.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Mrjustice
-
Posts
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Mrjustice
-
-
Ok, NancyL so now I am "Pig-Headed" (you didn't say "Fear Mongerer"; but some other Poster on prior Posting Topic already did.)
I'm also an "Ass" according to Mapguy. An ignorant "Newbie" according to someone else. Others: "Bad Attitude";
Smell Bad?; Poor Appearance; a "Liar"; confused about requirements between original Non-O Visa and Ext. of Stay (there are none, except diff. form!);
sniffed out that I was a "Lawyer" and should receive special treatment (no I didn't tell them); and too many other names I was called that I lost track.
First, I wonder where the Moderators have been with all this name-calling/Flaming?
Guess it's ok apparently, when the person flamed holds a different opinion than them.
Oh, but the Moderators immediately "Closed" my new Topic Post with Title about new policy change by CM Immig.; apparently because it ran contrary to their belief/opinion. Amazingly 'fair and neutral'. Of course, they have not (and no doubt will not) do same with this new Topic by NancyL. But, won't be surprised if they delete my Post here, because it not only (again) runs contrary to their opinion, but God-forgive, also criticizes their lack of 'fairness and neutrality'.
Second, all of a sudden one new Poster "NancyL" (husband) supposedly has a different experience than I, and that means I am "dead wrong". Don't think so.
Wonder what makes NancyL so credible -- at least I provided my background and qualifications in a prior Post (after being attacked, of course). Indeed, I seem to
recall that when NancyL first replied to my Post to advise of her Hubby's upcoming Appointment at CM Immig., she claimed it was scheduled for this past Tues. -- an official Holiday when Immig. would be closed. She only corrected/edited this "misinformation", when another Poster pointed this out. Very credible! LOL.
In FACT there are other (long-time) TV Members that have posted same experience as I (most recently earlier this month, "MESQUITE" and "BB1955"); not to mention many other TV members, including a Poster above, who have said they have been 'warned' about change in policy is 'coming' too.
Third, all I did or tried to do was pass along my very recent experience and impressions, and what I was uniformly and expressly told all the way thru the Chain of Command,
from initial Immig. Officer, to Sgt. Major, to Captain, and ultimately the head Inspector of the CM Immig. Office. If there is any 'misinformation', it did NOT come from me -- it
came from the CM Immig. folks. All I did was report accurately what happened to me and what I was told. And, did so with the best of intentions, to forewarn any of the
Ex Pat Retirement folks here who apply for original Non-O and/or Ext./Renewal of Stay, that if you intend on relying on US Consulate Income Affidavit, you are likely to be
asked for additional proof of PENSION Income (they also expressly advised only Pension Income would satisfy).
Sorry, if this runs contrary to the (vocal) majority of TV Posters beliefs or PAST experience. You can take the warning and be prepared; or stick your head in the sand
and foolishly ignore the warning. I certainly could care less about the true "Pig-Heads" that I have encountered on this Forum, and not-so-secretly hope you get your heads
handed to you at Immig. next time you go. But for the 'silent' minority? (perhaps majority), or new Retirement applicants like we were, hopefully you will avoid getting 'jammed up'
as we ALMOST were because we relied on the real 'mis-information' on this Forum -- that the Income Affidavit is (almost) always accepted at face value without more.
Oh, and lest I forget to mention (again), we were eventually granted our Retirement Non-O with the express approval of the head Inspector -- and if any of you think that
would have happened if I had actually done anything improper let alone 'offended" any of the Officers, then you are not only ignorant you are fools.
-
1
-
-
A question on the timing of the renewal; Do I have to wait until my license has expired or can I do this just before as well?
You can do it before it expires. Whatever day you do it will be one year from then. Do NOT wait until it has expired.
Not sure if the OP is holding a 1 or a 5 year license, either way you can go before or after expiry, no problem. (Previously you actually had to let your 1 year license expire before you could get the 5 year one, this has now changed.)
If you’re currently holding a 5 year license, letting it expire by a day or more before applying, will grant you a new license that’s valid for close to 6 years.
The 5 year licenses expires on your birthday, has nothing to do with application date.
This is correct. Was told 2 days by Supervisor at CM Motor Vehicle, that you could come as early as 60 days prior to expiration.
And, whether you are issued renewal of 1 year or 5 year, depends on your Visa. If you have the 1-year Ext. of Stay, she said
you get the 5-year renewal.
