesn't work the way it was intended.

My general advice to people going to China is ALWAYS get a proper visa, barring that make sure you are stopping over and spending time elsewhere if doing TWOV.

nk15 Apr 18, 17 1:03 am

I think the other mistake was to book the whole family on a marginal ticket and not be there at least 3 hours before the flight. When I did my TWOV I was there 3 hours early, just in case, and I had a nested ticket with an overnight in S. Korea (much safer situation). I can see how you may have felt reassured by two sources, but still, this had anxiety written over it.

chongcao Apr 18, 17 1:13 am


Originally Posted by NickP 1K (Post 28194209)
Reasonable view of reality, in my prior post my theoretical non standard TWOV through PEK was allowed in PEK even though CX thought it wasn't...My general advice to people going to China is ALWAYS get a proper visa, barring that make sure you are stopping over and spending time elsewhere if doing TWOV.

That is very true.

I recommend OP to check the website of:
http://www.sh-immigration.gov.cn/

JDiver Apr 18, 17 5:05 am


Originally Posted by rjw242 (Post 28193948)
I'm not saying that the airline has to accept it, only that such written communications aren't thrown around willy-nilly. "Front line embassy staff" are fully empowered diplomatic officials, not low-level customer service reps.

Conversely, the OP could have a signed letter from the Premier of China himself and AA staff wouldn't be required to allow him to board (nor would they have the capacity to verify it in the first place).

Certainly not in many, if not most, cases. Many Embassy front line employees are not under diplomatic cover and are often nationals of the country the embassy is located in. And diplomatic cover itself does not assure that they are always correctly interpreting the regulations of the country they work for.

Whether a 72 or 144 hour "transit" to another country where one is truly transiting less than at least the time the airline considers a stopover may well be a point of contention with airline employees, and the deep material behind the regulation we are able to read may also disambiguate what is another transit or legitimate destination out of the US and it's territories for China TWOV.

In this case the OP will probably get the money back from AA, but took a risk. A genuine ticket via PVG / SHA to NRT, KUL, HKG etc. as a destination would have eliminated the risk of being significantly inconvenienced.

JDiver Apr 18, 17 5:07 am


Originally Posted by rjw242 (Post 28193948)
I'm not saying that the airline has to accept it, only that such written communications aren't thrown around willy-nilly. "Front line embassy staff" are fully empowered diplomatic officials, not low-level customer service reps.

Conversely, the OP could have a signed letter from the Premier of China himself and AA staff wouldn't be required to allow him to board (nor would they have the capacity to verify it in the first place).

Certainly not in many, if not most, cases. Many Embassy front line employees are not under diplomatic cover and are often nationals of the country the embassy is located in. And diplomatic cover itself does not assure that they are always correctly interpreting the regulations of the country they work for.

Whether a 72 or 144 hour "transit" to another country where one is truly transiting less than at least the time the airline considers a stopover may well be a point of contention with airline employees, and the deep material behind the regulation we are able to read may also disambiguate what is another transit or legitimate destination out of the US and its territories for China TWOV.

In this case the OP will probably get the money back from AA, but took a risk. A genuine ticket via PVG / SHA to NRT, KUL, HKG etc. as a destination would have eliminated the risk of being significantly inconvenienced.

IN ANY CASE: The OP has cross-posted in the China forum TWOV thread, and that is the appropriate thread for China TWOV policy - not here. This forum is appropriate for AA and their treatment and application of China TWOV policy, dealing with AA when they deny boarding, require re-ticketing, etc.

Please keep on topic by discussing AA related issues, not China's TWOV policy. There are posters in the China forum thread who are generally more familiar with and knowledgeable of TWOV policy, and that is where China immigration policy discussion belongs.

Thank you,

/Moderator

TOMFORD Apr 18, 17 5:51 am


Originally Posted by Colin (Post 28193811)
I would never attempt to fly the OPs routing & ticket.

I would get a 10 year CN visa for the peace of mind.

This, x100.


Originally Posted by Colin (Post 28193811)
If I were going to attempt TVOV and wanted to use the indicated flights, I would be sure to book outbound as a one-way and return on a seperate ticket. Would then eticket a refundable J ticket PVG-SIN on SQ and use this ticket for LAX checkin as proof of eligibility for TWOV. Once in CN, cancel SQ tix for refund and fly AA home.

China's TWOV requires you're transiting through China to a destination other than your origination. AA did the right thing, unless China embassy officially changes the TWOV terms.

