notamember

2 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Probably to prove your point, guess that’s not obvious tho. You crank about being false but can’t show otherwise  in your ridiculous reply

i do not need to prove anything to you, that would be for your satisfaction, not mine

i could in fact write anything, attribute it to anyone and get it verified by a lawyer and you would still not believe it

i know its true, i have no reason to lie, i was asked if i could knew of one example, i do, thats enough for me

if its not enough for you, kindly move along

you were not even the one who challenged me to show one, you just jumped on the wagon like most of the sheeple on here

if you do not like me or my posts then just post some imoji that you think will bother me or block me and save your own blood pressure

1 minute ago, lamyai3 said:

So you're saying sworn affidavits made to a country's embassy are less credible than the testimony of an anonymous TV poster called notamember? 

you are saying that not me

you asked if i knew of one single case of a person lying

i do, 

2 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Can that be verified or certified or declared, and is that citizen of sane mind? And I guess he was friend of yours!

for your satisfaction?

why?

no he was not a friend

4 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Who lied - can you provide a single example? Whether by sworn affidavit, or as with the UK, falsification of documents provided?

 

Rather than drinking immigration's kool aid, you might want to consider that the citizens of the four nations whose embassies buckled are collateral damage, in a much higher level retributive spat.

yes i can

i have it in writing from a US citizen that admits he lied on 3 years affidavits with the Assistance of a Chiang Mai agent

11 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

It should have been turned over to the FBI office in Bangkok  for investigation and the extension denied or revoked.

 

I never knew of anyone that lied and I certainly never did but  I still have to believe on a percentage basis that the numbers are low- The Embassy could  have eliminated many  by simply asking for documentation and then Thai Imm - if suspecting an issue also ask for the proof.

Federal law stated they cannot ask for evidence, the applicant or an agent Assists with the affidavit preparation, the applicant pays and they stamp

Thats it, i believe that the majority lied as it was so easy. The minority who did not suffered for it

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

You have no evidence that anyone lied nor do I- but most likely someone did-  in every situation involving any entity someone will lie- but it is only a minority-   the way you stop these things is to have the applicants present  their evidence of statement- backed up by a bank statement showing the same amount  claimed going into a bank and then the evidence of it being spent.

 

At the same time- Thai Immigration can ask for 'proof'-  If they feel the applicant is lying- they can  not issue the  extension and refer the case back to the Embassy for prosecution.  Both the US and Australian Embassy have  Federal police presence in Thailand.

 

 

actually i do have evidence, i have an admission in writing that a US citizen had applied using an affidavit Assisted by a Chiang mai agent to the value of $2400 when he was only making $1880

This has been done with their Assistance for 3 years

8 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

2nd hand information.  Do you believe him?  Why?  I think it is too early in the process to tell.  What if some guy is convinced you are correct and spends his money too quickly say on hospital bills and gets kicked out of Thailand?  I'd feel awful it I furthered a rumor that caused that. 

 

I read the OP and it sounds plausible although if someone asked me to ask those questions while I was getting an extension I'd tell they to go fly a kite. 

 

My wife owns a part time visa agency anyway so I'd ask her. 

can i ask?, what is a ''part time visa agency'' that your wife owns?

3 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Interesting, but which Office?

None of the person interviewed at Jomtien Immigration mentioned such document ??

Jomtien

3 minutes ago, Lovethailandelite said:

So you cannot show where I supposedly said agents would be stopped? Once again your full of yourself.
The only agents that have been stopped are those working outside the parameters of Immigration, supplying fake passports and stamps in conjunction with rouge immigration officers. I guess a man with your knowledge and understanding of how the system actually works, would know that?

you have misunderstood, i did not say i was going to direct you to a statement then turn it upon you to prove you are wrong

Thats up to you if you want to do that to try to prove you were right

i am bothered by your evasiveness, your defensiveness and your inability to answer a question

you said ''Agents are operating as normal. None of these changes effect agent assisted applications. Everything is as it was.''

i simply want to know how you know that?

you said it as if its gospel so put some meat on the bone so that maybe we can be enlightened by your knowledge and worship at thine feet

or are we just supposed to have faith in you ?

14 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

He mostly need to wait a little,

as nobody knows still today how things will work in Jomtien/Pattaya Immigration !

 

From the first reports we got in Pattaya from guys getting their Retirement Extension this week with new 800k rules,

- some of them were told the "checking" will be done at next extension

- some of them were told they will have to come back for "checking" in 3 months 

- in all cases, Officer was not able to say which document will be required for the "checking"...

1 hour ago, stud858 said:

It will be interesting to see as of today if any stories come through of seasoning agents bypassing rules and successful extensions given. But I'm also guessing those people won't want to share their experience.

i expect the agents would want to declare if had been possible but decided that discretion is the better part of valor.....

39 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

What do you mean by better seed money? Do you have any insights into this? 