-
I just got my license a little over two months ago. I got my Certificate of Residence at Chiang Mai Immigration, and they did not mention needing a letter from the landlord.Well certainly you have to get a Certificate of Residence, either from your home country consulate, or CM Immigration, to apply for a Thai drivers license.
Or to buy a vehicle here legally, and register it in your name.
I don't know where you read that a rental contract is all you need, on this forum.
The rental contract/lease agreement is just part of the documentation to getting the Certificate of Residence.
You also need a letter (preferably on letterhead stationary) from the landlord stating you live at that address.
Also a copy of the Thai national ID card of the person who signed the above letter.
I've obtained about 6 Certificates of Residency in the past 6 years, for both drivers licenses and vehicle purchases....
PS If you own a home or condo, and have a tabien baan (yellow book), no need for a Certificate of Residence to obtain a drivers license or purchase a vehicle.
Same for me; went last week; got Residency Certificate from CM Immig. with just Lease. No letter from Landlord required.
-
This is not about Chiang Mai (and your report is the first such posted about everyone needing there). But yes supporting documents can always be asked for any Embassy/Consulate letter.
Not reporting about whether it "can be asked for", but that I have been informed it is now Policy!
It is not policy. Stop posting all this nonsense in all the different forums. Fear mongering.
You're right; I'm just a "Fear Mongerer"; and ignorant 'newbie'.
Lot's to gain from that.
And, of course, I'm just fabricating that I heard it direct from the Captain and head Inspector of the CM Office.
By the way, Where does your information come from; and how recent?
-
Per CM Immigration instruction sheet given me last week, it says Bank Letter has 7 day validity.
-
Went this past week to Chiang Mai Immigration to convert Visa Exempt to Non-Imm. O Retirement.
They would NOT accept the US Consulate Income Affidavit Form, without backup documentation
corroborating the monthly income -- i.e. They wanted Letter from Govt. certifying Pension money (or presumably similarly from
private Company Pension). Note: I even had brought with me ATM Slips showing cash withdrawals from just the past few days of
75,000 THB (more than the monthly required min. income), along with our apartment Lease Agreement, copies of Citigold ATM Cards, etc.
In response, they showed me 'examples' of Letter certified by Canada Consulate (in lieu of Affidavit form) -- note US Consulate
will NOT verify your income per their published policy (I explained this to the Thai Imm. Officers that US Consulate will not do this, and they
would not budge). Further, they expressly wanted it to be "PENSION" income only -- not investment/interest/savings income.
In my case, as a (retired) self-employed Attorney, impossible to provide such documentation. Meaning, only Money-in-Thai-Bank
method will now be satisfactory for persons in similar circumstances.
Interestingly (or, more accurately, contrarily), they also handed me a half-page printed Instruction form, with the usual financial requirements stating the alternatives for showing the 65000 THB monthly income and/or the 800K in the Thai Bank. But, with respect to the Income method their own instruction sheet expressly states: "The applicant must be able to comply with any of hte 3 requirements: 1. Proof of INCOME OR Pension from the country of Origin in the amount of not less than Baht 65,000 per month certified by his/her Embassy or Consulte in Thailand." Note: It says nothing about corroborating documentation, nor does it limit the monthly income to only "Pension" money. So, it would seem that the form Affidavit supplied by and certified by your US Consulate fully complies with their own instructions!
Finally, for those self-professed TV Gurus and 'flamers', who will immediately reply we must have done something wrong -- forget about it.
My wife and I were dressed in nice slacks and button down shirts, good shoes, spoke softly and nicely to the Imm. Officers
including the "Sawadee" greeting etc. No arguments or any problems from us (with initial Imm. Officer), until after the Sgt. Major called
us up later, to tell us they would not issue the Visa, for the reasons noted above.
Through tactful appeal up the chain of command, from Sgt. Major, to Captain, and finally to head Inspector of the CM District Office, we did finally prevail in obtaining our 90-day Non-Immig. "O", but only with strict admonition that 'next time" when we come in 60 days for our 1-year Extension of Stay, if we use Income Method, supporting documentation WILL be required!
And, yes, I know that Thai Immig. has always had discretion to ask for supporting proof. That's not what this 'heads up' Post is about.
From what I was advised, this WILL now be the Policy for everyone using the Income Affidavit for Retirement Visa and Extensions -- at least
with respect to using the US Consulate Income Affidavit.
