sumrit

14 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

That is not correct.  Before, you only needed 800K + 3 months spending money (which could be less than 65K/mo).  

Under the new rules, it's 800K + 5 mo spending money, just to cover the extended seasoning for the 800K, plus the 400K one can never touch.

 

This is a significant difference which is negatively affecting those who budgeted to retire here years ago.  Who would have guessed that immigration would trash their previous offer, and force them to either leave, or make annual pay-offs through an agent?

Or of course, instead of having to keep the 800/400k in the bank for longer periods plus having to also transfer extra living expenses, or having to pay high agent fees to (possibly) use the illegal route you could simply use the monthly income method and just transfer the 65k baht into Thailand each month. much simpler for us to do and easier for immigration to control.

That could well be what immigration would prefer us to do.    

4 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

I'm not certain what part you don't understand about having a visa agent do the one year visa extension, 90 day reports, and any nonsensical TM forms immigration can come up with.  I use a legal agency to do this for me since it avoids any communication with immigration.  

 

The agency makes an appointment for me once a year and physically drives me to immigration.  Immigration takes my photo and has me sign a couple of documents.  The visa agent then drives me back to their office.  It's all legal.

 

<inflammatory comment removed>  

If I misunderstood your previous comments I apologise.

You actually said: 

 

 

 

2

Quote

I use a regular visa agency that makes the one year appointment, does the 90 day reports, and files the TM forms.  I got burned out on doing these visa extensions myself and interacting with immigration

The extension application uses a TM form and you said your agent files those forms. I took that to mean you no longer did the extensions yourself but used an agent to do the work for you. 

If you are now saying you supply the agent with all the necessary documents for your extension, the agent puts them in a folder for you, makes an appointment for you then drives you to immigration and hands that folder to you in order for you to make the application in person before finally driving you back to his office then you are indeed doing things legally.

What I can't get my head round is why you 'I got burned out on doing these visa extensions myself'.

The agent: gives you a list of the documents required.

You:          get all the documents needed from your own supply.

                (assuming you are doing everything legally as you state you must apply in person to your bank for the required financial proof. The                      bank will not accept an agent applying for that for you)

The agent: makes a phone call to arrange an appointment then drives you there.

You:          present your application in person to the IO.

The agent: drives you back to his office.

So for supplying a list of the documents required, making a phone call and acting as a taxi driver just how much do you get ripped off??????

1 hour ago, Olmate said:

It’s not illegal at all, on the contrary, it’s given priority approval

It is illegal, you are not given priority, you have been buying priority with illegal payments.

25 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You’re right, but there is nothing illegal about using an agent as long as the applicant attends immigration as required during the application process.

I quite agree with you. But my original post on this matter was in reply to a poster who said he used an agent instead of applying in person.

9 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

But, I had no path for an extension that was legal, to spite meeting the qualifications (2 different offices - different methods of avoidance). 

So, if you qualified for an extension why was it refused and what two offices was it refused at??

2 hours ago, Olmate said:

The agent has showed your respect and courtesy!

Using an agent to complete an illegal extension application on your behalf is NOT showing respect or courtesy.

The law says you must apply in person. Showing respect is complying with the law and making that application in person.

1 hour ago, JackThompson said:

For us to "obey the law," requires that law-enforcement at our local-office actually want us to obey it

Wrong!!!!

You should obey it because it's the law.

1 hour ago, Olmate said:

Interesting that a complete unknown, unsighted new applicant can obtain a visa from an Embassy either online or by post yet an in country renewal must be in person.

A visa is NOT an extension, the information in the application has not been confirmed by Thai immigration and can be refused on entry to Thailand.

An extension is an application to stay in Thailand and is made directly to Immigration.

9 hours ago, BritTim said:

You are correct that, once a year, a correct extension ought to require your presence at immigration.

My comment was primarily directed to CMNightRider who made it clear that he chooses not to attend and pays an AGENT to (illegally) do the work for him, although, judging by the many posts on this forum, there are many others who do the same. Some are legal apart from not attending in person but some are not legal anyway. All are illegal in not attending.

The extension process is easy and straight forward, even after the recent changes. I agree with you that our presence is only required once a year for the extension. We are guests in this country and I think common courtesy should mean we obey the law and make our application in person.  

6 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

I got burned out on doing these visa extensions myself and interacting with immigration.

So the notice towards the bottom of the TM7 doesn't apply to you then?

NOTICE
๑. ผู้ขอจะต้องยื่นคำขออนุญาตด้วยตนเอง
APPLICATION MUST BE MADE IN PERSON.

If you're using an agent instead of making the application in person yourself it's an illegal application, regardless of whether the rest of your paperwork is 100% accurate or not.????

1 hour ago, CMNightRider said:

Compared to Thai Immigration, the visa agents are our friends.

Why's that? Because they're expensive and do things illegally?????????

1 minute ago, jackdd said:

Unless you want to extend your driving license in Pattaya, then you still need a certificate of residence

So don't go to the Pattaya office. I renewed mine in Chonburi using just my yellow book and ID card. No passport or residence certificate required.

