The cruel UK rule which forced a mum to return to Thailand without her daughter

[anon789561]

26 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

You don't need any money (apart from the 5kbht VISA fee) to stay in Thailand as a married person, but there are no benefits available, no free health care, and you can't work. BUT you also don't need any money to stay in the EU (outside the UK) as a married family. It's only the UK that excludes your Thai wife.

"you can't work", yes people can. "no free healthcare". it's actually paid for out of working peoples contributions in the EU so not free. "no benefits available" you just looking for somewhere to get a free ride? "you don't need any money to stay in the EU" 55555. really now

[MaeJoMTB]

6 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

"you can't work", yes people can. "no free healthcare". it's actually paid for out of working peoples contributions in the EU so not free. "no benefits available" you just looking for somewhere to get a free ride? "you don't need any money to stay in the EU" 55555. really now

I paid 60% of my (very large) salary to the UK government during my working lifetime. (40% tax, 10% NI, 10% employers NI +VAT on top of that).

That's the way the system is supposed to work, pay in while you're young, get back when you're old.

I'm guessing I paid in more than you or your  family ever did (or will).

How much did the single mothers, Romanians, Polish, Syrian refugees (et al) ever contribute.

Edited October 20, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[MaeJoMTB]

23 minutes ago, GOLDBUGGY said:

When I was on my extension to stay in Thailand under married status, I had to have 400,000 Baht is the bank in a saving account. On my Retirement Extension, I now have to have 800,000 Baht in the saving account.

 

Maybe that has changed recently, but I don't think so?

Marriage VISA, not marriage extension. Marriage VISA requires no show of funds.

Edited October 20, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, Happy enough said:

i got married in 1999. i learnt not to let things that i can't change bother me a long time ago. if you've been married 15 years you could have been a citizen by now if you really put your mind to it and wanted it ; ) but let it out, it might make you feel a bit better for a short period of time 5555

He could have obtained Thai citizenship. Not possible for the vast majority of farangs living here.

[anon789561]

22 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I paid 60% of my (very large) salary to the UK government during my working lifetime. (40% tax, 10% NI, 10% employers NI +VAT on top of that).

That's the way the system is supposed to work, pay in while you're young, get back when you're old.

I'm guessing I paid in more than you or your  family ever did (or will).

How much did the white women, Romanians, Polish, Syrian refugees (et al) ever contribute.

certainly paid in more than me old mate because i've been here since I was 19 and was born in Germany. the only time i spent in the uk was at boarding school and xmas every year visiting family. but lets not share stories and details. the comments were about thai immigration and their policies regarding foreign husbands and settlement.

btw i don't care how much you earnt really mate but you brought family into it and i doubt very very much you paid in anywhere near what my brother is paying into it unless you had your own hedge fund but you were talking salary so i guess not. don't big yourself up and make assumptions about other people because what you think is large others might think is <deleted> all

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, Medicine Man said:

UK nationals are getting treated like 2nd class citizens in England. If he was a EU immigrant living in the UK he could bring his whole family over without any financial limits. Being a UK citizen I can't bring my Thai wife to live unless I earn enough, the whole thing stinks and people wonder why we voted for Brexit

If his wife was an eu citizen, she, like him and any eu citizen, could go live in another eu country. 

 

However you are right in people wondering why people voted for brexit, apart from the obvious little englander xenophobic prejudices that is. 

 

The more I watch the utter debacle the tories are making of exit negotiations, I do wonder how much longer this xenophobia will blind people to the  truth of what a catastrophic error it was. 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Bluespunk

[nontabury]

9 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

If his wife was an eu citizen, she, like him and any eu citizen, could go live in another eu country. 

A citizen of a EU country can also bring his NONE E.U. wife into the UK, without having to comply with all the rules and regulations, that can restrict a British citizen from bringing into the UK his None E.U wife. This is the main reason that there are the 15,000-20,000 so called British skype children.

Edited October 20, 2017 by nontabury

[Scouse123]

I know UK guys who have settled in Ireland with Thai and Cambodian and even Vietnamese wives as apparently the visa is easier.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[thaiguzzi]

Only read the first page. Lets be honest here. And lets not be PC or beat about the bush. The whole point of the change of rules in 2012 was to finally stop the Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis, taking advantage of the rules and regs FOR DECADES.