Suggest anyone applying for Retirement Visa, Extension of Stay, or Renewal of Stay, should be prepared.
-
This is not about Chiang Mai (and your report is the first such posted about everyone needing there). But yes supporting documents can always be asked for any Embassy/Consulate letter.
Not reporting about whether it "can be asked for", but that I have been informed it is now Policy!
-
If using income of 65k for retirement only the Embassy letter is required and it needs to be new every year and that was as true last year as it is true this year. If using bank account both the passbook/copies and a new letter from bank would be required every year. If using a combination both will be required.
As I recently posted under another Topic Thread, this may not be true anymore in CM Immigration.
In no uncertain terms, I was admonished by the Officers all the way up thru the Chain of Command,
that US Consulate Income Letter alone would NOT be satisfactory, and that supporting documentation
of "Pension" Income would be required (i.e. they also indicated ONLY "Pension" Income would satisfy).
Of course, this does not affect the alternative Money-in-Thai Bank Method.
-
Maybe people who have a problem with mrjustice should take a look at themselves. He is new to cm and is getting the heave ho from some self appointed TV gurus.
Thankfully for me none of you gurus were here when I arrived in cm. Lucky for me!
Well I wasn't here when you came here or I wasn't aware that you had come here.
But my money say's you were not arrogant.
So now I am "Arrogant" and a "Bully". Just keep up the attacks, insults and namecalling.
BTW -- anyone who wants to be objective, take a look at the history of this post; and pray tell how/when
I was "arrogant", as it began with a simple helpful heads up advisement, that turned into attacks on me -- especially by you.
True I cited my legal qualifications -- only after attacked and put on the defense -- BTW -- forgot to mention also a former
candidate for elective Judicial Office rated "Well-Qualified" by the State Supreme Court's Blue Ribbon Comm., and also a former
fully sworn Police Officer; and currently accredited as an international Arbitrator and Mediator by a score of ADR Orgs. around the World.
Ya, just more arrogance -- or, maybe just giving the readers some objective info. to weigh the credibility of my advice and opinions versus
the self-appointed TV Gurus who claim to be all-knowing, but one has to wonder, especially with comments such as your recent one:
"That I bullied my way to the Top to get my way at Immigratiom". Really? If you believe that then YOU Know Nothing "about the way things work here" -- or anywhere else in the World. Nobody of any intelligence could believe a powerless Farang could "bully" the Head Inspector of the Thai Immig. Bureau to do anything. Respectfully, more likely I achieved the right result, thru skillful tact, diplomacy, and knowledge of the rules and applicable law.
I think Member MESQUITE may have been on to something: What's really at the bottom of this hostility from a few of the more vocal (and ignorant) Posters, appears to be that they are threatened their dominance on the Forum may be undercut if folks who have some real knowledge and expertise begin to contribute more frequently to the Forum. So sad .... so small.
You forgot to mention your Nobel Peace Prize. Dale Carnegie has a book for you.
Can't we just wait till NancyL's update following her husbands immigration attendance on Thursday.
That will actually help advance (or cease) this discussion substantively.
Still think its worthwhile having a semi sticky where people post their RECENT experiences WITHOUT follow up commentary which would have helped this very important topic from deteriorating as it has. That way the poster could comment on time frames, officer, outcome etc without fear of reprisal or irrelevant diversions. Those that had queries could then perhaps pm the OP (subject to OP's having made that invitation.
Nope, didn't win Nobel Prize; so that's why I didn't say it. Only cited the true facts.
Sorry if that offends or threatens anyone.
As far NancyL's anticipated update, I agree it will be interesting; but as others of pointed out with respect to our experience,
one person's experience may or may not be the next persons. BTW -- It seems you all keep ignoring the prior two posts that I originally
replied to in this Topic by Senior Members BB1955 and Mesquite, both of whom had the same experience as I did recently. So, that's
3 in a Row already that HAVE been required to show proof beyond Income Affidavit!
-
Mrjustice,
Further information from the U.S. Consulate, Chiang Mai, web site:
Affidavit of Income ("Income Verification"). To extend your stay in Thailand, Thai immigration might ask you to get a letter from us to “verify” your income. In fact, we are not empowered to do this. Instead, you may execute an affidavit in which you swear under oath or affirm your monthly income. Use the Affidavit of Income (PDF, 36 KB). Fill in all of the blanks, but do not sign it.
