Acharn

Another thread here bb: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/Atm-Network-...78#entry2114778 showing same prob.

Thanks for the link. I missed that thread when I searched the forum. I found a similar problem from last year, but was hoping for something current.

Over the last month, I've been having frequent problems using my VISA card. I've been using this card and account for many years. When the ATM gives me a "transaction canceled" message, if it's during banking hours, I can go in to the office and make a cash advance with telephone confirmation, but I don't usually carry my passport with me. Also, I often want to make the withdrawal after office hours.

It's not that serious a problem, yet, but I was wondering if it is a problem with the banking system's private network? Have other people been having problems the last couple of months? Or is it just me, which means it probably has something to do with my bank's network?

Happens all the time,i generally go to another ATM and hey presto

No, in my case I go to half a dozen different machines, belonging to different banks, and none of them work. This happened just yesterday, starting at 1:00PM. I tried again at 5:30, still "transaction canceled". One time, about four months ago, I ran into an Australian guy at one machine who said he also had tried five or six different banks and couldn't get anything, so I had confirmation that it wasn't just my card. I was hoping for some indication from a wider crowd -- if it's just me, then the cause is probably my bank or account, but if it's lots of people the cause may be the Thai banking system netword (they don't use the internet).

Over the last month, I've been having frequent problems using my VISA card. I've been using this card and account for many years. When the ATM gives me a "transaction canceled" message, if it's during banking hours, I can go in to the office and make a cash advance with telephone confirmation, but I don't usually carry my passport with me. Also, I often want to make the withdrawal after office hours.

It's not that serious a problem, yet, but I was wondering if it is a problem with the banking system's private network? Have other people been having problems the last couple of months? Or is it just me, which means it probably has something to do with my bank's network?

BS. No western country forces any private biz from being open on any day of the year.

It appears you have never lived in the United States. Of course things may have changed in the thirty years since I last went there, but many states had Sunday Closing laws, which required *all* businesses to close on Sundays. Then, of course, there are many laws regulating days and hours when alcoholic beverages may be sold. When I was a boy *all* barber shops closed on Wednesday, as well as Sunday, but I'm not sure if the Wednesday closing was mandated by law or was just the custom of barbers who wanted to have two days off a week (they couldn't afford to close on Saturdays because so many people had to get their hair cut on a day when they didn't have to work). I've been surprised the barber shops here in Thailand don't close on Wednesday, since it's disastrously bad luck to get your hair cut on that day.

Anyway, I agree that mandating morality by law is a bad idea. And, confusing as it may be, not only are Cabinet Resolutions considered Law here, even regulations issued by ministries are. My favorite example is the law imposed in 1976 that prohibited the wives of foreigners from owning land -- never ratified by Parliament, just a regulation promulgated by the Ministry of the Interior and thankfully rescinded now.

by georgebkk:Posted Today, 2007-06-03 08:03:58

Let me ask this: how many of you are aware that U.S. Central Bank, aka The Federal Reserve, is NOT a Federal entity at all but instead a privately-owned, for-profit corporation, whose members consists of both U.S. and European banks?

Georgebkk - you are incorrect. From the Fed website: http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/faq/faqfrs.htm#4

The Federal Reserve System is not "owned" by anyone and is not a private, profit-making institution. Instead, it is an independent entity within the government, having both public purposes and private aspects.

As the nation's central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms. However, the Federal Reserve is subject to oversight by Congress, which periodically reviews its activities and can alter its responsibilities by statute. Also, the Federal Reserve must work within the framework of the overall objectives of economic and financial policy established by the government. Therefore, the Federal Reserve can be more accurately described as "independent within the government."

You are 100 percent wrong. What you read on the Fed's website is doublespeak.

The Fed is made up of member banks - who owns those banks? Not the government, so who?

The Fed is private - no more Federal than Federal Express.

Here's a good explanation from a web site which encourages the possession of gold: http://www.usagold.com/federalreserve.html

Each of the Federal Reserve banks is "owned" by National and State banks within the Federal Reserve Bank's geographic area, which are known a "member" banks. Stock in the Federal Reserve Banks is not traded publically. It may only be owned by a bank. There are thousands of member banks in each Federal Reserve geographic area, especially New York, and no one bank owns as much as 5% of the outstanding stock, so no one member bank can control the Federal Reserve Bank that governs its area.