12 hours ago, JackThompson said:

Immigration are not forcing us to get residency-certs only from them (through agents) - yet.  When/if they decide to do so, perhaps our embassies will again oblige immigration, by discontinuing their own service which interferes with their agent-racket.

Just get a Yellow Tabien Baan and Pink Foreigner ID card. You'll never need a residency certificate again.........and certainly won't get ripped off by agents.

I realized I'd lost my Krung Thai ATM card a couple of weeks ago. The account is mainly used for on line bill payments so I've rarely used the ATM. The last time was probably more than a month ago but I couldn't even remamber where. I just needed my pink ID card as proof of ID. After confirming the card hadn't been handed in and no attempt had been made to use it, the card was cancelled and a new one was issued. The good news was that, because the bank was in the process of changing cards with four digit pins to new cards with six digit pins, she put the new card down as an upgrade and it was totally free. No charge for the lost card.

18 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

It makes no difference as to what it is based upon when issued. It is still a non immigrant visa and that is all that required to apply for the extension.

I agree with you. But there is an anomaly over financial proof with the two non-o visas at Savannakhet. I was just suggesting a possible reason as to why the IO in Nonthaburi might (wrongly?) reject the extension.

Quote

problem is i no longer live with my wife

Supplying documents to make it easier/more convenient to get a non-o based on marriage might just be one of the things Immigration are tightening up on. No idea, just an observation.

34 minutes ago, bootly66 said:

the o visa i got in Laos

I suspect he got his non-o in Savannakhet where you can get a non-o based on marriage without financial proof. A non-o based on retirement does require financial proof so its likely 'marriage' is written on the visa to distinguish between the two. 

3 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

Does it matter what method of transfer or what bank?  Must it be from a foreign bank if you are on a retirement Non-imm/OA visa? 

You must transfer a minimum of 65k baht from a foreign financial institution into your own Thai bank account each month. Each deposit must be shown as an International Transfer in your Thai Account from abroad.

9 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

5 hours ago, sumrit said:

Have you missed the Transferwise threads about being able to ask them to send your transfers to the Thai partner bank of your choice? By doing that you can guarantee the transfer being shown as an International Transfer.  

Not missed those, but I'm asking about something different, no one has reported doing that yet for Kasikorn, understand?

If you make the effort and do a small transfer via Transfervise yourself and contact them to ask that the transfer is routed via Kasikorn bank then you could be the first to report the success (or otherwise) to posters on this forum.

24 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Do you think your life would be a little happier/less stressful if you confined your stressing to what's happening now and not what MIGHT/MIGHT NOT happen in the future ?

I'm certainly not stressing, I'm happy, relaxed and chilling out while looking at options.????

1 hour ago, Kadilo said:

You can see a lot. 

Ever  thought of being a Medium. ?

They've done exactly that already to people using the income method. We now have to bring 65k baht into Thailand from abroad each and every month, plus, if asked, provide proof of where that income originated from.

You think they can't/won't do the same/similar in the future to prove people using the 'money in the bank' have an adequate income for living expenses while in Thailand.

Tell me why do you think this can't/won't happen????

22 minutes ago, Tropposurfer said:

 just need an income to cover your needs without touching the 800K. What could be simpler ????

Not so simple if you have to prove that income is sourced from abroad every month in the same way the income method is.

That will mean 800k PLUS proof of an income to cover living expenses. Would be better off just using the income method and not having to tie up your savings in a Thai Bank.????

1 hour ago, vinniekintana said:

It astounds me that some ppl make 65k a month and they cannot rub together 800k and be done with it.

28 minutes ago, vinniekintana said:

No I don't...I was living as a cheap Charlie for years

...but if I had 65k coming in I would have banked a fortune.

And, in the future, you might need to.

Those using the income method are showing that they have a sufficient monthly income to live in Thailand.

In the past, those using the money in the bank option have said that money is used for expenses throughout the year. But they can no longer say that. Most of that money must stay in the bank. 

So, If their money is tied up, what do these people now use for living expenses and can they provide proof of the source of that money?

In the foreseeable future, once the current dust has settled, I can see Immigration asking the same question.

I can see an additional requirement, for those choosing the 800k in the bank option, being a requirement to show sufficient annual living expenses, with proof that the money originated from abroad.

Having to show 800k baht in the bank PLUS annual living expenses will suddenly not be such a good deal.

22 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

have you missed the transferwise threads about the 3 local partners and how you need your one in order for it to be Intl?

Have you missed the Transferwise threads about being able to ask them to send your transfers to the Thai partner bank of your choice? By doing that you can guarantee the transfer being shown as an International Transfer.  

23 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

23 hours ago, wgdanson said:

And this is exactly why one needs a buffer, not rely on each month's payment as and when it is made. 

 

My UK Pension is paid WEEKLY still.

What good is a buffer if you can't use the combo method?  If I'm understanding your term buffer.  SS gets deposited in my Thai bank account how would I set up a buffer if SS messed up like they have done in the past?

By buffer he means keeping a small amount in his UK bank account to enable him to transfer a monthly payment if his pension fails to materialize for whatever reason. 

There'd be no point in keeping a buffer in his Thai bank, he can't prove that money came from abroad when he needs to show it.