This seems to state exactly what the affidavit is and what it is used for.
MSPain
Yes, I know and agree fully. Cited this very thing to the folks at Immigration, when they were insisting that US Consulate
could certify corroborating docs. Besides the US Consulate saying this is what the Affidavit is supposed to be used for;
the Thai Rules/law say the same thing: the applicant for Retirement Visa or Extension must show "Income or Pension ...
certified by his/her Embassy or Consulate.." So, I couldn't agree with you more that the Affidavit should be all that is required.
But ... as I have always recognized, its their country, their rules, their authority. And, what they say goes. Comply or fail.
Hope I am wrong too; but just reported on my experience, and my impressions on what the CM Immig. current policy is or may be
in regards to using the Income Affidavit.
The Department of State of the U.S. has the Office of Authentications to certify things. http://www.state.gov/m/a/auth/
The difference in all of this is getting a visa and extending a permission to stay. For U.S. citizens the affidavit notarized at the U.S. Consulate is accepted by Immigration for permission to stay. It is not accepted to get a visa.
You cannot use the affidavit as a guarantee of income.
MSPain
Sorry I misread your posting. Then I say you are dead wrong.
Why would you cite the US Consulate as authority for what the Thai law and rules require for
obtaining a Thai Visa or Extension of Stay. The only thing the US Consulate is authority for is their own rules and policy with respect to issuing the Income Affidavit and whether THEY will or will not require verification of your claimed income (they will not per their website). But for what the THAI rules and law are for obtaining Visas or Extension, you need to review (and cite) the Thai Immigration Website, and you will see the requirements are absolutely identical for obtaining initial Retirement Non-"O" and Ext. of Stay:
1. Over age 50. 2. Proof of Income of 65000THB/mo. certified by your Embassy or consulate; OR Money-in-Thai Bank
of 800,000THB/per person (seasoned for the Ext. of Stay). No difference. You are really going to confuse newcomers
who wish to apply for Non-O -- BTW: Perfectly acceptable and proper to apply for conversion to Retirement Non-O after
arrival in Thailand (rather than getting more difficult "O-A" abroad). If from Tourist Visa, us form TM86; if on Visa-Exempt as
we were, you use TM87. Supporting documents all the same. Only issue, as originally raised by my posting, will be whether
CM Thai Immig. will or will not accept the US Consulate Income Affidavit as sole proof, or WILL require corrobating docs.; AND
whether they will require the Income to be solely from "Pension". Subsequent Extension of Stay App. prior to expiration of 90-day
"O", will require same documentation. And, for you long-termers, Renewal of Ext. of Stay is also the same and requires same documentation.
-
Mrjustice,
Further information from the U.S. Consulate, Chiang Mai, web site:
Affidavit of Income ("Income Verification"). To extend your stay in Thailand, Thai immigration might ask you to get a letter from us to “verify” your income. In fact, we are not empowered to do this. Instead, you may execute an affidavit in which you swear under oath or affirm your monthly income. Use the Affidavit of Income (PDF, 36 KB). Fill in all of the blanks, but do not sign it.
This seems to state exactly what the affidavit is and what it is used for.
MSPain
Yes, I know and agree fully. Cited this very thing to the folks at Immigration, when they were insisting that US Consulate
could certify corroborating docs. Besides the US Consulate saying this is what the Affidavit is supposed to be used for;
the Thai Rules/law say the same thing: the applicant for Retirement Visa or Extension must show "Income or Pension ...
certified by his/her Embassy or Consulate.." So, I couldn't agree with you more that the Affidavit should be all that is required.
But ... as I have always recognized, its their country, their rules, their authority. And, what they say goes. Comply or fail.
Hope I am wrong too; but just reported on my experience, and my impressions on what the CM Immig. current policy is or may be
in regards to using the Income Affidavit.
-
Maybe people who have a problem with mrjustice should take a look at themselves. He is new to cm and is getting the heave ho from some self appointed TV gurus.
Thankfully for me none of you gurus were here when I arrived in cm. Lucky for me!
Well I wasn't here when you came here or I wasn't aware that you had come here.
But my money say's you were not arrogant.
So now I am "Arrogant" and a "Bully". Just keep up the attacks, insults and namecalling.
BTW -- anyone who wants to be objective, take a look at the history of this post; and pray tell how/when
I was "arrogant", as it began with a simple helpful heads up advisement, that turned into attacks on me -- especially by you.
