Jump to content

OneZero

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    1,069
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by OneZero

  1. 19 minutes ago, OneZero said:

    Thanks Jim, good explanation.

    Jim, PS,

    1.  USAA website says domestic wires cost $20.  What magic words did you use to get USAA to grant you FREE domestic wires?

    2.  Is there any negative impact on the exchange rate compared to using a USAA international wire, which costs $20 + $25 = $45?  (Even if there is I'm guessing it would not be more than the added $25 charge of USAA's international wire fee compared to the normal domestic fee of $20).

  2. 9 hours ago, JimGant said:

    Recipient's name, recipient's "US domestic or APO/FPO" zip code are completely irrelevant to the wire's successful receipt. But, somewhere along the line such info was required to be entered on the wire request, regardless that it could not or would not ever be verified.

     

    Wire transfers have always been in two flavors -- domestic and international. Thus, by definition, you had to (er, were supposed to) choose international for money going abroad. Now, ACH only got the international add-on (International ACH Transactions - IAT) when it became apparent that supposedly domestic only ACH transactions were going abroad (and escaping data elements in place for added security). Now, with two avenues for ACH transactions, the law put its foot down and told Bangkok Bank (and others) to quit using domestic ACH transactions for international transfers -- or pay a fine. Now, this didn't mean that you couldn't still mechanically send a domestic ACH overseas -- it just meant that the Feds told Bangkok Bank to cease and desist with this activity. So they did. But apparently the Feds forgot to tell Bangkok Bank that the spirit of this new ACH law encompassed domestic wire transfers -- but, hey, it's the letter of the law that counts, right? And I guess the domestic wire tree wasn't apparent amongst all the ACH trees in this bureaucratic forest. Can't blame Bangkok Bank for profitably using a system not specifically prohibited...

    Thanks Jim, good explanation.

  3. 2 hours ago, JimGant said:

    The templates of some sending banks, like the example here from USAA, has "United States" embedded as the country of receipt; no option for a foreign address, 'cause this, after all, is a domestic wire... If it were an International wire, then there's a different template -- one that demands the receiver's physical address and purpose of wire, those extra data elements demanded by anti-money laundering laws -- and which finally caught up with Bangkok Bank sending domestic ACH transfers internationally. So, they were told to use the international ACH coding for such transfers. But, I guess the Feds said nothing about domestic wires floating across the pond. Thus, good deal for us (especially if you get free domestic wires, like I do).

    Anyway, in USAA's case, you could use John Doe as the recipient, as it will end up in the account number designated. Bangkok Bank doesn't care either, as John has pointed out.

    As for address -- this too is worthless for tracking. USAA only asks for Zip code, and my first wire I used the Zip code of Bangkok Bank NY; my second, I used my former Zip code in Virginia. Worthless information, other than, maybe, to assert you're wiring the money *within* the US....(?).

     

    imageproxy.php?img=&key=de238a8f491e857f

     

    usaa3.jpg

    Jim, Pib, 

    Now I'm confused. From your example above it appears that if one puts in a recipients zip code that is in the USA(actually just a friend, relative, etc) the money will indeed be sent to Bangkok Bank Public Co ltd ABA 026008691 (located in NY) who will then forward the money to the specific account located in Thailand?

     

    I thought that that was exactly what all the prior hubup was about, & Bangkok Bank had to finally stop it? 

    Ya, now I'mk confused.

  4. Following is what I've found ref condo act.

     

    Condo Act: For Committee selection see sections 37, 42 & 44.
     
    Section 44:
    Section 44 The resolution of the general meeting shall be by the majority of votes of joint-owners attending the meeting unless this Act will have provided otherwise.
     
    Note in section 44 above that "majority" is Not explicitely defined with a % (though admittedly perhaps some would say it implies 50%); and in the other sections that specificly address election of a committee an explicit % is clearly Not stated.  If a % were to be explicitly required it would be those sections that should state it.
     
    Does the Condo Act purposely tend to be vague in order to allow condos flexibility to avoid difficulty filling committee positions that indeed tend to be thankless & in fact frequently headache positions?
     
