crazydrummerpauly

Many thanks Tony M. 

Hi All. With the ILR application looming in August i'm in the stressed-out stage with areas of mental fog instead of clear answers to some questions. Such as : with the required Contract of Employment, and 'Letter from The Employer' for my wife Tass, who has been with the same employer since 2018 at least, is a brand new Contract signed within 28 days before the submission of the application necessary ? Similarly, is a new 'Letter from Employer' signed within the 28-day-rule for documents required ? These are docs that were submitted for the FLR visa of course. Is there a basic difference between these two employment docs in terms of how up-to-date they have to be, as i notice that in March 2019 when we applied for the FLR the Letter was bang up to date (Feb 28th 2019), but the Contract was dated October 8, 2018, about 5 months old,  and it all went through ok.   

Thanks bigyin and Tony M, i like the idea of an 'inutitive' form - sounds great. 

Hi all.  Looking at the form for an ILR application - the SET(M) form,  i'm slightly stuck at the section for entering details of any Savings to be used as part of the Financial Requirement qualification.  Simply this :  how have members negotiated the fact that an applicant might have 2,3,4.. different savings accounts, but the SET form only provides boxes to enter 1 account, and it just refers to 'The Account'.   As far as i can see, there is no space in which to put something like 'Please see additional sheets for other accounts' ?  

10 minutes ago, elviajero said:

No it’s not!

 

Read my post again, which was the correct answer to a question by the OP.

I'm assuming that what UbonJoe meant was that it is like the recently changed process for applying for a UK spouse visa inside the UK - filling it in Online, but then printing it off and posting it ?  (Now radically changed).  That's how i'm reading it.  A combination of online form completing on screen, and then posting in to the embassy.  Is that wrong ?  Thanks.

44 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Ubonjoe is the master on your question …. he will answer for you.

Yep - he has for many a year !  ????

27 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Most of the info for doing it by post you asked about can be found here.

 http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84397-How-to-apply-visa-by-post.html 

No need for a trip to the embassy.

 

The requirements for financial proof on the embassy website are not that clear. You can combine income and money in the bank to reach the equivalent of 800k baht. This from the online application site is clearer.

"3. Financial evidence : a guarantee letter from the bank and a copy of bank statement showing a deposit of the amount equal to and not less than 800,000 THB or an income certificate with a monthly income of not less than 65,000 THB or a deposit account plus a monthly income in total not less than 800,000 THB (Note: corrected typo to make it 800k baht instead of 80k baht)"

Source: https://thaievisa.go.th/Home/LongStay

All of the money in the bank can be in a UK bank.

Many thanks Joe - long time no read - happy to see you are still here and hopefully in good shape ????  Do they mean that the 'combined sum' would come from : Monthly Income x 12,  added to whatever sum is on Deposit ? 

15 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Yes, just the old style forms. You can still use the post and don’t need to visit London.

Thank the lord for that !  Thanks for the reply as well ????

Hi all.  Just browsing the Thai Embassy, London website to get up-to-date with the ever-changing visa rules for visiting Thailand, and guess what, i am pretty confused - what's new !  Ok, so this is from the introductory page - 

"How to apply visa by post

So that says as i read it,  From June 15, online application, an account necessary, print-out the filled-in online form and "Submit to the Embassy by post."  But then, in the last paragraph there is a reference to 'old visa applications' being returned if they are posted in after June 14.  Ok, so i'm reading that as just a block on the old-style forms ?  So postal applications still accepted as long as the new online form used.  I am just trying to make sure i will NOT have to make the trip to London !  

If you click through the embassy site to get to the Non-Imm Visa section, there is this paragraph - 

Applicants are required to set up an account and submit visa applications as an individual, or apply through travel agencies as previously, where travel agencies will submit online applications on their behalf.  However, supporting documents have to be attached and payment has to be made online through secured portal.  Applicants can either book an appointment to submit their passports and visa applications in person at the Embassy, or submit them by post (for those who are eligible to do so).

Anybody have an understanding what 'those who are eligible to do so'  means ? 