True I cited my legal qualifications -- only after attacked and put on the defense -- BTW -- forgot to mention also a former
candidate for elective Judicial Office rated "Well-Qualified" by the State Supreme Court's Blue Ribbon Comm., and also a former
fully sworn Police Officer; and currently accredited as an international Arbitrator and Mediator by a score of ADR Orgs. around the World.
Ya, just more arrogance -- or, maybe just giving the readers some objective info. to weigh the credibility of my advice and opinions versus
the self-appointed TV Gurus who claim to be all-knowing, but one has to wonder, especially with comments such as your recent one:
"That I bullied my way to the Top to get my way at Immigratiom". Really? If you believe that then YOU Know Nothing "about the way things work here" -- or anywhere else in the World. Nobody of any intelligence could believe a powerless Farang could "bully" the Head Inspector of the Thai Immig. Bureau to do anything. Respectfully, more likely I achieved the right result, thru skillful tact, diplomacy, and knowledge of the rules and applicable law.
BTW -- you keep harping on my earlier comment that "I was finished with this Topic". Is changing one's mind
a concept you can't grasp? Or, is it that I'm just not entitled to do so? Get over it. For the sake of Readers who
actually might benefit from my heads-up and helpful advice, I thought it best not to let my posting get diluted by all
the false assumptions and misinterpretations, attacks and insults.
I think Member MESQUITE may have been on to something: What's really at the bottom of this hostility from a few of the more vocal (and ignorant) Posters, appears to be that they are threatened their dominance on the Forum may be undercut if folks who have some real knowledge and expertise begin to contribute more frequently to the Forum. So sad .... so small.
-
@MESQUITE: Thank you; I was beginning to feel there were no decent people on this Forum.
Amazing to be subjected to a continuing stream of insults and attacks, for simply offering a helpful
heads up and warning on possible change of Policy of significant import to many ex pats.
But if you are one of the rare few, rather than silent majority, don't know if I want to contribute any
more (well-informed) advice, if this is what occurs.
PS. But FYI, I'm not a "newby to CM"; as I said my third long-term stay.
This is only the first time, we have chosen to apply for the Retirement Visa versus
simply using multiple entry Tourist Visa.
-
"...it is now going to be standard practice that they WILL ask and require supporting documentation to be attached
to the Affidavit if you are using the Income Method... ONLY "Pension" Income will be acceptable, despite the rule saying "Income or Pension".
They always have the right to ask.
That is not true. There are thousands and thousands of people who have retirement visas with income from overseas business, investments, and so forth. Many of us are too young to have a pension, are self-employed, etc.
Of course they do; what I have raised is the prospect that now they WILL (always) ask, if you present with the US Consulate Income Affidavit.
And, not sure what you are claiming "is not true". As I have repeatedly said, I agree that the law/rule does not/should not limit the type of income to Pension alone; and, I too am one of those (formerly) self-employed folks who have no official Pension and too young for Soc.Sec. And, therein lies the problem I have posted about. If I am correct, that Chiang Mai Immigration will now only accept "Pension" Income (and, with corroborating docs), then all of us self-employed/too young folks who only have Investment (or other types) of Income, are SOL; and you will not be able to obtain Retirement Non-"O" or Ext./Renewal of Stay based on Income Method; and will have to use Money-in-Bank Method; as we are now in process of obtaining for our Ext.
Time will tell if I am correct; or whether I am just the "Black that draws the Heat" as prior Poster claimed. If right, I'll expect a whole lot of apologies for the treatment I have received on this Forum! In the meantime, with all good intentions, I say be prepared!
BTW: If I am so "Black", had a "Bad Attitude"; had "Poor Appearance"; was so "confused about requirements for obtaining my initial Non-O; used incorrect Forms and documentation; and every other thing I have been blamed and faulted for; then pray tell why did I ultimately prevail in obtaining my initial Non-O after going over the head of the Sgt. Major, to the Captain, and then ultimately to Head Inspector. ... But, only with proviso that a courtesy exception was being made for me this 'one time' and that next time I MUST bring corroborating docs. with the Income Affidavit or use Bank method. I dare say, those with less personal and professional skills than I, would never have succeeded. So to all the Flamers, Naysayers and Doubters, I say take that and put it where the Sun don't shine! :-)
-
Yup, both of the last two posters are right.