Nobody knows where Mullins and Kah (the two most influential conspiracy theory writers) got their information, but since it cannot be verified it can't be trusted. If you insist on believing them, I've got this bridge in New York which would make a wonderful investment -- please contact me.

The only save way is to turn off the log files/deleted them frequently than no court can demand them.... Else you simply can't keep it confidential. If the men black/brown come you'll give the date no other choices....

Then the question becomes, "What does the law require of ISPs as regards retaining logs?" I know that in U.S. and Europe there are legal requirements for ISPs to retain certain information in their log files for specified lengths of time -- somewhere from two to five years!

This law is just another obstacle to Thailand entering the twentieth century, and people in the IT sector pointed out its shortcomings but were snowed under by the ultra-nationalists. You have to understand that the groups behind the coup and behind the junta were angry because they were losing power under Thaksin and are trying to find ways to prevent that from happening again. In the long run it won't work, but it can make life uncomfortable for a while.

From 1980-- 1996 the Baht was 25 to the US Dollar

1948 -- 1980 the Baht was 20 to the US Dollar

The US Dollar has been overvalued for many years and the lower US Dollar makes

the US more competitive in the global market. We Americans living in foreign countries feel the pinch. People living in the US could not care less.

This year they couldn't care less, for the last five years they couldn't care less, but in a couple of years they'll be caring when they can't afford those cheap Chinese clothes any more. I blame Bush's economic policies (more for the rich) for the mounting disaster. The housing market has already stalled, and if it drops disastrously next year we could see the dollar going to 25 baht.

I would like to know why all the people living in thailand on a so called permanent basis do not become a citizen of Thailand and saves themselve the hazzle of forever obtaining vizas

RAMSEE, As a U.S. citizen, with a militar retired penison, I see one problem with this.

As I understand it, if I become a citizen of another country, I effectively give up my U.S. citizenship and also my military pension.. I may be wrong on this, but if that's the case, I would be crazy to become a citizen of Thailand. Regards, BD.

As another retired serviceman I used to worry about that, but over the last twenty years or so the Supreme Court ruled that you don't lose your U.S. citizenship unless you make a specific, public anouncement (in writing) that you mean to do so. I've read that the Department of Justice had decided, for all practical purposes, that even if you did that they had to consider that the renunciation could be cancelled, so would not attempt to withdraw *anyone's* citizenship (if you remember, Oswald [the guy who shot Kennedy] publicly renounced his U.S. citizenship when he went to live in the U.S.S.R., but was permitted to return as a U.S. citizen and bring his wife, a Soviet citizen).

The only reason I don't try to get Thai citizenship is that I think it would cost a lot of money (as I understand it you have to get Permanent Residence first -- 200,000+ baht). I'd still be a U.S. citizen and able to draw my pension. Although it's against Thai law to have dual citizenship, if I submit a legal renunciation of my U.S. citizenship, it's legal and accepted by the Thai government but not accepted by the U.S. government, who would still consider me a U.S. citizen even though the Thai government would say I'm not. Confusing?

what level of pension do you need to negate the need for cash in bank ?

65000 Baht/mth

Even if one has a pension/income of 65K Baht/month or more this does not necessarily negate the need for at least SOME cash in the (Thai) bank when applying for the 365 day extension of stay

based on retirement. Ive seen numerous posts by those who have income in excess of 65K baht/month who were told they also need money in a Thai bank acct. How much that would be is,of course,dependent on the individual case involved. But I try to have as much as possible (in my case about 300K baht) even tho my income exceeds 65K baht/mo AND also show that Im actually using the acct. for living expenses throughout the year. The question now seems to be(for those of us who need less than the 800K baht each year) Does the amount we do keep in the bank have to be there as far in advance as it would if we actually needed the full 800K? Anyone who is 'in the same retirement boat" as I am,please dont hesitate to PM me with any info.

All the best,the Harpman

I used to worry about it, when they first told me I had to give them a copy of my bank book, but many years my bank balance at the time I get the letter from the bank made up is 3,000 or 4,000 baht. The first year I had a balance of about 20,000 baht and the official said I should have more but approved the visa. Since then the amount has always been lower, but none have made any remark.

I think they first started doing this in 1997, when they were desperate to get money into Thai banks -- and at that time the Bank of Thailand had a rule that foreigners couldn't open a bank account!

