BREAKING NEWS British Embassy Bangkok to Stop Certification of Income Letters

[Spidey]

Just now, Tanoshi said:

No, this time they asked them to verify the individual Pension letters we send as proof of income.                   The BE can only verify the Government state pension, not private pensions.                                                    If I gave you my name, address, pension provider and account number and you enquired about my pension, you'd get a two word reply 'Data Protection'.

Data protection applies exactly the same in every EU country yet no other EU embassy has a problem.

 

The British Embassy has twisted the interpretation of verification to suit their own ends i.e. They wanted to cease the practice of issuing income letters for their own reasons, nothing to do with what Thai Immigration has said or not said.

[Pattaya46]

24 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Actually they do already and have for many years!
The embassy letters are foreign documents!

That's true … more or less.... as they are "Made in Thailand"

 

Edit: In fact it depends. Embassies are foreign territory I think, but Consulates are Thai territory.

Edited October 16, 2018 by Pattaya46

[Spidey]

12 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

In cases where they demand more evidence foreign pension letters, statements showing income flowing into foreign accounts, and foreign rent leases may all and many more be typically considered. A pain in the butt to look at that stuff? Yeah. You betcha.

Which is one reason why Thai Immigration will not be taking on the task of veifying individuals incomes and will continue to insist on an embassy letter.

 

Can you imagine a local IO officer trawling through various documents, in English to verify someones income. One piece of evidence that I always submit to the BE is my P60, issued by my pension provider and extremely difficult to forge or alter. It's hard enough for me to read and understand. Impossible for a Thai.

 

Also, if Thai immigration are insisting on greater verification of the documents, which I very much doubt, how could Thai Immigration verify the documents authenticity?

[Jingthing]

That's true [emoji2]… more or less.... as they are "Made in Thailand"
 
Edit: In fact it depends. Embassies are foreign territory I think, but Consulates are Thai territory.

They are documents issued by foreign governmental authority. Not Thai.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[johnmell]

If this results in loads of expats changing from retirement extensions, to marriage, i dont think Thai immigration are going to be too happy about it. 

[Maestro]

3 hours ago, Shoeless Joe said:

Well, we're going to have to agree to differ, inasmuch as one deposit of 800k / 400k deposited annually, 3 or so months prior to the visa renewal also doesn't necessarily qualify as income.

 

Joe

For that method of meeting the financial requirements for an extension of stay, the money in the bank does not have to qualify as income.

[Maestro]

3 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

How hard would it be to pluck out a monthly deposit on 12 bank statements.

Deposits into your bank account are not, per se, evidence of income.

 

Moneys that go on the line for income on your tax declaration are income. A statement from the person or entity paying you these moneys is evidence of income.

[Maestro]

As I skipped some pages of this topic I am not sure if the text of the currently used British embassy letter has been given in a post. I should like to check what it says. For example, does it say that the embassy has verified the income stated by the foreigner? I seem to remember vaguely that it says something along the lines of "Based on documents seen by this embassy, Mr. John Doe had an income of GBP... during the 12-month period from...to..."

 

Can anyone shed light on this?

[tropo]

2 hours ago, Spidey said:

Which is one reason why Thai Immigration will not be taking on the task of veifying individuals incomes and will continue to insist on an embassy letter.

 

Can you imagine a local IO officer trawling through various documents, in English to verify someones income. One piece of evidence that I always submit to the BE is my P60, issued by my pension provider and extremely difficult to forge or alter. It's hard enough for me to read and understand. Impossible for a Thai.

 

Also, if Thai immigration are insisting on greater verification of the documents, which I very much doubt, how could Thai Immigration verify the documents authenticity?

Please excuse me as I'm about 500 posts behind since I last read this thread...

 

So if Thai immigration refuses income support documents, and the Embassy refuses to issue income letters, isn't that saying goodbye to all expats who have been using income letters for extension applications? I'm Australian, but I can see them following the BE's example sooner or later... along with the US and other embassies. I'm not confident that Thailand even cares if they lose half the expats. We either comply or bugger off.