I should never have volunteered my helpful advice and heads up and just keep my opinions to myself.
Ironic that my opinions used to be paid for handsomely by grateful clients that permitted me to retire
and travel the World at the ripe old age of 50, while this Forum sadly seems to be dominated by too many folks bent on attacking even the well-meaning, who offer informative and helpful advice. Indeed, having been a passive reader for awhile, I even anticipated such attacks in my initial Post.
And yes, I did succumb to 'overcompensation", having been put on the defensive from the start.
I say who needs that. I'll save my informed and gratuitous advice for my appreciative close friends and family.
Stay ignorant, and be happy -- until it bites you in the "arse".
-
TO POSTER "HELLODOLLY" above:
REALLY? -- "I'm the only one who seems to have this problem" ... and "(you) see no posts other than your post claiming it happened recently?
It would be nice if folks bothered to read thru the whole post before pointing fingers, and once again presuming
it was our fault; and we are the only ones with the problem. If you read the posts that preceded my original post and were quoted
therein, from Senior Members BB1955 and Mesquite, you would see they have recently and before me had very same problem.
And, no I'm not "new and susceptible". This is our third stay in Chiang Mai -- two prior stays of 4months. So while I haven't been here
for decades, pretty familiar. And, we have been traveling non-stop around the world for past 5 years -- so think we know how to adapt
to different cultures. Oh, and by the way, I am a Harvard Law grad, and Internationally Accredited Arbitrator and Mediator with some 30+ years
experience behind me; so also think I know how to read, interpret, and follow rules/instructions to the letter; not to mention knowing how to
deal with people especially Bureaucrats. So again, I say, WE weren't the problem; and, from what we gathered, it IS a new policy.
Granted, someone else may get treated more liberally -- especially someone as suggested by one of the Global Moderators, who is
a many time renewal person that the Officers may be familiar with. But, for all others, caution is advised is you intend to use the Income
Affidavit method you best have the corroborating documentation of PENSION Income ready to hand over!
-
I was not referring to money in the bank for extension. I am referring to extension based upon income of 65K.
Making regular transfers into a Thai bank account is the best back up proof for your income affidavit.
Ok I understand. And, I would agree it should be satisfactory (as I would also think have substantial funds
in foreign investment/bank accounts from which you get the funds, should also be satisfactory).
However, based on my experience, I would strongly suspect they would still require proof of SOURCE of income/bank transfers;
and, unless it is certified Pension Income, problem.
-
UPDATED: CHIANG MAI IMMIGRATION -- INCOME AFFIDAVIT ALONE NO LONGER SATISFACTORY!
The best option and one that immigration will accept is to open an account at a bank here and make regular transfers into the account. Then make copies of bank book pages to show proof that income is coming in on a regular basis.
Using Bangkok Banks New York branch to transfer funds in is probably the least costly than any other option. You would only pay for a domestic transfer to the bank and then a $5 charge for NY and then .25% service fee with a 200 baht minimum.
Info can be found here: http://www.bangkokba...ndsfromUSA.aspx
Edit: Chiang Mai immigration has been reported many times time before as asking for back up proof of income to all income documents from Embassies and consulates.
One of us is confused now. Because you seem to be mixing the Income method with Money-in-Bank method.
My understanding, it's one or the other. If you use Money-in-Bank method, you don't need to make regular transfers into the account,
only have 800,000THB/per person in Thai Bank, and keep it there. Doesn't have to be spent; no withdrawals or further deposits required.
If this is wrong, I sure hope somebody clarifies this for me, before we have another problem. But, I thought I was pretty clear on this.
-
It would be interesting for someone that makes their extension of stay from now on and used the income method to post their experience.
MSPain
T.M. 87 Application for visa (requires proof of income, not an affidavit, for type O for purposes of spending the rest of life in the Kingdom)
T.M. 86 Application for change of visa (visa already approved, changing visa type, income affidavit acceptable for U.S. citizens and possibly others)
Applying for a visa, applying for change of visa, and extension of permission to stay are all different things.
INCORRECT. They may be 'different things', but requirements are all the SAME:
1. Over age 50.
2. Proof of Income "certified by your Embassy" of 65000 THB; OR 800000THB in Bank (properly seasoned for extension, but not initial Non "O"
That's all!
Again, all I am trying to emphasize, is what has 'changed' now at least for Chiang Mai Immig. Office, is that if you are using the Income Method, the Affidavit from Consulate alone will not be satisfactory; you will be required to have corrobating documentation, and it must be "Pension" income.