Anyway, as far as I know, as long as you meet the income requirement and have a bank account you're OK even if the balance is low. I get nervous/scared every year when renewal comes up, but I've never had a serious problem. And it used to be you had to keep coming back for three or four months before the committee finally considered your application -- a long time worrying. Now they stamp my visa the same day -- usually no more than about an hour. I've come to rather like Immigration; they've always been helpful to me.

I am genuinely married and have been for five and half years. The point here is that the Thai system, has no form of redress for mistakes, moreover after being married for a certain period of time, one should not have to be reliant on annual renewals, but be given some form of permanent residency, providing all the paper work and the circumstances are kosher! But that is not the case, I know someone who has been married here for 27 years and still has to go through the ridiculous process of annual renewal. If his wife had gone to the UK with him, should could have been a prominient local politician or even an MP by now! But here your just a foreigner!

Well, I've been here for 24 years and still have to renew my visa every year, but that's by my choice! I first used the married person's visa and often wish now I'd done the paperwork for a residence permit -- I would have been eligible in 1985, and I thing the cost then was 5,000 baht. I could apply for a residence permit now, but at almost 200,000 baht I can't afford it. By the way, my wife passed away eleven years ago and I had to switch to a retirement visa. At the time I couldn't meet the income requirement for a year, and the officials at Immigration *advised* me to make visa runs for the next year. I like those people -- they've always been helpful to me. If your friend is pissing and moaning because he has to renew his visa every year, tell him to put in the paperwork for a residence permit.

I was puzzled this year by the requirement for a medical certificate. I never had to produce one before, so I'm glad they are now doing away with it.

Ok, So I've been Visa running from 30 days after my arrival on July 2nd. Just to clarify.... Can I DEFINITELY now stay here till 1st Jan 2007? If I do Visa runs?

I know this is flogging a dead horse, repeating ground, but can this source be trusted??? Do I stake my life in Thailand for the next few months on this information?

Thanks

Phil

PM me if need be.

Well, actually I doubt that this report *can* be trusted. Notice the date. 15 September. Now stop and think -- has there been any significant political event since then? I think (please note that this is my opinion only) many policies are going to be held up for review as to whether they are really good for the country or help Thaksin's friends. This one may very well be implemented, as with the review of foreigners holding land, but after past coups there has usually been a considerable change of direction.

Is exposing gross stupidity flaming? Quite apart from the silliness of your original post, you also display your ignorance of how Thailand treats deposed leaders.Siezing assets does not form part of it, witness General Suchinda etc.

Yeah, but on the contrary look what they did to Thanom and Prapas in 1973. Granted, they kept millions, but several hundred million were confiscated from them. hel_l, they even seized several tens of millions from Sarit's estate, after it came out how much he had stolen (a lot had to be left for his dozens of minor wives -- I wonder if the outcome of *that* case is recorded somewhere convenient?).

In more recent years, you're right though <sigh>. Just look at Suchinda.

I think this wouldn't do any good to tourism , or do i see it wrong ??? I'm guessing but if they are not carefull now and sort this very very quickly Thai economy could end up in a big mess . This together with stricter visa laws , and tightening the foreing companies with houses .... well i see a recipy for disaster coming ....

Well, those changes to the visa regulations and the scrutiny of violations of the land laws, and the redifinition of business ownership, may very well be put on hold or forgotten, depending on which faction in TRT was behind them (they all smell of Purachai's cronies, but he's been living in New Zealand for some time now). There was at least one faction of TRT that was clearly xenophobic, but the "old elite" who back the coup are too, at least to some extent. Certainly Thaksin made some xenophobic statements back during his first term.

Anyway, past practice was that during and after a coup business goes along as usual, so the implementation of these things may continue as if nothing had happened. I noticed on Time/CNN's story, they mentioned that Thailand has had 24 coups in 74 years (since the "revolution" of 1932). They're used to it, even though we haven't had one since 1991 (the affair in 1992 was different).

where are all the moron expats that are usually on the forum with there THE RULES ARE THE RULES. is this what the rules are?

Why, yes it is. I guess you haven't been in Thailand very long. We used to do this every couple of years, in lieu of elections. Well, I'm being condescending -- it really has been a long time. The last one was 1990, if I recall correctly. 1992 was a different thing.