Lastly, in the Non 'O-A' visa section - this - 

" 

• Financial evidence showing monthly income of not less than 65,000 THB (approx. £1,625) or having the current balance of 800,000 THB (approx. £20,000), e.g. bank statements, proof of earnings, for at least 1 month

As i have nowhere near that monthly income, (i wish!) i will need to show the 800,000 THB in the bank for at least 1 month - is it ok for that to be in a UK bank, or is it one of those deposits that has to be in a Thai bank ?

Thanks.

2 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

It must of been a one off error, There have been many reports of the embassy issuing multiple entry visas.

Are you sure he was not confusing a consulate with an embassy?

Hi ubonjoe - so is there a difference between applying at the Thai embassy in person, and having a local consulate (eg Hull) sending one's papers into the London embassy ?

Hi all - so is there a neat answer to the different takes on the Non-immigrant Cat O 1-year Multi Entry for UK pensioners ?  Until today i did think that us old brits had lost that great visa which i had used for over 5 years.  Ubonjoe pls.

6 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

The guidelines are a very simplified version of the rules, they do not include everything.

 

Your quote comes from the section  "When you can apply to extend or switch," which continues "If you’re extending your visa to stay with the same family member, any time you have left will be added to your new stay up to a maximum of 28 days."

 

Which means that if you apply earlier than 28 days before the initial visa expires then the FLR will be valid for 30 months and 28 days; not that the FLR application will be rejected because you applied too early.

 

Which, provided you have been in the UK for at least 30 months, is fine because you only need 60 months for ILR.

 

However, it is obvious that you believe otherwise, so let's leave it there.

 

 

Yep - agreed.  I am pedantic about language, and if a sentence contains "the earliest you can apply is 28 days before etc..." i get completely hung up on that word 'earliest', which in normal usage is very simple to understand.  I do see yr point about the 60-month total of course.  A thought occurred to me - i wonder of the over-lengthy time many people report as being how long it took to get their application processed, is in fact due to them applying much earlier than they need to, and that such applications are simply put to one side so the end-of-permission ones can be dealt with - just an idle thought.  I'm rarely on here these days, so can i throw in a different topic which has been rattling around my head for years - when people are trying to pass the financial requirement, i wonder how many of those who have a property realise that they can, within the rules, rent out their house/flat for £X, and move around the corner to be tenants in a similar house/flat for the same £X , and then count the income from the renting of their own place towards the £18,600 or whatever their goal is depending on their family circumstances.  In the case of properties that might rent out for between £500 and £1000 a month, this goes a long way towards meeting the target.  I think the rental contract has to be at least 12 months already in place, and of course a proper legal arrangement which i personally would do through an estate agent.  In case anyone thinks i'm guessing here, i have an email from the immigration service confirming that this is true.  The reason is of course that the financial requirement, being nuts, has no 'means testing' component, so the rent one would pay out is irrelevant as far as the application goes.  But i would always check and double-check current guidelines, as we all know how much things can change in a couple of years.  

Yep, agreed. (Had to put this in an edit, as TV seems to have crashed for 5 minutes and the reply got posted twice!)  Why can't mistaken posts just be deleted ?

7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

The guidelines are a very simplified version of the rules, they do not include everything.

 

Your quote comes from the section  "When you can apply to extend or switch," which continues "If you’re extending your visa to stay with the same family member, any time you have left will be added to your new stay up to a maximum of 28 days."

 

Which means that if you apply earlier than 28 days before the initial visa expires then the FLR will be valid for 30 months and 28 days; not that the FLR application will be rejected because you applied too early.

 

Which, provided you have been in the UK for at least 30 months, is fine because you only need 60 months for ILR.

 

However, it is obvious that you believe otherwise, so let's leave it there.

 

 

Yep - agreed.  I am sadly pedantic about language, and if a sentence contains "the earliest you can apply is 28 days before etc..." i get completely hung up on that word 'earliest', which in normal usage is very simple to understand.  I do see yr point about the 60-month total of course.  A thought occurred to me - i wonder of the over-lengthy time many people report as being how long it took to get their application processed, is in fact due to them applying much earlier than they need to, and that such applications are simply put to one side so the end-of-permission ones can be dealt with - just an idle thought.  I'm rarely on here these days, so can i throw in a different topic which has been rattling around my head for years - when people are trying to pass the financial requirement, i wonder how many of those who have a property realise that they can, within the rules, rent out their house/flat for £X, and move around the corner to be tenants in a similar house/flat for the same £X , and then count the income from the renting of their own place towards the £18,600 or whatever their goal is depending on their family circumstances.  In the case of properties that might rent out for between £500 and £1000 a month, this goes a long way towards meeting the target.  I think the rental contract has to be at least 12 months already in place, and of course a proper legal arrangement which i personally would do through an estate agent.  In case anyone thinks i'm guessing here, i have an email from the immigration service confirming that this is true.  The reason is of course that the financial requirement, being nuts, has no 'means testing' component, so the rent one would pay out is irrelevant as far as the application goes.  But i would always check and double-check current guidelines, as we all know how much things can change in a couple of years.  

