007 RED

4 minutes ago, evadgib said:

That's pretty much what I meant but TBH I thought HMG had farmed it out to whatdotheyknow so that all govt requests are in one basket. My own most recent requests appeared there during a search but I have others that pre-date wdtk that I've never bothered looking for & will presumably be archived by the appropriate dept.

Whatdotheyknow is not in any form of partnership with the FCO or any other UK Government body.  They are totally independent and were set up shortly after the FOI Act was introduced to enable individuals anonymous access to information without revealing their personal details (email address, IP location etc) to the Government body.

3 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Tried it Mr J Bond. lol. Thanks.

 

The member stated he had a successful reply and I'm sure, without going back, he stated it was from the FCO

FYI..... If you submit a request via Whatdotheyknow, they in turn forward it to the relevant government body (in this case the FCO) on your behalf.  The FCO then reply to Whatdotheyknow who in turn post the FCO response.  As you will see from my request there is a PDF letter attached from the FCO.

I seem to recall that the poster who indicated that he had received a response from the FCO indicated that they answered 2 of his 3 questions.  One of the requests (awaiting a response) askes 3 questions.  Maybe coincidence.

2 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Nothing there either under successful applications.

Try the link I've posted above in post 2620.

11 minutes ago, evadgib said:

FoI releases are published on https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/ at the time they become available to whoever asked for them.

HTH

Not quite correct.  Only requests that have been made via the Whatdotheyknow website are published by Whatdotheyknow.  If the request was sent directly to the FCO Whatdotheyknow  won't know about it.

FYI..... As of a couple of minutes ago there were 5 FOI requests posted on the Whatdotheyknow website which relate to BE Embassy Bangkok.  2 of those have been responded to by the FCO (one being from me - refused) and the other 3 are awaiting a response.  Take a look:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/fco?utf8=✓&query=bangkok&request_date_after=2018%2F10%2F08&request_date_before=2018%2F11%2F13&commit=Search

33 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I'm still missing out on why they didn't just say that it would take 3 1/2 days to provide the information (free of charge) under the FOI act?

Dick.... Agreed .... It's because of the complications within the FIO legislation.  As mentioned, the so called 'Appropriate limit' for central government bodies is set at £600, whereas other public bodies (e.g. schools, hospitals, local authorities etc.) is set at £400 (equivalent to approximately 2 1/4 days). 

Mad... I agree.

2 minutes ago, bigginhill said:

so by doing as their reply suggests and reducing the time frame it may enter within the lime limit 

Correct and I've already submitted a modified request but I'm not going to hold my breath as there are other 'get out of jail cards' that they can use to refuse my request like it may harm international relations.

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

We always appreciate posters desperately trying to explain why the brit. govt. are not prepared to answer questions (they would prefer were not asked.....) - without paying 600 sterling.

 

FOI?? Only if you can afford it apparently!

Dick.... Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not defending the government's action... I was the one making the initial request.  As I said, they are not asking for any payment... FOI is free.

49 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

They told him it would take 3 1/2 days and they wanted 600 pounds?  Am I missing something?

FYI…. The FCO is not asking for a payment of £600 to provide the information.

Under the provisions of the UK Freedom of Information Act 2000 there is an exemption (Section 12) which allows the public body to refuse the request if locating, retrieving and documenting the requested information exceeds what is known as the ‘Appropriate Limit’.

In the case of central government bodies (e.g. FCO) the ‘Appropriate Limit’ is set at £600.  The Act also defines a standard hourly rate of £25 and a standard working day of 7 hours. Thus £600 equates to 3.5 man-day.  

Therefore if locating the requested information is going to take longer than 3.5 man-days it can be refused, which is what the FCO has done.

FYAI… One of the 2 requests was mine… the other is an identical request which another TV member copied (including a typo) and submitted a couple of days later – for details go back to post 1087.

27 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

Can you outline the steps how to do it? I have accounts in all major banks in the US (Ally, BofA, Chase, CaptialOne, Welsfargo, HSBC, Citi, First national, and a few credit unions)

No problem.  My three UK pensions are paid into an HSBC account in the UK.  Bangkok Bank has a branch in London, so as and when I require funds I go on line to HSBC and transfer the amount I want (GBP) to BB London who in turn transfer the GBP to my Foreign Savings Account at BB HQ in BKK.  The funds are normally available next day because of time difference. 

BB make a nominal charge for the transfer and I get their TT rate when I convert the GBP to THB.  The bank book provides an audit trail of overseas fund arriving in Thailand if needed.  Has worked well for me for the past 10 years.

FYI…. BB is able to offer the same arrangement via their New York Branch https://www.bangkokbank.com/en/Personal/Other-Services/Transfers/Transferring-Into-Thailand/Transfer-money-from-US-to-Thailand-via-Bangkok-Bank-NewYork-branch

6 hours ago, Spidey said:

It's already been posted early on in one of the other threads. I don't have photoshop or know how to use it so couldn't delete personal information (name, passport number etc.). However, I can assure you that it is virtually identical to the Netherlands format except it has, in recent years, had the caveat added,

 

"The service provided by the British Embassy, Bangkok should not be taken as to certify that this document is binding in law (whether under UK law or otherwise). Individuals are advised to seek independent legal advice as to the validity of this document under the relevant law."