Actually, I think I probably agree with you about the "moron expats", but I call myself an expat too, so I was a bit offended.

Army vs Army, could get ugly fast

I don't think so. The people involved (Army) haven't forgotten the ground rules. We used to have these every few years -- just like elections. It's just the way different people belly up to the trough and push some of the old-timers aside. One of the rules is you don't disrupt business. There'll be a day or two of holiday, but most businesses will be open. By Monday everything will be normal.

I'll grant you things got nasty in 1992, but that was because the Army was faced with large crowds of demonstrators and didn't know how they were supposed to act.

And, hey! Maybe they'll forget to force the bars to close at 1:00AM!

I predict a huge increase in WP's. Can a person get a WP.....say to teach.....but then not really pursue work; just use it as a way to stay in country legally?

The short answer is, "No". A work permit is issued to do specific work for a specific company/school at a specific location. In general, they check up by checking to see if payroll taxes are paid. I doubt that any school will go to the effort of getting work for somebody who doesn't then do real work for them -- even if they don't pay that person and so don't pay payroll taxes on him/her. Actually, I've heard of people who got a work permit at one place and then used it to work at another place, but the company that originally got the work permit is subject to a large fine if they fail to notify the Labor Department when the person leaves their employ, so they're not going to do it willingly. That can even be a form of slavery, because if you leave one company you aren't supposed to work until the work permit is issued for the new company, and the old company can report you to Immigration if you do start working before then. There's also a teaching license involved, which has even more complications that I'm not clear on.

<snip>

There are a couple of unanswered questions I have. First is this a new law? If it is, don’t they need a real live and breathing parliament to vote on it? Find the source and you will know if this is political or other. Can anyone answer that?

Personally this does not effect me but I am very curious to see if Thaksin is behind this. Sorry if the answer was already posted, I did not have time to read all the posts.

Bear in mind that a large part of what the Thais call "law" is actually either a resolution passed by the cabinet or a ministerial regulation. Remember the "law" that said a Thai married to a farang could not register land in her/his own name (enforced only against women)? That was a ministerial regulation, not a statute enacted by parilament. When they realized in was against their best interests they didn't have to go to parliament to change it. Probably a good thing -- parliament would probably have refused to change it and even might have made it *more* restrictive. There's a lot of xenophobia in the ruling class.

I'm married to a Thai but so what. It doesn't get you much does it. I mean you can get a 90 visa from the get go extended for one month thereafter but then what?

??? Well, if you get a Non-Immigrant "O" visa, you can extend it for 9 months, not 30 days, and then in following years extend it a year at a time. hel_l, that's what I did for my first 14 years here. Then my wife died and I had to switch to a retirement visa, but that's another story. The only thing is, you have to be able to show a regular income -- I think the requirement now is 25,000 baht a month -- or a rather large amount deposited in a Thai bank. You must have some kind of income, so the only question is whether the source is acceptable to the Thais or not.

Immigration can certainly extend visas if you meet the criteria, and you

apply BEFORE it expires.

I have lived in Thailand on the same Non-Immigrant visa for several years,

and it HAS been extended year by year. So no new policy here.

I think you misunderestood the Immigration Officer, or vice versa.

im here on work permit and when( EDIT before) it expires, i just land up at the one stop center with all the documentation and get a fresh visa without paying any tea money and without leaving the kingdom.

but the case might be diferent for tourist visa???

I ran into this when I was in a hiatus between my "supporting a Thai national" and my retirement status. The Immigration officers advised me to make visa runs until my birthday, when I would be old enough for the retirement visa. I went down to Penang and got a Double Entry Tourist Visa which was valid for a 60 day stay. At the end of the 60 days I could get it extended for up to 30 days more for 500 baht. Then I had to go down to the border, cross over and come back, and that started the second entry stay for 60 days, which I extended...

They *may* grant an extension of up to 7 days of the "Permission to stay" for 30 days that they stamp in an American passport on arrival (I think the period is the same for U.K. passports, but it varies by country -- some are allowed 60 days without getting a visa in advance). This policy, of course, is subject to change without notice depending on whether the officer got a little the night before or is starting her period.

Lots of people get multiple entry non-immigrant visas, but I didn't really qualify and was worried about future repercussions so went the tourist visa route rather than submit forged or perjured documents.