[Kadilo]

25 minutes ago, tropo said:

Please excuse me as I'm about 500 posts behind since I last read this thread...

 

So if Thai immigration refuses income support documents, and the Embassy refuses to issue income letters, isn't that saying goodbye to all expats who have been using income letters for extension applications? I'm Australian, but I can see them following the BE's example sooner or later... along with the US and other embassies. I'm not confident that Thailand even cares if they lose half the expats. We either comply or bugger off.

I think the answer to your question is “Yes” 

 

As of now there doesnt appear to be any appetite for either side to change their stance so unless there are discussions taking place behind the scenes, (which personally I doubt) , it could be gloomy for all those who have been using the income letters and cannot (or dont wish to ) use the 400,00/800,000 route. 

 

As for the other nations, there doesn’t appear as yet to be any indication the others have to or wish to follow suit, but who knows how this will develop. 

 

I think you’re right, I don’t think they give a jot or understand the repercussions for those with families and have made their life’s out here. 

 

Im still going to bang the drum for Tommy Dee to finish the job he started with the lady from the BE and also invite someone from Thai Immigration.  The more I listen to his “interview” the more I’m disappointed in him for his half hearted attempt to get to the crux of the problem and then claim everything was crystal clear and sorted. He let her off with a load of baloney and half truths and  owes it to everyone affected to follow it up. 

 

So you’re on here Tommy.........get your finger out and finish what you started. You’ve opened a can of worms which needs follow up and closure. 

 

Thats is my two pennies worth anyhows. We live in hope. ????

 

 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Kadilo

[tropo]

1 hour ago, Kadilo said:

I think the answer to your question is “Yes” 

 

As of now there doesnt appear to be any appetite for either side to change their stance so unless there are discussions taking place behind the scenes, (which personally I doubt) , it could be gloomy for all those who have been using the income letters and cannot (or dont wish to ) use the 400,00/800,000 route. 

 

As for the other nations, there doesn’t appear as yet to be any indication the others have to or wish to follow suit, but who knows how this will develop. 

 

I think you’re right, I don’t think they give a jot or understand the repercussions for those with families and have made their life’s out here. 

 

Im still going to bang the drum for Tommy Dee to finish the job he started with the lady from the BE and also invite someone from Thai Immigration.  The more I listen to his “interview” the more I’m disappointed in him for his half hearted attempt to get to the crux of the problem and then claim everything was crystal clear and sorted. He let her off with a load of baloney and half truths and  owes it to everyone affected to follow it up. 

 

So you’re on here Tommy.........get your finger out and finish what you started. You’ve opened a can of worms which needs follow up and closure. 

 

Thats is my two pennies worth anyhows. We live in hope. ????

 

 

We might see a lot of expat getting married to take advantage of the 400k deposit discount.

[JLCrab]

2 hours ago, Maestro said:

As I skipped some pages of this topic I am not sure if the text of the currently used British embassy letter has been given in a post. I should like to check what it says. For example, does it say that the embassy has verified the income stated by the foreigner? I seem to remember vaguely that it says something along the lines of "Based on documents seen by this embassy, Mr. John Doe had an income of GBP... during the 12-month period from...to..."

 

Can anyone shed light on this?

This seems to be an actual UK letter as of JULY 2017:

[Maestro]

Thank you very much, JLCrab.

[wayned]

This is the "new" US version of the same letter. They added the sentences at the end of the paragraph stating the the US Embassy does not guarante the contents of the sworn statement, effectively only guaranteeing my that I have sworn that the information is true.  They say nothing about reviewing any documents.  I talked to the Vice Consul Yesterday and she said that if they were to guarantee the contents then they would have to require that any documentation that I provided would have to be certified by the issuing agency/Company and that could only be done in the US, as they are not in the business of certifying documents other than passports.  I assume that any documentation supplied to the UK Embassy is not certified, so all that they have done is read it and issued the letter without the requesting person even swearing that it was correct.