2 minutes ago, Here It Is said:

Surely twenty-eight days prior to the date on your wife's biometric card?

Yep - agreed. That end-date coincides with the date given in the letter informing a successful application for initial entry of the length (33 months) of her stay.  Although the dates for the start of the permission on the letter and the card are not the same - my wife's card shows August 15th, 2016 as the start date of the BRP card, but the start-date for her 'visa' was September 1st. 2016.  The other set of dates - on the Vignette in her passport - are September 1st 2016 to October 1st 2016, so we landed in the UK half-way through that one-month window on the 16th September.  That is the date that the 30-month minimum period is counted from, ie, the arrival date not the visa date.  But my point is to clear away the idea that it's ok to apply for FLR at any time after the 30 months in the UK have passed - when the permission is 33 months, the period in the country needs to be a minimum of 32 months the way i read government guidelines.

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

My opinion is based upon the requirements are laid down in the Immigration Rules Appendix FM: family members: Family life with a partner

 

FLR is covered by Section E-LTRP: Eligibility for limited leave to remain as a partner. There is no mention of any minimum time one must have lived in the UK for before one can apply; only that one must have a valid leave to enter or valid leave to remain when the application is made.

 

Whereas Section R-ILRP: Requirements for indefinite leave to remain (settlement) as a partner clearly states

 

So as FLR is valid for 30 months, then applying for it after being in the UK with the initial visa for 30 months means when it expires one will have completed the 60 months residence required for ILR.

 

Of course, that is my opinion and if you want to be certain then there is no reason why you cannot wait until the expiry of her initial leave to enter before applying.

Hi 7x7 - sorry but i don't think its a matter of opinion in so far as the government site is the guide.  In this page - https://www.gov.uk/uk-family-visa 

- under 'When you can apply to extend or switch' - there is this - "The earliest you can apply is 28 days before your current permission to stay in the UK expires."   When the permission to stay is the usual 33 months, then suggesting an application can be made any time after the minimum 30 Months residence has been completed would be incorrect wouldn't it ?   I agree of course that the 30 Months minimum is important in contributing to the 5-year requirement for an application for ILR, but that is a different issue to applying for FLR.  I imagine the rule about applying in the last 28 days before the end date of a permission to stay is simply the government's way of controlling the flow of paperwork. 

2 hours ago, rasg said:

The earliest you can apply is 28 days before the current visa expires. The latest is to have the application in before the current visa expires.

 

By marrying in Thailand the visa is 33 months, not 30 months which allows three months to get everything in order before the move to the UK. As we were married in the UK my wife has two periods of FLR , 30 months each.

Yep, it's a 33-month initial permission to stay if a couple turns up in the UK after marrying in Thailand - but that's never been an issue.  What i'm hoping to do is correct the guidance that it is ok to apply as soon as 30 months residence has been completed - see my quote from 7x7.  I agree with your first sentence.   Regarding the '3 months to get everything in order before the move to the UK' - i imagine that could be dangerous advice for folks with the 'Vignette' passport stamp, which only gives 30 days maximum before landing in the UK as i remember ?  Miss that and you'd have to get another vignette.  Maybe the 3 months to 'get everything in order' pre-dates the invention of the dreaded vignette - another money-maker for hm gov!  You managed to avoid that ?

Really sorry about this - it is boring and i should have got it clear by now but i haven't.

