Runamile

OK. Looks like we've all been looking in the wrong direction at the TM30, when most of us are not landlords. So presumably all the stuff about TM30 online is totally irrelevant to most of us as non-landlords.  I presume that this fabled website doesn't also enable online completion of TM28? I presume that would require a trip or two to Immigration (including one while I'm away to make that 24hr deadline????). Now as to the TM6 what would be its purpose if anyway we have to complete a TM28? 

17 hours ago, graemeaylward said:

Disgusting! In UK even just over the alcohol limit leads to a court appearance with an automatic 12 month disqualification and a hefty fine (unlimited) or up to 6 months imprisonment! After such a conviction, your insurance premium will increase considerably. Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of alcohol or drugs could lead to up to 14 years imprisonment! 2 points on your licence is NOT a deterrent, but a licence to kill the next unsuspecting, blameless person on the road.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

"No problem. No have insurance"

Long thread. But as far as I got with it saw nothing on high rates of relationship (marital and non-marital) break-up, thereby high rates of single parenthood and that single parent bearing the whole financial onus of having had the children. Huge creator of debt.

Wow! Can we just go to the Smart Van for good connectivity to 90-Day report? One is bound to be touring our neighbourhood!

If responsibility is covered by condoms, Thais are mostly in the space. Quality I'm way less sure about.

Pure blatant prejudice. And stoked from the highest levels.

I've never seen any hookers along Walking Street. Thereagain, I've always been rather exhausted after fighting my way through them on Beach Road. Perhaps the Police had the same problem?

 Many downscale Chinatown hotels are pretty big on mirrors too!

I take it that the hook would've been sorting an election result somehow. Then selling it to the public. Hence the need for BIG PR skills!

2 hours ago, YetAnother said:

course they do, they were appointed by the junta; surprising they didnt find some third world way to dissolve Future Forward

Be fair ............. Give them time.

Jeeze, I went through a lot of those entries looking for one on intellect. Never found it!

My guess is that it's to do with the young Saudi woman. He appeared to more or less unilaterally over-turn previous policy. That probably stepped on toes here and certainly stepped on huge and Royal toes in Saudi. That's offending an awful lot of powerful people, causing loss of face. Could be what goes around comes around. If not that my thoughts are election-related. I feel his immigration antics and policies least likely. Who cares about the loss of farang retirees for instance.

Bit off-topic this. And there were a couple of small English errors. Overall, though please, please don't let Sara Mellouk back to Morocco or Germany. This was so, so much better, including the English, than most reporting we get to see on Thai Visa.

1 hour ago, Runamile said:

Why do Brits and others not "Get It". Entitlement to NHS services are based on residence not contributions. If you are out of the country for more than 2 years you lose any entitlement, unless you were overseas working for a British company. I have heard of a generous interpretation of that last point being made. I have heard of generous interpretations being made by other agencies, then a return being made to NHS. Mostly, though it's simple. You have been out of UK for 2 or more years. The NHS show you the door. You aren't and haven't been permanently resident. I fail to see what is so hard to understand, but think that most people just run their lives around the mythologies perpetrated say here. That is very dangerous when it come's to your health. Research it.

Should have read ordinarily resident. Apologies. All else OK. Note that NHS use the simple expedient of asking to see your passport, then look at the entries. They are supposed to do this for everybody. Whether they actually do is a contentious point - meaning white guy with a cockney accent may well not be asked, especially if surrounded by wailing relatives. It's all one hell of a risk though, and you'll be trying to pull it off when not at your best. The same applies if you try the benefits agency first approach - though I think they have more discretion/flexibility (time to roll out your history of wartime military service, etc - seriously I've heard of that done successfully, but how many successes overall is a wholly different matter!)

12 hours ago, Jeremy50 said:

Pattaya is where they should be, not pissing about on Koh Tao.  Anyway, six years on Koh Tao, it's remarkable the man is still alive. 

Fake news. Thinks he was sponsored by Thai Tourism.

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

I am not trying to be a smart ass, I simply don't know.

But Don't British citizens who receive income from Britain file a tax return? or online  portals  where individual benefits are listed?

I am American , I can log on to my social security page and review my income for the past year and estimated benefits,I assume when I start collecting SS benefits the same will be reflected there, also my trade union website reflects my monthly pension benefits, 

Why can't the certifying agency (in this case the embassy) log on to these portals and verify income info? 