 

The Vice Consul at the Embassy said that they are still reviewing the procedure and said that all instigation needs is the backup data.  When I asked her if she had been talking to the "Twit" at the British Embassy she just raised her eyes.  I went on to tell her that some Immigration offices do require backup data but will not accept it without the letter. She actually thanked me for providing the information that I gave her. I applied for my yearly extension later in the day at Nakhon Sawan Immigration and all that they wanted was the letter.  I discussed it with the IO and showed her the backup that I had and she said that unless the law is changed that does away with the requirement for the letter that is what they require.  They can be instructed to ask for back up data but the letter will still be require until the law is changed.  She also said that the letters that I showed her  had no seals/stamps on them indicating that they are certified as the letter did.  In the end I walked out good for another year!

 

 

[ozmeldo]

It is my opinion that every person that has rec'd an extension based on that shonky letter consider themselves lucky.

 

Embassy no doubt saw too much fraud. Rather than bicker about it, they just shut it down. They can't discuss it bc that opens them up to abeiting in prior fraud. So it's done. Why can't you all just glom on to that cold fact?

 

Just an attestment. I would never give someone a year's visa based on their word and photocopies. US embassy will wake up too.

 

Move on... because you're going to have to anyway. 400/800 or another country. Up to you.

[Shoeless Joe]

And this is the important paragraph at the bottom of the British Embassy letter which has not been reproduced above.

 

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

Regards,

Joe

[ozmeldo]

8 minutes ago, wayned said:

This is the "new" US version of the same letter. They added the sentences at the end of the paragraph stating the the US Embassy does not guarante the contents of the sworn statement, effectively only guaranteeing my that I have sworn that the information is true.  They say nothing about reviewing any documents.  I talked to the Vice Consul Yesterday and she said that if they were to guarantee the contents then they would have to require that any documentation that I provided would have to be certified by the issuing agency/Company and that could only be done in the US, as they are not in the business of certifying documents other than passports.  I assume that any documentation supplied to the UK Embassy is not certified, so all that they have done is read it and issued the letter without the requesting person even swearing that it was correct.

 

The Vice Consul at the Embassy said that they are still reviewing the procedure and said that all instigation needs is the backup data.  When I asked her if she had been talking to the "Twit" at the British Embassy she just raised her eyes.  I went on to tell her that some Immigration offices do require backup data but will not accept it without the letter. She actually thanked me for providing the information that I gave her. I applied for my yearly extension later in the day at Nakhon Sawan Immigration and all that they wanted was the letter.  I discussed it with the IO and showed her the backup that I had and she said that unless the law is changed that does away with the requirement for the letter that is what they require.  They can be instructed to ask for back up data but the letter will still be require until the law is changed.  She also said that the letters that I showed her  had no seals/stamps on them indicating that they are certified as the letter did.  In the end I walked out good for another year!

 

 

Excellent post.

 

Exactly! So there is your answer for UK via US embassy. Please note all the caveats making the document nothing more than your word.

 

All these things coming to an end, especially as equity markets and economies weaken.

[Shoeless Joe]

Just now, ozmeldo said:

Excellent post.

 

Exactly! So there is your answer for UK via US embassy. Please note all the caveats making the document nothing more than your word.

 

All these things coming to an end, especially as equity markets and economies weaken.

Another baseless, pointless, unhelpful, unjustified, useless, comment, adding nothing of value to the conversation.

[JLCrab]

9 minutes ago, Shoeless Joe said:

And this is the important paragraph at the bottom of the British Embassy letter which has not been reproduced above.

 

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

Regards,

Joe

 

Correct which is why I said the letter was as of JULY 2017. But even without the above caveat, the JULY 2017 letter only states that the UK Embassy has been 'shown' statements of income and makes no comment as to their veracity or authenticity.

