spambot

6 hours ago, Oxx said:

 

You understand correctly.

 

The immigration officer and her boss on the day took a very strict view of the requirement that the money be continuously in a bank account.  The "continuously" wording I suspect was originally intended to stop people immediately withdrawing the money after the visa/extension is granted.

 

To be honest, the "make a new application" option didn't occur to me under the stress of the refusal.  The "seasoning" requirement for a retirement visa/extension of stay has, in my experience, been a bit flexible.  On one occasion (whilst on a retirement extension of stay) I mistakenly had a fixed deposit mature during the seasoning period, money which I immediately reinvested with the same bank.  This was spotted by an immigration officer, but wasn't an issue.  I presume the same flexibility was used when I was initially switched to a retirement extension of stay.

OXX - Really good reply - Thanks

"The "continuously" wording I suspect was originally intended to stop people immediately withdrawing the money after the visa/extension is granted" - Actually that is a good point  - The withdraw could theoretically have been an option and hence the account  in the mind of the immigration officer might have seen this as some other type of investment (but without really knowing why).

"To be honest, the "make a new application" option didn't occur to me under the stress of the refusal". - Yup I completely get that - when your on the end of some arbitrary reversal of what's normally accepted it tends to make the mind work differently -  I had British Embassy proof of earnings letter refused  retirement extension - I felt the same and became confused, angry and concerned what I could actually do next.

5 hours ago, Oxx said:

Based upon experience:

 

(1) It has to be a Thai government bank, e.g. Krung Thai.

 

(2) When it comes to rolling over a fixed deposit that may, or may not be accepted.  In my case, after a few rollovers Immigration decided that the money hadn't been permanently in an account (even though the rollover was done on the same day), and so refused to extend my extension of stay.  I suspect a factor may have been that that year I was eligible for an extension of stay based upon retirement.

Am I reading this correct - Ubonjoe is saying as long as the funds appear in a bank book and never goes below 10 million baht, but It can also be in government or state enterprise bonds - Then you should get the Investment Visa.

However it seems what you are saying is that you were refused an extension even though you had these aspects all covered.

I understand that the rollover might be a judgement that for a fraction of time (seconds, mins, hours) since it wasn't continuously there - But then surely wouldn't it be accepted at the time since it was then actually in the account at the application time for applying for the visa?

I know that you were making an extension and not an application - But looking at the only qualifications as defined by UbonJoe couldn't you make a new application (rather than extend)?

Or possibly I am missing something - Is there some min time for (both) extending and applying (similar to that required for a retirement Visa funds in an account for applying / extending)?

But even if there was this requirement in the case of the Investment Visa - Then application for the Retirement would fail since similarly the same argument would be used that rollover had caused the funds not to be in the account for 2 months (in the case of a new application)?

2 hours ago, Oxx said:

 

On the negative side, it has underperformed the SET50 over the long term (particularly in the last few years) after correcting for changes in exchange rate.  You'd be better off with a SET50 tracker fund or Thai ETF (e.g. iShares MSCI Thailand ETF).

 

On the extra negative side, various actively managed funds in Thailand investing in the SET have outperformed both.

 

The only pluses I see with ANW are (a) it avoids the more corrupt companies in the SET, and (b) its charges are relatively modest.

Enjoyed both of your posts steve73 and Oxx 

Depends on which countries you are from - I am guess steve is Uk and Oxx is YS - If taking the Uk route as a investor you must bear in mind the Tax on dividend only has an allowance now of £1,000 .

On a personal note - The SET looks like its recent move is on a downtrend - Possibly reacting to the FED - But not yet clear if this will continue.

Looking at the iShares ETF - Interesting to see the top 10 investments contained

2 hours ago, denby45 said:

I am still waiting for the OP to tell the actual Baht numbers involved on a monthly basis. You got a reduction in your lekky bill and it also looks like the landlord did not add back the 20% he was entitled to. How much more are you paying per month overall after the increase in your rent?

 

Den

The previous electricity charges were 6% of the rental costs - The New rental cost has increased by 13%. The new electricity cost will reduce now to 3% of old rental costs. 

In summary the amount extra being paid is 13% - 3% = 10% real increase.

32 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

OP, you didn't actually say, how much was your latest rent before this increase, and how much now after the increase?

 

You could lodge a complaint with the OCPB, and they had an article the other day "promising" to not allow sneaky landlords to pull these kinds of scams.  But obviously, filing an OCPB complaint won't do wonders for your relationship with your landlord, whatever that is.