But because in 2012 govt's have to be PC, they can't say the previous 3 nationalities only, they have to say everyone has to meet the new criteria. So, white working class males with Anglo Saxon sir names like Jones and Smith have to be lumped in the same boat as Abdullah from Pakistan with 9 kids and an ever expanding family in his 5 bedroom council house. Meanwhile Mr. Graham Jones working for 17.9k GBP in Hartlepool can't bring his Thai sweetheart back.

I agree, the system is completely wrong.

And I feel empathy for the individual on the OP. Not the "i earned so much , shoulda gotta better job" crowd. Jeez.

Still pi$$es me off every time I want a holiday in the UK, the rigmarole I have to go through to bring over the mother of my British son, whom I have known for 17 years and been married to for 12 odd years and has my British Anglo Saxon sir name.

[dunroaming]

According to EU law the mother cannot be separated from the child if the child has an EU passport.  The UK, in their wisdom, does not abide by that law.  I know all the hoops you have to jump through from experience and indeed the law did change in 2012 which makes it harder to settle in the UK.

[nontabury]

10 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

I know UK guys who have settled in Ireland with Thai and Cambodian and even Vietnamese wives as apparently the visa is easier.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

And after a couple of months, they would be entitled to then, move together to the UK. This way is far cheaper, less stressful and can be quicker.

[bizboi]

8 hours ago, Briggsy said:

A particularly one-sided story. Had Mr I'anson put in a modicum of planning this situation would not have arisen. There is no automatic right of residence for foreign spouses of UK citizens.

 

Mr I'anson resided in Thailand for 8 years during his highest earning years. I note any reference to whatever savings and income he lived on during this period has been suspiciously omitted from the one-sided story.

 

Zero planning and resorting to whingeing to the local press about injustice when no such right exists suggests Mr I'anson has yet to admit his own failings.

 

I suggest he stop crying about injustice and formulate a clear plan to rectify the situation. However, in today's Britain, complaining and painting an inaccurate picture often works better than following the rules. Perhaps he knows this.

Agreed but I think this a very hard hearted approach when you consider that other countries give automatic spouse citizenship - a friend of mine from Italy cant believe that we allow muslims to stay after they’ve committed terrorist acts but not our own citizens wives!!!

[JGV]

18000 pounds isn't a pittance - clearly it is less than many but with financial responsibility you can manage so I suspect the story is lacking important info

[bizboi]

46 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

If his wife was an eu citizen, she, like him and any eu citizen, could go live in another eu country. 

 

However you are right in people wondering why people voted for brexit, apart from the obvious little englander xenophobic prejudices that is. 

 

The more I watch the utter debacle the tories are making of exit negotiations, I do wonder how much longer this xenophobia will blind people to the  truth of what a catastrophic error it was. 

Perhaps you’d prefer us to be a muslim state!! Or perhaps the dictatorship that liberalism inflicts on people through EU procedures is preferable - by the way xenophobic and racist are words that leftwing nazis use when they lose an argument!!

[peterb17]

7 hours ago, mikebell said:

There's numerous examples of UK Gov's heartless treatment of its elderly.  Now I'm 75 it's exactly 10 years since the Gov decided to reward my 39 years of contributions by freezing my pension at 2007 levels.  Despite my paying for my own housing/transport/heating or cooling expenses; despite taking only a state pension and not using Health/Education/Police services.  Then the BKK Embassy charges you over 50 UKP for a standard letter which involves no scrutiny, only typing in your name.

Freezing the state UK pension has been the topic of endless threads .

 

Its the rules.

 

What on earth has this to do with the OP ? 

[Baerboxer]

9 hours ago, Briggsy said:

A particularly one-sided story. Had Mr I'anson put in a modicum of planning this situation would not have arisen. There is no automatic right of residence for foreign spouses of UK citizens.

 

Mr I'anson resided in Thailand for 8 years during his highest earning years. I note any reference to whatever savings and income he lived on during this period has been suspiciously omitted from the one-sided story.

 

Zero planning and resorting to whingeing to the local press about injustice when no such right exists suggests Mr I'anson has yet to admit his own failings.

 

I suggest he stop crying about injustice and formulate a clear plan to rectify the situation. However, in today's Britain, complaining and painting an inaccurate picture often works better than following the rules. Perhaps he knows this.