    Delight,   
    (& any others with experience or desire to comment),
    Do you agree then with Lkn's comments at post#4?
     
     
     

     

  5. Delight, Thanks for your reply.  

    Ref the word ""majority":  "Via simple majority" did you mean 50% of attendees/proxies?  

    50% is the criteria one of my condos uses.  Another condo had used a different % (I forgot if 25%, 33%, or something else).

    Yet another condo didn't require any %.  Whoever wanted to be on committee was ok, as long as they were among the top 9 vote getters and unless someone had valid objection / or requested further discussion.

     

    Leads me wonder if a % is officially listed somewhere.

    Can attendees at an AGM decide by themselves (by show of hands for example) what % they want to use during that particular AGM?

  6. kasikorn Bank Jomtien beach road branch (where I opened my account) insists that I cannot do as you described above Pib. I went on two days and even insisted they call a "Boss" to confirm - all that resulted in was his description of what a survivor must do if I pass on.  Rediculous waste of time and I don't know what I'm doing wrong to get them to understand Pib's description.  I suppose I could try another Kasikorn branch that represents more of a head office.  I suppose I could change bank accts to Bangkok Bank or krungsri as Pib noted.  etc etc

     

    But before I do those things ---if anybody has any comments or suggestions to easily do what Pib has done, please advise your experience.  Thanks.

  7. On 1/9/2020 at 7:00 PM, Pib said:

    You can use a Power of Attorney (POA) to allow a person to withdraw money from your acct.   The person is not put on the acct as a joint owner; only as a person who can withdraw funds from the acct.   The bank has all the necessary POA paperwork/forms....will take about 20 minutes to do....cost will be Bt30 for the govt fee stamp.   

     

    Now, I'm not 100% sure, but supposedly the POA is only valid while you are alive...so, if you croak make sure the person you add goes does withdrawals before the bank knows you passed away.

     

    The bank will prepare a new passbook where the acct owner and person authorized by the POA sign on the last page of the passbook.  Those two signature can only be seen under a blacklight.   The passbook still only reflects the single owner's name on the first page. 

     

    I've done this several times at Bangkok Bank and Krungsri Bank over the years for accts in my name only that I used for immigration/extension of stay purposes.  The wife was added with the POA.  In fact, last did it at Bangkok Bank and Krungsri Bank about 6 months ago.

    kasikorn Bank Jomtien beach road branch (where I opened my account) insists that I cannot do as you described above Pib. I went on two days and even insisted they call a "Boss" to confirm - all that resulted in was his description of what a survivor must do if I pass on.  Rediculous waste of time and I don't know what I'm doing wrong to get them to understand Pib's description.  I suppose I could try another Kasikorn branch that represents more of a head office.  I suppose I could change bank accts to Bangkok Bank or krungsri as Pib noted.  etc etc

     

    But before I do those things ---if anybody has any comments or suggestions to easily do what Pib has done, please advise your experience.  Thanks.

    • Like 1
  8. Apparently, when the wife originally bought & registered the house (& land) at the land office, the husband never showed up to sign the forms which (in my interpretation) in effect state that the money for purchase was his wifes money alone (& thus he could make no claim on it (for 50% or whatever %) in event of divorce).  That is probably why the land office now refuses to allow sale, at least without further legal assistance (like the abandonment divorce).

     

    Yes, see a lawyer to discuss filing for divorce due to abandonment.

     

    • Thanks 1
  9. 18 hours ago, EricTh said:

     

    Does that mean that Chinatown in BKK would give the best price in Thailand for pure gold? 

     

    It's easy to sell 96.5% gold in Chiangmai but not pure gold.

     

    I believe that is what their suggestion to me implied.  Someday I'll head down there to find out.

  10. I'm curious too because I have some of the 99% jewelry purchased at Venus Jewelry on Wireless Rd in BKK 40yrs ago that needs to be traded in.  I'm in CM now & some gold shops tried to give less than the spot trade in value for the 96.5% variety.  The original selling shop (BKK - Wireless RD) suggested a trip to Chinatown in BKK.  I just haven't had the time to do it yet.

×
×
  • Create New...