The Embassy are arguing that the very latest data protection legislation causes issues. That is correct, but not a major problem. We just give permission to share (I did it a few weeks ago about insurance companies sharing information on me). My guess is that for most of us three or four of those share permissions would cover the situation - and remember there's no great need to show all our income, just the equivalent of 65KBaht a month.

3 minutes ago, galt67 said:

Define a 'hard currency'....?

 

The THB has strengthened against ALL the major currencies over the past 10-15 years. Especially GBP.

Yes, OK, technically that should read reserve currency.

2 minutes ago, Torrens54 said:

Maybe it’s different for Aussies on SPOUSE VISAS !

 

Every year, for many years, we get a letter from our Thai Bank, a couple of days before fronting Immigration. The Bank’s Certified Letter costs

Baht 100 and it shows there has been a MINIMUM of Baht 400,000 in the account for the prescribed time.  

 

SIMPLE as that!

Year after year, after year.....

So that only leaves a couple of problems, assuming there really is 400,000 Baht in the bank:

1. Having 400,000 Thai Baht.

2. Being willing to tie up a moderate sum of money in a globally useless soft currency of a politically unstable country.

1 hour ago, totally thaied up said:

It will come in time. You know how slow things can be here. This will have many channels to go through and I can imagine the paperwork building now in Thai Immigration. Unless they just do the 800/400K route (the easy way) or show 65/40K a month in a bank book, it is pretty easy if you got the money. Until the Police Order changes stating anything drastically different, unless the British Embassy does not do a turn around in some way, I can see no other way it can be done. It will bring a lot more work for the IO doing the job. They will have to search the bank books an I think, that would not make them happy searching through for all the deposits and adding them up!

 

Can you see that happening?

There are so many easy ways it could be done, but  not using the existing resource base either at the British or Thai end. Two examples:

1. The British Embassy retains but outsources the consular letter on income service, outsourcing to a business that is competent to provide the investigative levels seemingly now expected by the Thai authorities. Embassies in general have and do often outsource, the British Embassy included, where they feel overwhelmed with paperwork, under-qualified or both. It's simply normal practice.

2. That the Thai authorities accept a statement of global income compiled and attested by a qualified Thai accountant. That statement would be in Thai and figures worked to Thai Baht, so alleviating the problem that the Thais have in fact raised about their ability to even read foreign language bank statements.

The problem here is that nobody has really considered the issues. Frankly, I doubt that they remotely care. Naturally if they haven't seen problems they won't have gone looking for never mind found solutions. In truth there are many available solutions - if anybody could be bothered

2 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

OK for non-Brits, but another problem for Brits. The British Embassy ended many of their notarial services last year. Presumably it was one of the things they deemed could be outsourced. If you ask them to witness a signature, they give you a list of local lawyers.

Absolutely correct. And again, why can't that logic be applied re the Income letters? If not an outsourcing arrangement, why can it not be agreed with Thai Immigration that they accept a global statement of income drawn up and attested by a qualified Thai accountant?

On the Data Protection issue raised by the British Embassy. I hit this issue about three weeks ago, changing my health insurance from one company to another. Guess what? You simply give permission for the original company to deal with the new one in terms of providing personal information. You could give permission for, say, your pension provider to deal with the British Embassy OR ITS AGENT. For most people, I doubt that many income transactions would need to be covered. For me, it wouldn't be that many, but so what, since that takes me way over the 65K a month, just leave some off. Now, why did I introduce OR ITS AGENT? Reason is that Embassies of many nationalities, British included, often feel either overwhelmed by paperwork or lacking in expertise. They simply outsource to those who can cope with the volume and/or have the expertise. That is totally normal. Why not in this case?

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

You don't get it.

The status quo is that for income based applications full import (monthly or whatever) of full claimed income has NEVER been required.

The British embassy is suggesting a very negative change in that policy in lieu of embassy letters.

You can enjoy your smug cuppas all you like, but the British embassy has opened a CAN OF WORMS. 

Thank heavens someone gets it! The further points are who on earth wants their money tied into the soft, globally useless currency of a politically unstable country? Finally, is 65K Baht a month a relevant amount of money for you to bring in other than in terms of the Immigration requirement? Non-drinking, non-smoking, not eating out, single relationship avoider that I am it makes zit sense for me - but that doesn't mean that globally I have haven't income and immediate access to it of many multiples of 65K Baht.