 

If he was a Scot or chose to move there he'd find the First Minister and her party likely staunch allies.

 

British citizens could bring their spouses into the UK quite easily at one time. Then it was abused by arranged marriages aimed at getting people into the UK rather than genuine marriages. That was the start. I totally understand the need for any country to ensure that a marriage is genuine and not arranged purely to allow a spouse to enter the country. Whether that arrangement is for family, cultural or pure financial arrangements is immaterial. 

 

However, there is something distasteful about imposing a financial limit. It smacks of the old British class thinking. If you earn enough, and/or have savings enough, then you must be the "right class" and so can do it. If not, well then bad luck. How quaint and Victorian and devoid of empathy.

 

I refuse to accept different classes of British citizenship based on financial income and savings levels. 

[Briggsy]

28 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

If he was a Scot or chose to move there he'd find the First Minister and her party likely staunch allies.

 

British citizens could bring their spouses into the UK quite easily at one time. Then it was abused by arranged marriages aimed at getting people into the UK rather than genuine marriages. That was the start. I totally understand the need for any country to ensure that a marriage is genuine and not arranged purely to allow a spouse to enter the country. Whether that arrangement is for family, cultural or pure financial arrangements is immaterial. 

 

However, there is something distasteful about imposing a financial limit. It smacks of the old British class thinking. If you earn enough, and/or have savings enough, then you must be the "right class" and so can do it. If not, well then bad luck. How quaint and Victorian and devoid of empathy.

 

I refuse to accept different classes of British citizenship based on financial income and savings levels. 

Thank you for your sensible and measured post.

 

I am very confident that Mr I'anson will meet the financial requirements if he tries. I think it is necessary to remind everyone that his wife applied for and received a visitor visa stating unequivocally that she would return to Thailand after 6 months. It is then ridiculous for Mr I'anson to turn around after the 6 months is up and cry to the press that she was being forced out. The epitome of cheek.

 

It is also necessary to point out that nowhere in Mr I'anson's one-sided account does he indicate that he made any serious effort to fulfil the requirements. Reading between the lines, it looked like he got weighed in (inheritance, redundancy perhaps), lived in Thailand for 8 years, by that time had a wife and young daughter, ran out of cash, went back to the UK, was unwilling to work the hours necessary to meet the salary requirements and then blamed everybody but himself.

 

This is a non-story. The situation is very easily rectifiable if he is prepared to make some short-term sacrifices. e.g. daughter goes back to Thailand for 6 months or relatives help Mr I'anson with child care.

 

In terms of the bigger picture, I have some sympathy with those who find the rule unfair. Particularly so, where the marriage is clearly established. However, common sense dictates that applicants for settlement need to show how they will survive financially, more so for those from impoverished countries.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Briggsy

[mrfill]

2 hours ago, MaeJoMTB said:

I paid 60% of my (very large) salary to the UK government during my working lifetime. (40% tax, 10% NI, 10% employers NI +VAT on top of that).

That's the way the system is supposed to work, pay in while you're young, get back when you're old.

I'm guessing I paid in more than you or your  family ever did (or will).

How much did the single mothers, Romanians, Polish, Syrian refugees (et al) ever contribute.

Except, of course, 40% tax is NOT payable on the whole salary, only on that above the threshhold - currently £45000 + allowance = £56500. 20% payable between £11500 and £56500.

NI has an upper limit, currently £866/week (lower limit under which no NI is paid is £157/week).

And, in response to your last question, the answer is, quite a bit more than Philip Green or Richard Branson.

[Baerboxer]

2 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Thank you for your sensible and measured post.

 

I am very confident that Mr I'anson will meet the financial requirements if he tries. I think it is necessary to remind everyone that his wife applied for and received a visitor visa stating unequivocally that she would return to Thailand after 6 months. It is then ridiculous for Mr I'anson to turn around after the 6 months is up and cry to the press that she was being forced out. The epitome of cheek.

 

It is also necessary to point out that nowhere in Mr I'anson's one-sided account does he indicate that he made any serious effort to fulfil the requirements. Reading between the lines, it looked like he got weighed in (inheritance, redudancy perhaps), lived in Thailand for 8 years, by that time had a wife and young daughter, ran out of cash, went back to the UK, was unwilling to work the hours necessary to meet the salary requirements and then blamed everybody but himself.