There may be some confusion of language going on here. Initially, I entered the kingdom on a 90-day non-immigrant "other" visa. At the end of the 90 days I went with my wife and documents to Immigration on Soi Suan Phlu and they extended my required departure date by 9 months. After that every year for 14 years they extended the departure date by one year, until my wife died, but I retained the same visa. When I renewed my passport they put a stamp on the first page recording the details of my visa, but I never got a new one.

After I qualified for the retirement visa (at that time there were different income requirements for under 60 and 60 or older), I got a new non-immigrant "other" visa, which has been extended (some might call it "renewed") for a year at a time for eight years. I haven't gotten a new visa -- in fact, I haven't left the country since 1997. I don't know how it works if you're on a "business" visa, with a work permit, but I bet they extend the departure date, rather than issue a new visa.

--dan

All he'd do then is switch the phone off! And turn it on when he needs too !

Guys this phone sim registration is just a bunch of Jazz, how the heck are they gonna enforce getting every sim card being registered? All you need to do if they do go all militant is buy two sim cards now; one for registering and one for 'Discrete' Use.

You guys just don't get it. This isn't about actually accomplishing anything! This is about giving the appearance of *doing something*. Whether it makes sense or not doesn't matter. It's necessary for the "powers that be" to be seen to be *doing something*, even if it isn't effective or makes any sense.

It's just like after the crash in 1997 -- the school where I work came out with a directive to turn off the air con when students left a room, turn off the lights, nobody allowed to work later than 6:00PM, supposedly to save money. In fact, they were losing money for entirely different reasons, but they had to be seen to be *doing something*. It's important to have the people involved, too. Same thing with Thaksin's campaign to get people to conserve electricity. When prices get high enough, people will conserve energy without any government intervention, but Thaksin needs to show that he's the leader, with ideas to "save" the nation.

...almost sounds too good to be true, doesn't it?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

too bad for me as i travel at least 1-3 times a montrh out of thailand

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

??? All you need is a re-entry permit. I admit the unlimited entry version is a little pricey (Bht3800), but if you travel that much it would seem to be worth it.

I agree the law is valid for every province and for all people (i.e. police officers) but early closing times will NOT solve the problems that they want to address ...

But what do you think are the problems they want to address? Do you believe they really think teenage drug use or teenage prostitution are the problems they want to solve? It obviously doesn't make sense -- those are just decoys. Their real goal is to force everyone (Thai as well as farang) to live like an ordained monk is *supposed* to live -- no drinking and no sex. These guys are religious zealots (a rarity in Buddhism) and want to impose their beliefs on everybody.

More than 50 plainclothes and uniformed policemen, under orders of Deputy Interior minister Pracha Maleenont, closed the American owned Q Bar for the remainder of the night, stopped customers from leaving and administered urine tests to 373 people, said Sgt-Major Manote Panyatana.

Two people were found to have "purple urine" meaning that they had taken drugs but police were performing further retests to see if they had taken illicit or prescription drugs, Manote said.

Of the 373 people tested, 104    didn't have passports with them as required in Thailand, and were taken to a police station where they were fined and released. He did not know the amount of the fine.

"We do random checks at a different bar every Friday. It's by the orders of the police commander and policy of the government to be strict about drugs," Manote said.

"We did the raid last night because the minister requested it... he ordered us to make arrests, and he's in command, so we had to make the arrests," he said.

The thing about this that puzzles me is that these raids are still being carried out at the orders of the Ministry of the Interior, but they no longer are supposed to have *any* authority over the police. The police are supposed to come under the Prime Minister's Office now. Of course, Pracha Maleenond is Purachai's surrogate here -- both of them are from the Church Wing of the Phalang Tham Party, which was where Thaksin got his start (the Party that is, not the Church Wing of it), and both he and Purachai probably want to keep getting publicity.

Nobody seems to know what their agenda *really* is. They've gotten the law requiring zoning and early closing times passed, but now Thaksin is holding up implementation of it. This case shows that their original premise, that these places are all dens of drug use, is false, but they aren't interested in truth. I think it's pretty clear that the cops wouldn't have fined anyone for not having a passport if Pracha hadn't been there. He wasn't looking for any real wrongdoing -- he was specifically harrassing people he thinks should be run out of Thailand.