Just because one meets the requirements does not mean that one gets a visa. There is no "right" to a visa. Its not tick all the boxes and out spits the visa.
A visa grant is a delegated authority and each immigration officer has to be satisfied that their grant is appropriate, lawful, and within their delegated authority. An experienced officer may require less supporting documentation. Likewise may have to require more documentation for an initial visa grant.
When Zippydedodah indicated that the officer pointed to her name tag...its right. Its her name and her delegated authority. She has to be satisfied. Someone else may require lesser or greater supporting documentation. You can get a differing outcome everyday....thats normal.
The law provides a basic framework but there are also policies, guidelines, regulations, case law, and protocols that establush how the law is to be interpreted and applied.
An immigration officer always has the right to ask for supporting documetation. They make a risk assessment (new visa, physical presentation, history as presented etc).
If you fail the "attitude test" then of course they ask for more......that's not just Thailand either.
Nothing has changed......they can ask always.
Ah yes, "my Attitude" must have been the problem -- here we go again.
Please read my original post again. No appearance problem; no attitude problem; original
Immig. Officer very nice, and appeared to say all was okay and passed along our docs.
Only later called up by Sgt. Major to advise we were denied.
And, as I also acknowledged, I am/was fully aware of the discretionary authority of Immigration Officers,
to grant or deny Visa for any reason; and to require additional documentation. Not my point.
Getting discouraged, that my helpful advice/heads up, turns into the 'blame' game.
For those who want to believe we did something wrong, fine believe what you like.
And, with any luck, you enjoy same experience we had.
For those who wish to accept my well-intentioned advisement and heads up, your welcome.
I'm finished with this topic.
-
Mr. Justice,
Well, now you have explained your unique situation a bit more clearly.
You didn't state in your original post that you were applying to change the visa exempt to a 90 day non-imm category O, and then was trying to immediately upgrade the non-imm category "O" to an extension of stay.
AFAIK, it has never been possible to do this simultaneously. Perhaps in some other Imm office elsewhere in Thailand, but not here in Chiang Mai.
You get the non-Imm cat O, and come back 60 days (minimum) up until the expiry date, and apply for an extension of stay based on retirement.
As to the change in requirement to show proof of income (other than the consular income statement)- nothing there has changed.
I think you might have missed a few comments by some who have said that Immigration has always had the right to ask for corroborating documentation.
For the record, I was in CM Imm about 3 weeks ago for my annual extension based on retirement, and my consular income statement was accepted, with no further documentation. Of course, I had the documentation, had it been requested.
I'm glad you got your situation worked out.
Now take a deep breath, exhale slowly...and enjoy your now legal status.
Again, I think you are misunderstanding the point.
The fact that I was going to try to Extend at same time had nothing to do with anything -- and was not a 'unique situation'.
It occupied 10secs. of time, for the original Immig. Office to hand it back to me, and say later. And, then it was totally
out of the picture. (And, yes I had read that Chiang Mai was probably not one of the offices that would allow a simultaneous
extension, but that things always depend on individ. officers and mood).
As far as your experience 3 weeks ago, I think you just 'made it in under the wire' and that was just prior to when they began implementing
the 'new policy'. This is based not only on the 2 prior posters, to which I originally responded that said they had same
experience as I did at beginning of this month; but also based on what I was told at Immig., that they had supposedly
"telephoned" US Consulate in past couple of weeks about this issue, etc.
Finally, I am very happy with my 'new status' and no need to exhale -- did that after our long day yesterday.
Again, I'm just trying to help here by giving a Heads Up to folks for the future. And, just don't want there to
be misunderstandings as to what happened, and what's required. If someone else goes in for either Non-O
or for Extension/Renewal of Stay, they need to know that corrobabting documentation of Pension Income is
going to be required. (If someone finds they don't need to after this, good for them; but, that's not what I was told
very expressly and clearly yesterday). That's all.
-
It would be interesting for someone that makes their extension of stay from now on and used the income method to post their experience.
MSPain
T.M. 87 Application for visa (requires proof of income, not an affidavit, for type O for purposes of spending the rest of life in the Kingdom)
T.M. 86 Application for change of visa (visa already approved, changing visa type, income affidavit acceptable for U.S. citizens and possibly others)
Applying for a visa, applying for change of visa, and extension of permission to stay are all different things.