If an agent application needs to show 800,000 seed money now and 800,000 again three months later and then 400,000 later for hundreds of clients on their books, then you will need to find one that has the funds to be able to service those clients

Bottom feeder agents with no money to invest in their clients futures will be driven out of business and take their clients down with them

Old English proverb ''Buy cheap, buy twice''

1 hour ago, stud858 said:

Recently, Friend got his extension  done through agent with 800k seasoning help but was told next time it can't be done unless the big wigs change back to  the easing of rules.

If you've got the 800k and follow the rules I wouldn't bother with an agent.

In the future I'll be relying on repeat non oa visas every two years with 800k in Aussie bank. No need to bother with extensions if doing a trip back home every two years.

Not sure if seasoning in home bank of 800k is needed for o-a visa. I don't think so. And if not begs the question a money agent might be an option for o-a visa for those who struggle to meet the money requirement.

your friend needs to get a new agent with better connections and more seed money

5 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Yes

i heard Betong is easy

2 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

I'd like to know which immigration offices prefer Fixed Deposit accounts over regular savings given the new rules.  Of course the information is worthless if the poster is unwilling to identify the immigration office.  I guess in my case I'll get two letters and ask the IO which they want as I have both but it would be nice to know as I don't want to flash any cash I don't have to at Immigration. 

you planning to move near to the office thats easiest?

1 hour ago, marcusarelus said:

My friend told me not to believe anything until I see it posted here and first hand not second hand information and a statement by immigration. 

i think your friend did not paint a broad enough stroke

1 hour ago, bigginhill said:

Forgive me but where does the 28th march come from? 

March 1st is the new rule date. 

I,m trying to figure the difference between a february expiry and renewal  date and a march expiry and renewal date. 

it was a hypothetical date in a previous post to create an example to follow

''at Jomtien Immigration if you renew before March 1st 2019 , the new rules do not apply to you

So if you have a renewal on March 28th 2019 expiry, do it 30 days early on February 28th 2019 as is allowed by them and dodge the March 1st 2019 bullet

you will lose no time by doing it early, the new extension will be added to the expiry date of the old extension, the new rules will then only apply next March 28th 2020 when you do your next renewal''

1 hour ago, bigginhill said:

I understand or 800,000 OR 65,000.

 

But are you saying a february 2019 expiry would  show 800,000 3 months before (nov 2018) and can take out straight away during 2019? Then in February 2020??? What would they present at February 2020 extension? 

And only who renews in  March 2020 will have to have 3/6/3 400/800/400  OR 65,000 x 12 OR combo? 

But are you saying a February 2019 expiry would  show 800,000 3 months before (nov 2018) and can take out straight away during 2019?

yes same as usual

Then in February 2020??? What would they present at February 2020 extension? 

not February the expiry would still be March 28th 2020, the original expiry day

then show a seasoned 800K on date of application , then 800K 3 months later then 400k 3 months after then 800k again and renew

1 minute ago, bigginhill said:

"It will then only apply next March 28th 2020 when you do your next renewal" 

And on that date you have to produce the documentation of 12 months 2019 regarding the deposits of 65,000.?

If yes, then the deposit retirees have to have 3/6/3  800/400/800?

How, s that different to a February expiry? 

the rule will not apply until next renewal time for them in March 28th 2020

next time they will be subject to the rule and show 800 on renewal then 800 then 400 then 400

there are no 65,000 baht monthly deposits needed with cash deposit in the bank on file

7 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I think you are right. However, if it is done a month earlier, doesn't that push the existing 800,000 baht seasoning requirement back one month as well?

yes it does

35 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

As I understand it, the new rules start when your current extension expires. So if your extension expired in February, your next extension would require you to retain 800,000 baht on deposit for three months after renewal. And 400,000 after that.

On the other hand, when my extension expires November 3, I only have to have 800,000 baht on deposit from August 3. Before that, nothing required to be on deposit.

On that basis, one is disadvantaged by a February expiry.

Quite happy to be corrected on this, IF my understanding is erroneous.

at Jomtien Immigration if you renew before March 1st 2019 , the new rules do not apply to you

So if you have a renewal on March 28th 2019 expiry, do it 30 days early on February 28th 2019 as is allowed by them and dodge the March 1st 2019 bullet

you will lose no time by doing it early, the new extension will be added to the expiry date of the old extension

It will then only apply next March 28th 2020 when you do your next renewal

5 minutes ago, ozmeldo said:

How arrogant. Can't be bothered. And we're the judgemental ones 55555

 

I can't be bothered so I'll just break the law of a foreign country because I can. Can't trouble myself to wait behind all the poors.

 

I've always diyd my visas and extensions. Always did visa runs instead of shonky extensions prior to getting married.

It's valuable knowledge. Appreciated getting OUT of Thailand for a bit as well.

 

Arrogant, yes, lazy, yes, supposed to attend in person anyway

Some agents will not even do this service its so offensive to them

Wealthy foreigners that think they can buy a professionals time like they buy a girl in  bar is offensive