jesimps

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

It is about time that you Brits got off your ass and did something; your outrage has been palpable but your actions nil.

 

I would also organize an direct e-mail to your respective members of Parliament; it isn't hard to find their addresses in these modern days. I know for a fact that every letter sent to an MP is logged and (usually) responded to; your taxes pay for them, give them a kick!

 

If you are not happy, and there are several thousand of you (?), then a campaign via the Web is useful and doable. Put up or shut up.

 

Give' em hell, Brits

 

That's blx! Are you in personal contact with all the Brits on here to be able to make that statement? If not, then it's a ridiculous thing to say.

I'm all for it if they can make it work, which on past performance, it won't. If they do enforce it, the Thais next door with nine dogs will be in for a shock. So will the farang who lives near me who lets his six dogs roam the community. If it were up to me, households would be limited to one PET dog which must be kept behind a locked gate except when being walked, on a lead, by an adult. I think it'd be more appropriate if dogs were to be required to have a licence for owners, most of whom are completely irresponsible in this country, farang included.

11 hours ago, Trujillo said:

The OP said: 

 

"I own property in Chiang Mai,..."

 

Unless you are a Thai citizen with an ID card, you don't own property here. I assume you mean that your girlfriend or wife owns "your" property. 

 

With this in mind, I am not sure if you are technically working or not. But it might raise some eyebrows if they investigated. If the actual owner of record just gives you the rent money and you do not have any involvement whatsoever, you might be fine. 

 

It does, however, seem to run counter to the spirit of the granting of a retirement visa, ie, you are supposed to be living off of your retirement funds (earned not from anything you did in Thailand). 

 

By the way, you are never too old to move somewhere else. 

Wrong! You're allowed to own at least one condo.

9 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

There is 1 solution to this problem and no one has mentioned it yet. The British Embassy change to the same system Australia uses and you fill out a Statutory Declaration and have it witnessed and stamped by the British Embassy and that way it throws the onus onto you for the correct details and not the British Embassy

I've mentioned it more than once, but now the Brit Emb have said the Spams are planning to go down the same road. I'm so pleased that I've just renewed my visa and have plenty of breathing space. Time for the embassies to stand up and and sort this out on behalf of their citizens.

14 minutes ago, Trouble said:

I doubt that all embassies in Thailand provide income letters so obviously people from many countries have had to do it by the book.  Immigration seems to say they accept proof in bank statements. The embassy letters seem to have always been in lieu of a bank statement and were provided as a courtesy. They are now saying that since they can't verify, they cannot continue to provide the service. Wonder how many people have been claiming income they didn't have by using the embassy letter.  Everybody complains because they have been provided an easy way to conduct this business and now they will have to do it differently.  It's the same everywhere, give people an inch and they will take a mile.  

Complete and utter horlicks!

9 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

I think you are missing the point.  The Thais want accuracy and that comes with backup provided by the applicant.  The Brits don't want to write a litter that goes with the backup provided by the applicant.  All the Brits would have to do is put the legal onus on the applicant but are unwilling to take the time to write the letter.  So even if the Brit is legal he will not be able to use the monthly income method. 

The Brit applicant already has to provide documentary proof which IMO is a darn site more reliable than a sworn statement. But you're right in pointing out that the embassy are too bone idle/uncaring/unwilling to do this. 

6 minutes ago, dontoearth said:

   With all due respect the British were the first to cave-in.  Unfortunate because most citizens of most countries believe the embassies are there to uphold their laws properly not cooperate with any tin horn outfit.  I guess that is just wishful thinking.

Our embassy should have said "We'll continue issuing the letters in the same format, whether you accept them or not is up to you". Seems like a cop out from us Brits to me. Why we'd want to pass up such a lucrative source of income is hard to fathom.

6 hours ago, SkyNets said:

So just get a print out from your Thai bank showing your pension payments. Whats the problem, unless you have been lying.....