FYI..... As you will see from my earlier post the caveat at the bottom of the BE letter has been there since August 2014.  After having originally posted this in another thread, another TV member responded by stating that he has a copy of the BE letter dated back in 2010 which had the same caveat, so it's been around for quite some time and is nothing new

51 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Run it to the present - or at least through the announcement.  The announcement came later, which may indicate there were ongoing discussions after the meeting in May.

My original request was very open – no start or end date.  They (the FCO) have indicated that in order to comply with my request it is going to take them longer than 3.5 man days to gather the information and have, therefore, refused to comply with this element of my request on the basis of an exemption (Section 12) which is provided within the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

As a result, I have responded and limited the request to cover the time period that the initial meeting with Immigration was reported to have occurred.  If that information is forthcoming then there is nothing to say that a follow-up request cannot be submitted covering different dates.

My own personal opinion (based upon having to deal with FOIA requests in my pre-retirement life), is that obtaining the information being requested is in fact very simple – you ask the person at the BE BKK who is responsible for dealing Thai Immigration (there is only likely to be a couple of people who fit that bill) do they have any minutes and/or correspondence/emails relating to this subject?  If the answer is yes, you instruct them to produce the information.  It should only take the person at the Embassy a couple of hours to locate all the relevant file(s), particularly as the Embassy should have an exemplary filing system ????.

I am of the view that the BE does hold the minutes/correspondence/emails, but they are going to be very reluctant to disclose that information and will no doubt use another exemption (FOIA Section 27 – International Relations).  In which case I am quite happy to take them on at their own game.  As I said previously, don’t hold your breath, this is going to be like getting blood out of a stone.

29 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

You got the response I expected you would get.

"I can confirm that the FCO does hold information relevant to your request."

It does not surprise me that they have confirmed that they hold the information requested and have used the exemption that to locate and retrieve it will exceed the 'Appropriate Limit'.

Now the 'fun' bit comes in getting 'blood out of the stone'.  Please don't hold your breath because their next tack will be that they cannot release the information because it will adversely affect international relations.

12 minutes ago, Catoni said:

 

         For those members who are still learning all the acronyms....

    what is METV and SETV ? ? 

METV = Multiple Entry Tourist Visa

SETV = Single Entry Tourist Visa

1 hour ago, wgdanson said:

A link to that anyone please. This particular line I have quoted is missed out on my reply from Stacey, Deputising Vice Consul, at BE. How far down the line is that?

FYI…. Ms Stacey Adele Filer is the person who normally signs the BE letter confirming income.  When she signs the letter her designation is given as Pro Consul.

I think that she is fairly new to the post and was recruited earlier this year – see FOC job advert https://fco.tal.net/vx/mobile-0/appcentre-ext/brand-2/candidate/so/pm/4/pl/1/opp/3478-BK-Pro-Consul-A2-L/en-GB

It should be noted that her salary is just 37,102 Baht per month so I leave it to you to judge how far down the BE 'food chain' she is.

Please bear in mind that if the alleged meeting between Immigration and Embassy Officials took place in May, the above mentioned person would not have participated in this meeting.

4 hours ago, offset said:

I was just wondering if the letter was changed before or after the meeting between the embassies and the immigration in May, if before it maybe the BE instigated the problems we have now if after it might mean it as been instigated by the immigration

The text at the bottom of the Bottom of the BE letter has been the same since 2014.  The only difference is that it did not have the BE 'seal'.. that was added in 2016.

50 minutes ago, White Tiger said:

If your FOI requests do not give us more info, maybe mine will.  In total there are now 3 FOI requests in the system, all worded differently & asking slightly different questions but essentially pushing in the same sirection, so hopefully more background info to this decision at the BE will be revealed by them.  

Unfortunately there may only 2 FOI requests in the system.  Yours and mine.  Another TV member (who shall remain nameless) copied my request (including a typo) and submitted it a day later as a new request.

I hope that we both get a positive response to our requests.

55 minutes ago, Spidey said:

I operated my first computer at my local university in 1969. I have worked with computers ever since. I know exactly what computers can and can't do. Doubt that they would be able to effectively reproduce my P60. As for the British Embassy letter, it has an embossed seal, it's all about the paper that it's printed on, not the computer itself.

 

Try printing a banknote on a piece of A4 paper, using a computer alone, do you think that your bank would accept it?

I don’t dispute the fact that you submit the original documents to support your request for a BE letter – that is your choice.  However, with your all-embracing computer experience you must be fully aware that many organisations nowadays encourage their customers to adopt paperless online communications.  That is to say they provide you with your information online and it up to you if you print it or not.

My bank statements, pension payslips, P60s are all available to me as PDFs online.  I just download them and attach copies to my email to the BE when I submit my request for a letter.  In the case of Immigration, I print these on standard inkjet printing paper (no security ink) and submitted them to the IO if asked for added verification.  Never had a problems.

As previously mentioned, the BE letter is produced on standard LaserJet printing paper and does not have any watermark.  The red serrated disc is just self-adhesive sticky paper and the embossed BE logo can be easily produced using a 3D printer to make a stamp.  Nothing is impossible!

5 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

Not for me it aint. ????

Thanks.... I don't know why you can't access the attachment... I've just tried and it appeared.

10 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Your attachment download does not work.

Thanks... Re-loaded and now working.