About the TIMING of the FLR application....i was reading an older post by the esteemed 7x7, who has helped me many times, and i got confused about what was being said about the correct timing for putting in the Further Leave to Remain application.   7x7 - your "Although the visa is valid for 33 months, the residential requirement for FLR is 30 months so she does not necessarily have to wait until her visa expires, but can apply for FLR after she has lived in the UK for 30 months." - is that correct ?   The government site has this - "The earliest you can apply is 28 days before your current permission to stay in the UK expires."  Permission to stay (lasting 33 months) is not the same as 'after living in the uk for 30 months' ?  And i'm very conscious of the phrase 'earliest you can apply'.  I might be completely wrong, but the way i read it, the totally correct time to apply is during the last 28 days of the 33-month 'Permission to stay'.  That is quite different to saying it is any time after 30-months in the UK have been completed.  Please set me straight if i'm wrong - wouldn't be the first time!  

32 minutes ago, rasg said:

Yes it's fine. A2 as a minimum. If your wife's English is good enough for B1 she could do it. Currently fine for ILR.

Thanks rasg - i guess the only way a test result could 'expire', is when the border agency or home office decide to create another list of 'Approved test centres' and it didn't include the one the missus attended.  

Is there any time-limit on when the English language test was taken ?  Or put another way, would it be possible to take the test too early before a FLR application ?  

Scott - been while since i was there four times year, but we liked to go in the evenings when it is really laid back with few farangs, mostly locals going home from work - it was open until 10pm i think but that might be out of date - and there was a $1 'overtime' fee.  We used to leave Nong Khai about 7pm. and do a U-turn to be back in NK before 9pm even including a meal on the Laos side of the bridge.

1 hour ago, AboutThaim said:

If you use a money transfer company, I use Transferwise, they will give you the going exchange rate and it will land in your Thai bank account as baht. Their fee is reasonable IMO. Only problem can be opening an account.  I had this problem until I asked to be put through to an English speaker.  After explaining that it was a requirement of immigration I was able to open the account.  

I use them as well - seem better than moneycorp for both exchange rate and fee, so far so good...

1 hour ago, MaprangHolmes said:

give Uswitch a try, they have come back with a quote using my wife's details, and using a international driving licence which I put had been held for 5 years and 0 no claims and no convictions or medical problems. On a 2007 peugeot 107 1000cc for £524 that is with Go Girl. 

Oh thanks for that idea - haven't tried Uswitch having only ever associated them with switching energy suppliers.  Cheers.

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

The requirement is that one must be ordinarily resident in Great Britain if applying for a GB licence, Northern Ireland if applying for a NI one.

 

The basic definition of ordinarily resident is that one lives in the UK for at least 185 days out of any 365.

 

However, this does not mean one cannot apply until one has lived in the UK for at least 185 days. As your wife is here with a settlement visa she is classed as ordinarily resident. It is only if she were to spend more than 185 days out of the UK in any one year before she has ILR that she may lose that status.

Oh thanks - yep here on a normal 30-month settlement visa so we can apply for the provisonal anytime.  But as for her driving other than in a driving-school car, i think we'll have to wait for her to move on from a provisional to a full UK licence just because of the high insurance with her current status.  As others have noted, i imagine roundabouts will be the scary bit - especially as around here in South Yorks they do not hang about !

On 01/02/2017 at 11:34 AM, 7by7 said:

Take official practice driving theory tests - for free

Be interesting to know how members fare! (I got 49 out of 50.)

 

You can also buy official DVSA practice materials from there.

 

 

All your comments on this thread 100% spot-on as usual 7by7.  I recently discovered that website with the free theory test as well - got same score !  My wife has been in uk since last September and we are about to apply for her provisional licence soon -  i read on one government website that to be seen as a 'UK Resident', she has to be in the UK for a minimum of 185 days - so about 6 months - i am NOT completely confident that this is correct though - needs checking.  She came with a full Thai licence, and could in theory drive for up to 12 months from date of arrival as you say...but the problem we've come up against is INSURANCE.  I have pretty much given up trying to get her cover.  The other day after trying & failing with all the usual big names - Aviva, Liverpool Victoria etc.. i called 'Adrian Flux' the mega broker.  They said they could cover us both on one policy, but the annual premium would be £2,132 !!!   I said oh right, thanks and bye.  If anyone has any good experiences with getting motor insurance for their Thai partner in the UK i'd be very interested to know about it.     ( I'm sure it isn't helping that i'm 71 with a group 21 motor btw - which is ridiculous for an ancient low-value Citroen Picaso!).