JonNYC Apr 18, 17 7:42 am

Input from another knowledgeable inputter, FWIW:

"If you buy a r/t ticket, everything is based on the destination of that ticket-- the fare, the taxes, minimum stay if applicable etc. I assume that this was not other than a simple R/T ticket? If so, the destination of the ticket is not in question, and it's not NRT. I can't blame folks at airport for seeing it that way."

moondog Apr 18, 17 7:55 am


Originally Posted by JonNYC (Post 28195291)
Input from another knowledgeable inputter, FWIW:

"If you buy a r/t ticket, everything is based on the destination of that ticket-- the fare, the taxes, minimum stay if applicable etc. I assume that this was not other than a simple R/T ticket? If so, the destination of the ticket is not in question, and it's not NRT. I can't blame folks at airport for seeing it that way."

PRC immigration does not care about how airplane tickets are constructed. They ONLY care about whether you fly in from one country and fly out to a different country.

It does not matter if your stay in China and/or country 3 is <20 minutes.

Simply put, based on the OP's account, AA was 100% wrong in denying him boarding, full stop.

JonNYC Apr 18, 17 8:04 am


Originally Posted by moondog (Post 28195353)
PRC immigration does not care about how airplane tickets are constructed. They ONLY care about whether you fly in from one country and fly out to a different country.

It does not matter if your stay in China and/or country 3 is <20 minutes.

You're talking about what "PRC immigration" cares or does not care about-- I am not:


Originally Posted by JonNYC (Post 28195291)
"...If so, the destination of the ticket is not in question, and it's not NRT. I can't blame folks at airport for seeing it that way."

Additionally, I'm just passing along another person's comments, which you should respect, even if you don't agree with them. I have stated at every step here that my guidance (which is to pay for the #$%&@ing visa :)-- others agree,) is formed by information and experiences I'm able to gather on the subject.

As moderator JDiver notes upthread; there are 2 issues here; what China authorities would think about this-- as you address-- and there doesn't seem to be *any* doubt that you're right from what I can see on that subject. AND what AA check-in personal can/might/will see, which is what I am addressing. We see a CX example upthread as well.

Try and understand the difference with me. :)

Or, maybe the answer is to fly Chinese airlines or even other non-AA-airlines to successfully employee this loophole, unless one is content with the potential-major-hassle-at-check-in followed by reimbursement (partial, at best, if other expenses are involved) by AA later. Unless some people find that fun or exciting or whatever. YMMV on that one.

moondog Apr 18, 17 8:07 am


Originally Posted by JonNYC (Post 28195392)
You're talking about what "PRC immigration" cares or does not care about-- I am not:

Okay. Let me put it differently. The OP's planned itinerary was clearly TWOV compliant based on the stated rules. It is reasonable to expect AA's employees to be up to speed with these rules and/or have the cognitive ability to understand them.

AZbba Apr 18, 17 8:29 am


Originally Posted by JonNYC (Post 28195392)
As moderator JDiver notes upthread; there are 2 issues here; what China authorities would think about this-- as you address-- and there doesn't seem to be *any* doubt that you're right from what I can see on that subject. AND what AA check-in personal can/might/will see, which is what I am addressing.

Well it seems to me that as the biggest airline in the world, with multiple daily flights to China, AA should be interpreting China's visa policies correctly. I.E. the same way China interprets them. Especially AT LAX.

If the check-in personnel are incorrectly interpreting the visa policies, then this seems to be AA's fault, no?

If AA wants to have more stringent requirements for transporting passengers to China, surely they should notify passengers of that at/before booking so as to not end up in situations like this.

JonNYC Apr 18, 17 8:31 am


Originally Posted by moondog (Post 28195404)
..It is reasonable to expect AA's employees to be up to speed with these rules and/or have the cognitive ability to understand them.

Hope springs eternal! :)

AndyAA Apr 18, 17 8:31 am

I would not expect a front line airline employee to know the ins and outs of every single immigration rule, including these apparent special case loopholes.

That is the job of Timatic. I'd expect them to punch in the itinerary as ticketed, and follow the rules it spits out. Currently, China as a destination requires a visa. If this loophole is indeed valid, language needs to added there for stays less than 144 hours.

JonNYC Apr 18, 17 8:35 am


Originally Posted by AndyAA (Post 28195508)
I would not expect a front line airline employee to know the ins and outs of every single immigration rule, including these apparent special case loopholes.

That is the job of Timatic. I'd expect them to punch in the itinerary as ticketed, and follow the rules it spits out. Currently, China as a destination requires a visa. ...

This is the majority opinion of the people at AA I've had input from.

And I'm out on this one, good luck OP!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:27 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.