 

This is a non-story. The situation is very easily rectifiable if he is prepared to make some short-term sacrifices. e.g. daughter goes back to Thailand for 6 months or relatives help Mr I'anson with child care.

 

In terms of the bigger picture, I have some sympathy with those who find the rule unfair. Particularly so, where the marriage is clearly established. However, common sense dictates that applicants for settlement need to show how they will survive financially, more so for those from impoverished countries.

 

There may be be more to this story as indeed all cases will involve some unique context. 

 

But the issue is the unfairness of applying any law that penalizes or benefits based on financial wealth criteria.

 

It's as wrong as allowing billionaires to buy citizenship just because they're rich and can afford to. 

 

All of this smacks of the right wing Tory idea that wealth brings privilege and also helps there claim to be better policing immigration when in fact it does nothing to prevent illegals. 

 

By all means continue the no recourse to public funds, no benefits etc until a spouse has gone through the necessary steps in the immigration settlement procedure. But there is something morally, ethically indecent about saying one person can bring a spouse and one can't because of their personal financial circumstances. 

 

The UK government should hang their head in shame but it won't because May introduced this; and Rudd is her lapdog.

 

The difference is you advocate he should treat the symptoms i.e. navigate through the rules; whereas I want to treat the cause and remove this cancerous piece of politically inspired legislation.

 

[cookieqw]

6 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

Do kiwis and those awful Australians have thier pensions stopped after one year?

i think kiwi state pensions are really low, my sister in nz will have to work well past her uk retirement age 

[sawadee1947]

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

If you really believe that, then put your 300 baht a day where your mouth is and try it for 3 months.

 

Then come back and tell us all how easy it is.

Your comment is not quite right and is a bit nonsense. The story is about a Thai Lady, not you and me. Got it? And Thais are used to spend only what they earn: morning breakfast for not more than 20-40 Baht, lunch maybe a bit more, let's say 50-80 Baht and dinner same. That is in total , and I hope you would agree, max. 200 Baht. Our maid needs only 100 Baht for the whole day e.g.though she is paid 500 Baht/day.

[Enoon]

10 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

Fair enough... he doesn't earn enough to provide and will claim State Benefits. He should have thought of that before having kids.

 

edit: BTW  before any bleeding hearts start.. 18,600 is a PITTANCE in the UK and when I left 10 years ago I was on 5 times that

 

It is indeed a pittance.

 

A pittance that millions of people on the minimum wage in the UK can only dream of earning:

 

"But nothing is so hard for those who abound in riches, as to conceive how others can be in want"

Jonathan Swift

 

 

[Enoon]

8 hours ago, sawadee1947 said:

that is not quite right: even with only 300 Baht/daily you will get all what you need. Life here is cheap and by far cheaper than in UK with 1500 Pounds/month.

 

 

Cheap for you, but not for Thai people.

 

Here is one example:

 

6 eggs Thailand about 25baht.

6 eggs UK about 75p.

 

25baht is about 8% of the daily minimum wage in Thailand (IF you are fortunate enough to get it)

75p is about 1.3% of the daily minimum wage in the UK.

 

That price differential extends across the board.  When you get to luxury goods the differential is even greater as the prices in Thailand are not so much less than those in the UK.

 

The ordinary Thai person has to pay a much greater % of their unreliable income to "get by" than someone does in the UK.

 

That is why so many of them live in dirt poverty. 

 

Hadn't you noticed?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Enoon

[Bluespunk]

4 hours ago, nontabury said:

A citizen of a EU country can also bring his NONE E.U. wife into the UK, without having to comply with all the rules and regulations, that can restrict a British citizen from bringing into the UK his None E.U wife. This is the main reason that there are the 15,000-20,000 so called British skype children.

That doesn’t refute the bigotry I was responding to in the post I replied to. 

 

As for your so called term, I class that phrase as bigoted as well. 

 

As long as eu citizens and their non-eu spouses comply with the laws of that eu country, then they are free to move through Europe. 

 

This would be true in this case as well, if the couple had complied with British law. 