 

By the way, if you have an actual rental agreement/lease for a particular time period that's still valid, and it specifies a fixed monthly rental rate, the landlord can't legally change that arbitrarily during the duration of the agreement.

 

 

Yup - Both points valid and yes I have thought about both (here is the site to do this) and  know I could logically say to the owner landlord - Hey you can not do that, look at this  legal document which is my tenancy agreement - But  then in  the real world - Owner is ex high ranking police officer - A OCPB complaint will probably never be rigorous investigated.  Also if the other 74 apartments are not kicking up a fuss and so the way to sort this is to just get rid of the troublemaker.

I think since he put the rent up retrospectively he can also claim  Basically April occurs before May - So the tenant was paying the higher rent in April - The new introduction for electricity rate change has been implemented May 1st - so we didn't change the rent on the same month - He was already on an increased rent previous to this..... or some such other argument will work and will be difficult to prove in any such complaint.

4 minutes ago, GarryP said:

If that happened, I would leave anyway. At least there is likely to be one month before someone rents your room so the owners would lose that.  It may not be much money, but I can't stand cheats.  

It just got worse - few minutes ago I was presented with April 2018 statement - They backdated the Rent increase - And Yup  it was only yesterday that I got sight of a handwritten note shown to me - And no change to my tenancy agreement (yet) materialised as addendum or amendment - Just the rent increase.

9 minutes ago, BEVUP said:

How many increases in that time ( of 6 yrs ) ?

Difficult say - since I have moved from different priced (increased quality) appartments

13 minutes ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

Do you got a rental agreement?

Yes

As many are now aware the  announcement of the Consumer Protection Board which will come into force as of May 1, which was intended to protect consumers from being taken advantage of by owners of apartments, hostels or rented rooms who often overcharged their tenants.  Starting on May 1, electricity and tap water fees at hostels, apartments or rented rooms in residential buildings will come under legal control which prohibits owners of the premises from overcharging the utility fees. The apartment or a hostel owner cannot charge utility rates exceeding 20 percent of the rates charged by the Metropolitan Electricity Authority - In Bangkok this 4 THB + 20%(0.8 THB) = 4.8THB. They also stated in an announcement that they wished to ensure that owners of hostels or apartments id not impose other charges on the tenants to compensate for lowering utility fees.

Yesterday I was shown a handwritten piece of paper that turned the argument the opposite way around and this s what it roughly said - “The Government required the apartment block owner to increase the rent and service charges on each condo - However to compensate we are going to reduce your electricity unit cost from 8 THB to 4 THB” - I was so amused that they had said the government was imposing a rent increase and it was the owner that was voluntarily lowering the electricity charges  I tried to take a photo of the piece of paper on my mobile, but the paper was even more amusingly hastily withdrawn and a number of hands outstretched - All three of the receptionists held their hand up to block me from using my camera phone .

There is probably very little I or anyone in a similar situation can do, but what is it that  a tenant can to do when a landlord does impose other charges to compensate for the lowering utility fees? -

This question for me is more rhetorical, since I do not envisage trying to fight this - I know the owner and definitely know that the only result would be me asked to vacate and finish my 6 years of tenancy.

- Is there anyone else in this same situation?

- And what (if anything) is anyone doing as a tenant to fight this?

Just for completeness - Got confirmation email from Bangkok immigration - in the last 60 secs

4 minutes ago, Sophon said:

They might send him an email, it depends on which immigration office he uses and who approves the report. I report to the Chiang Mai immigration office (well to Lamphun now, but no-one has told the system that they opened up an office in Lamphun), and have only received an email twice for 10 online reports. 

 

If you don't receive an email, just log on to the system and check the status of your report.

 

Sophon

Thanks Sophon - Good feedback!

30 minutes ago, Mattd said:

Open the immigration page, then go to the right hand menu and click open with Internet Explorer, this is how I do it and never had an issue.

Mattd - You are sheer Genius - It worked! 

I got one of these - I am presuming that they send a response by email for final confirmation?

Thanks Mattd - Good info - I will try that now

4 minutes ago, Mattd said:

Correct, this is the page where you confirm all of the info is correct, no idea why you are showing no info.

Are you using Internet Explorer?