INCORRECT. They may be 'different things', but requirements are all the SAME:
1. Over age 50.
2. Proof of Income "certified by your Embassy" of 65000 THB; OR 800000THB in Bank (properly seasoned for extension, but not initial Non "O"
That's all!
Again, all I am trying to emphasize, is what has 'changed' now at least for Chiang Mai Immig. Office, is that if you are using the Income Method, the Affidavit from Consulate alone will not be satisfactory; you will be required to have corrobating documentation, and it must be "Pension" income.
-
....... a social security benefit with an "official" letter from S.S. verifying the benefit. It sounds to me that that would be accepted but I also wonder what is the process/how hard is it to get such letters from U.S. social security.
I think Social Security sends out a letter each year to each benefit recipient stating what their benefits will be for the coming year. It is an official letter and I get on from them every year. Never showed it at the Immigration office because never had a need to do so.
If Immigration wants a paper, I just get it for them. It makes no sense to disagree, argue or in any way try to tell them how to do their job or that they are not doing it correctly. Correctly for them is how they do it and nobody can tell them otherwise. They own the rules and they are the Police.
MrJustice's case is the first I have heard of where ATM slips and copies of credit cards were used in an attempt to satisfy the financial requirements. Perhaps creative but ....
I was not being "creative" bringing along ATM slips -- this has repeatedly been advised in this Forum, to bring with (at least when applying for Ext. of STay), to verify money is being brought in. And, yes, I agree it is "their rules". Purpose of my Post, was to advise that at least in the Chiang Mai Immig. Office, they have 'changed their rules/policy"; and now WILL be requiring corrobating documentation of PENSION income to accompany the Consulate Affidavit.
-
Nothing special here. Immigration is aware that the US-embassy, and the embassies of some other countries, don't require proof for the embassy letter. As a result it is not unheard off that they require extra proof of your income and the advise is to always bring the extra proof.
by the same token if a person lies to there embassy in getting proof of income from them and is caught out they can be in deep trouble both here and in there home country
"Lying" is not the problem. The law/rules do not specify the type of monthly Income; and just say "Income". Immig. instruction form given to me
expressly says "Income OR Pension". So, should be nothing wrong to be able to rely upon investment/interest income, which is what we had truthfully intended. It's just that now Chiang Mai Immig. says ONLY "Pension" income will be acceptable.
-
Mrjustice: thanks for your informative and very credible report. This issue of how immigration accepts or does not accept embassy/consulate letters from countries like the U.S. that do not actually verify income and rather just take the word of the citizen has indeed come up before at other immigration offices. It seems to be somewhat cyclical. Official national written rules and actual current enforcement policies at the local immigration offices are sometimes not the same thing. Now it will be interesting to see if this is localized in Chiang Mai or a more national trend. Cheers and good luck.
I am a little confused by your post though. Supposing in the case of a U.S. national who has a consulate letter AND a social security benefit with an "official" letter from S.S. verifying the benefit. It sounds to me that that would be accepted but I also wonder what is the process/how hard is it to get such letters from U.S. social security.
Your welcome. And, I agree about your 'confusion' regarding the Letter from SSA.
Will it have to be "Certified", if so how -- by the Consulate? Don't know if they can do that,
if they didn't get the Letter directly. Or, just attach Letter to the Affidavit? (I think but not certain,
that is what the Immig. folks were implying).
Can I Obtain An O-A Residency Visa In Country?
in Thai Visas, Residency, and Work Permits
Posted · Edited by Mrjustice
Sorry Mario, must disagree with you (again) -- global moderator or not, you are wrong (again).
While it used to be true (and is true for visiting most countries), the exception here in Thailand is now
the single entry 90-day Non-Immig. "O" Visa, which IS obtainable IN the country at Thai Immigration Bureau,
using Application Forms TM86 (for conversion from Tourist Visa), or TM87 (for conversion from 30-day visa-exempt stamp).
As for the requirements, the preceding Posters have correctly set forth; as they have for thereafter obtaining the 1-year Extension
of Stay, within the final month of obtaining your Non-Immig. "O" Visa. Although, I must once again add the caveat/caution, for
new applicants, that if you are intending to use the Income Affidavit method (versus Money-in-Thai Bank method), CM Immig.
is likely to request supporting documentation esp. with the US Income Affidavit, of your "Pension" Income.