 

This families problems are with british law, not eu law. 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Bluespunk

[Bluespunk]

3 hours ago, bizboi said:

Perhaps you’d prefer us to be a muslim state!! Or perhaps the dictatorship that liberalism inflicts on people through EU procedures is preferable - by the way xenophobic and racist are words that leftwing nazis use when they lose an argument!!

No, the words I use are the truth. 

 

Though I do not recall using the word racist. 

 

Please show how where I did. 

 

As to your comments over “eu liberalism” and Britain becoming a Muslim state...sigh.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Bluespunk

[sawadee1947]

7 minutes ago, Enoon said:

 

Cheap for you, but not for Thai people.

 

Here is one example:

 

6 eggs Thailand about 25baht.

6 eggs UK about 75p.

 

25baht is about 8% of the daily minimum wage in Thailand (IF you are fortunate enough to get it)

75p is about 1.3% of the daily minimum wage in the UK.

 

That price differential extends across the board.  When you get to luxury goods the differential is even greater as the prices in Thailand are not so much less than those in the UK.

 

The ordinary Thai person has to pay a much greater % of their unreliable income to "get by" than someone does in the UK.

 

That is why so many of them live in dirt poverty. 

 

Hadn't you noticed?

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is not quite right. You picked ONE example only. If you go to the market e.g morning, you'll get your rice with veggies and chicken or pork for around 30-50 Baht. By 3 it's in total 90-150 Baht.

[Dene16]

11 hours ago, LannaGuy said:

BTW  before any bleeding hearts start.. 18,600 is a PITTANCE in the UK and when I left 10 years ago I was on 5 times that

What a sad person you have shown yourself to be

A person with no qualifications or skills will only, at best, command a wage of £8/9 per hour which will not provide the relevant sum of money required (he worked in a warehouse that paid the minimum wage/even less)

A person over 60 regardless of some skills or qualifications will still only be able to get a job/position that provides this same hourly rate

£18,600 may be a pittance to some people with high opinions of themselves but to others it is not.

I agree he should of thought about the circumstances beforehand and allowed for these

I actually agree with the rules but it is a somewhat sad scenario. 

 

[wakeupplease]

The laws here for a Farang are 10 times worse than the UK, get a job man earn the required income then she can join you, its the law many of us had to obey. I get the feeling of late as there have been a few of these cases that many just think it applies to Thai people or Thai people have a right to go to the UK. Not so even Americans have to obey this law.

 

All he has to do is get that income not hard if he works and then she can go and even buy land and a house which you cannot here can you.

 

Stop bloody moaning and get on with it for gods sake.

[theguyfromanotherforum]

35 minutes ago, Dene16 said:

What a sad person you have shown yourself to be

A person with no qualifications or skills will only, at best, command a wage of £8/9 per hour which will not provide the relevant sum of money required (he worked in a warehouse that paid the minimum wage/even less)

A person over 60 regardless of some skills or qualifications will still only be able to get a job/position that provides this same hourly rate

£18,600 may be a pittance to some people with high opinions of themselves but to others it is not.

I agree he should of thought about the circumstances beforehand and allowed for these

I actually agree with the rules but it is a somewhat sad scenario. 

 

 

I don't understand your whine to be honest.

 

Per your own amounts an unqualified and unskilled person will earn 9 pounds an hour which by itself is enough for the requirements to be met (9*40*52=18720 pounds).

 

So, it is not a class discrimination as other posters are whining, but a bare and absolute minimum that anyone in the UK can earn. I am sure after he is qualified, numerous assistance programs will become available for him, his wife and his daughter.

 

Like I said previously.... 

 

 

Get a job you bum.

[Dene16]

30 minutes ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

Per your own amounts an unqualified and unskilled person will earn 9 pounds an hour which by itself is enough for the requirements to be met (9*40*52=18720 pounds).

My answer states  8/9  at best but that is not the norm. Also a week in the majority of companies is 37.5 hours per week. His wage was the minimum wage that a company has to provide (£7.62 an hour i think). A wage that many companies only provide and only employ younger workers so that the minimum wage is even less 

Therefore your calculations are irrelevant

What extra qualifications are you going to get stacking shelves in tesco ?

His wife cannot work on a tourist visa and are not applicable anyway

He is hardly a bum as he is working a full time job

As i have already stated i don't disagree with the financial requirements

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Dene16
addition information