I am using Microsoft edge, but give me 10 mins and will try again with internet explorer (once I get confirmation on my last question posted - since I might have input incorrect date info)

Just gone back to start - Something I need to check that might be wrong on my part - Field asks for "Stay Permitted Date" - Is this the - Admitted until (stamp in the passport - when I entered Thailand) or is the "Notify your address again on" date (printed on the receipt of notification - last time I went to immigration to do my 90 day report)?

Thanks Joe

Having input all the details requested for the online 90 day reporting - After numerous rejections, but finally figuring out what to change in some of the ambiguous fields - I get to this acceptance page - I tick acknowledge box and then accept button - I just get a page refresh and I do the same as before tick and click the accept button - stuck here.

I can see that there is no data in the header field name, just a dash line, even though all this data has been input and accepted on the previous pages.

What should I be seeing on this page - i.e is this normal or should there be fields reflecting the input data I have already input?

Any thoughts why I am stuck at this step?

What about  nasal inhalers sold everywhere (7/11) - Specifically Poy-Sian Nasil Inhaler - It has Eucalyptus Oil also mixed with menthol, camphor and borneol - Has anyone tried these or are they not effective on chest / throat? 

I think a lot of people here in Thailand get cough, chest and phlegm problems this month every year as the temperature and humidity changes - I was told that its caused by glands in nose and throat changing the thickness of mucus (everyone produces and swallows unconsciously throughout the day). Any change in humidity / temperature  also changes the  thickness of the mucus and this changes ability to fight infections - It also moistens the lining of the nose / sinuses and when its not the correct thickness doesn't lubricate correctly and causes coughs. 

8 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

What immigration told you is not the real reason you got the message. They only told you had to do it in person since it is your first 90 day report. If you had been successful it would of not been approved.

The database the system accesses only has info from entries to the country. There is no linkage to previous reports or no reports nor when your report is due.

I do understand that immigration does say anything without any real truth or knowledge backing the statements  on occasions. I was reporting only what was said when we discussed the methods available and when they could be deployed - She spoke good English and and was better than most conversations I had experience before - Helpful and very clear about what the message meant that I got online when and failed to do reporting online . This increase in helpfulness I am guessing is something to do with the internal management changes and investigations on policy, services and corruption that took place over the last 10 days at the Bangkok immigration offices.

Good to hear  your knowledge about their IT database structures i.e that the online reporting system that expats use - It can only access data associated with entry dates associated with passport numbers.

Hence what you are saying is that the system might have accepted my first time application - AND THEN the manual inspection of my status would have come back with a result that declined my application to report online. This is different from what I THOUGHT the immigration officer was saying - That the status message (I posted earlier) WAS BECAUSE IT WAS MY FIRST REPORT - i.e I was interpreting her statement as that this was WHY I was getting the message .

And hence the bottom line is whether it was a message generated by the system knowing that it was my first time - or if the system had accepted my application and rejected my application after the manual inspection latter - I would have been required to attend in person either way. But this is process and not really about why I was getting the message. 

The reason we might have both been seeing this differently (previous post) was that you think the message was being generated not automatically by the system because it was my first time, but the system was rejecting me for some other reason - I however was seeing this and was presuming that this message was being generated based because this was my first report.

How the system actually works i.e automatically picking up that a firs time report and rejecting or not - isn't too critical to most on the forum -  But it is however good to know  that the report must be done in person for the first time and also interesting to know as you say what the data it accesses on the online system can only identify look up of passport numbers and the dates the passport entered into the country only.  Thanks - For helping with this insight.

Thanks Ubonjoe - You quote "That means your record was not found" - And yes - I can see your reasoning for why you think this might be occurring  -  See post 16 - For the real reason that this is occurring.

5 mins ago I just finished doing my 30 day report in person (Bkk). I asked immigration officer why I could not do online earlier today - Reason: First report (I have a new O-A visa) must be in person - then all other reports can be done online.

2 minutes ago, glegolo said:

Use Internet explorer......

 

glegolo

Yup - I Did do - I know my post said windows explorer, but I did use Internet Explorer - And every other browser failed getting even any kind of response - at least Internet Explorer did respond, but not with what I wanted to see B+(

JUST FOR COMPLETENESS - THIS IS THE RESPONSE FOR MY ONLINE  MULTIPLE ATTEMPTS - AFTER CAREFULLY CHECKING MY INFORMATION AND USING LATEST WIDOWS EXPLORER BROWSER (ALSO TRIED WINDOWS EDGE BROWSER)

THANKS ubonjoe