There's been nothing official from the Thais saying they'll accept this. Nasty goit to suggest people are lying. Some seem to rejoice in others problems.

The government acts like a jilted lover when someone decides to leave UK and live in the sun. Even those who have a fully paid-up state pension, still pay full UK income tax, served many years in the forces etc etc. Pigs will fly before we get an index-linked state pension.

4 hours ago, smedly said:

pretty much the same, but the fact that the British embassy cannot and perhaps will not authenticate the docs you provide means they now cannot sign off in a letter to Immigration, US AUS CAN do not do this, it is the applicant that swears the information to be true - the Embassy legally witnesses that declaration (Affidavit)  which means they have absolutely no legal responsibility for what you claim, if Thai authorities want to accept that then up to them

They more or less do that at the moment by saying in their letter "Mr ....... has also stated that he receives monthly pension totalling GBP .......... and has shown to us letter from the Pension Service and Civil Service Pensions stating that he receives pensions totalling GBP ............. per annum". It'd be nothing to add to that that the applicant swears the information to be true, along with the applicant's signature.

By the way smedders, is the junta still hitting your G spot or are you starting to go off them a bit? 

3 hours ago, notamember said:

only for  first time applicant converting to an O visa inside Thailand and then only for 2 months not 3 months

Wrong, it used to be, it's now three months.

1 hour ago, dick dasterdly said:

Get over yourself ????!

 

Some of us came here with a large amount of money and a pension on top.  One way or another, things went sideways - and so we were left with pension income that fortunately, exceeded the 65,000 bht p.m. requirement.

 

The brit. embassy (capital letters in my posts decrease in direct proportion to my lack of respect for the institution/s), have decided that they can't be bothered providing Brits with the necessary documentation required by Thai Immigration....

 

Although to be fair - this is typical of the brit. govt., and even more typical of the brit. embassy ????...

 

 

As an ex-member of the Brit foreign service, I agree with every word you say. I figured a long time ago that the only purpose of the British embassies is to kiss the backside of their host nation. British citizens abroad are no longer of any concern to them, nor have they been for many years. Anyone who doesn't fall in line with this policy isn't going to go far up the Foreign and Commonwealth Office hierarchy.

1 hour ago, NCC1701A said:

 Americans have been told for decades that you need two million dollars to retire at 65. 

 

When I first came to this forum six years ago I said to someone "if you don't have 800,000 baht you are not ready to retire." Which is true.

I was shocked how many people came back at me and said they don't have it. I am not talking about the "I don't trust Thai banks" crowd.

 

after all, 800,000 baht is 66,666 baht a month for one year. It was just shown that a large group of expats get by on 45,000 baht a month. so people retired and came to Thailand without being able to put one or two years living expenses in the bank? It's not like you can't take it out anytime you want. It is your money. The little income you lose with a poor interest rate is not that much.    

 

and all you are going to do is use the money to live on for one year and then fill the account back up two months before your retirement extension of stay.

 

at a bare minimum you should have 16 million baht ($500,000 USD) in a bank somewhere in your home country and a pension or social security to scrape by over 30 years.

 

man that is really going to be tough moving forward for a few more decades without money.   

 

 

3 months for extension as well these days.

17 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

I’m going to the US Consulate next week to get my Income Affidavit.  Of course the US never certifies anything(it is just an Affirmation Under Oath). I will ask if the US Consulate has plans to terminate this sevice?  In my case the 800K deposit is a no-go and direct depositing my pension into any Foreign Banks is also a no-go.  Maybe my time in LOS is coming to end soon?  

That should tell us whether if it's at the instigation of the Brit Embassy or the Thais. If they still allow the US Affirmation Under Oath, then I would say that it isn't the Thai authorities who're responsible.

10 hours ago, blackhorse said:

Gonna be a lot of transferring to wives and even GF's.

Transfer fees are expensive, especially if the wife kicks you out of the house after you've put it in her name ????

For this to be rigorously applied, he'll first have to start paying the IOs a living wage.