[Mike Teavee]

 

1 hour ago, JLCrab said:

This seems to be an actual UK letter as of JULY 2017:

Looks more or less the same as the one I got in June this year, main difference being there is now a disclaimer at the bottom of the letter...

 

[Edit: Apologies, with all the faffing around taking pics & editing out details, Shoeless Joe beat me to the fact that there is now a disclaimer at the bottom of the letter, but for anybody who's interested there it is on an actual letter from BE - I wonder if this was added in May after them discussing things with Thai Immigration]

 

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Mike Teavee

[Dale75]

Just a thought..............

For many of us this all starts with getting a "non-Imm O" 3 month visa from a UK Thai Consulate or Embassy.

This includes verification of deposits or income.

Is it possible that UK based Thai consulates/embassy would provide a service to verify income for extensions?

Has anyone asked them?

 

[vogie]

54 minutes ago, ozmeldo said:

It is my opinion that every person that has rec'd an extension based on that shonky letter consider themselves lucky.

 

Embassy no doubt saw too much fraud. Rather than bicker about it, they just shut it down. They can't discuss it bc that opens them up to abeiting in prior fraud. So it's done. Why can't you all just glom on to that cold fact?

 

Just an attestment. I would never give someone a year's visa based on their word and photocopies. US embassy will wake up too.

 

Move on... because you're going to have to anyway. 400/800 or another country. Up to you.

So it's ok for the BE to be fraudulent up to the 12th of December, I very much doubt your claim.

[Rally123]

1 hour ago, ozmeldo said:

It is my opinion that every person that has rec'd an extension based on that shonky letter consider themselves lucky.

 

Embassy no doubt saw too much fraud. Rather than bicker about it, they just shut it down. They can't discuss it bc that opens them up to abeiting in prior fraud. So it's done. Why can't you all just glom on to that cold fact?

 

Just an attestment. I would never give someone a year's visa based on their word and photocopies. US embassy will wake up too.

 

Move on... because you're going to have to anyway. 400/800 or another country. Up to you.

I have to agree 100%. Instead of moaning/bitching about how hard done by yous are just pull yer pants up and 'move on'. I'm sure there are many other ways to remain in Thailand, long term, without the embassy letter. Good luck.

[Thaidream]

8 hours ago, Shoeless Joe said:

1) "Thai immigration will never accept foreign documents as main proof of revenues" Well that's just complete guesswork on your part.

2) And when you say "it seems etc., etc." Well that just means you don't have a clue as to what might happen, any more than me or anyone else.

Then why did they accept mine when i had to prove income and why are they currently accepting this proof in CM which has been recorded on this site.

[Thaidream]

7 hours ago, Spidey said:

lso, if Thai immigration are insisting on greater verification of the documents, which I very much doubt, how could Thai Immigration verify the documents authenticity?

By asking for another document that connects   with the original document-

 

1.  I show my pension letter of XXX Amount

2.  Then I show my account letter showing the same amount going in to the bank.

 

IO asks how do you  get access to your money?

 

3.  I show my foreign ATM cards that I use at a Thai ATM

 

This would be enough IMHO-  No one forges their own ATM cards. And this is exactly the info I have shown to a Thai Imm Offier when I was asked to prove income.

[wayned]

13 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Then why did they accept mine when i had to prove income and why are they currently accepting this proof in CM which has been recorded on this site.

Are they accepting it without the letter, or are they requiring it in addition to the letter? 

 

AS I stated earlier, my office in Nakhon Sawan, falls under the Chiang Mai jurisdiction.  They , at present , do not want back up but have said that CM may instruct them to require back up in addition to the letter, but they say that they cannot accept back up without the letter unless the immigration laws are changed and questioned the validity of the back up that I showed her because it was not certified with either some kind of stamp or seal or (god help us) certification by the Ministry of Finance.

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, ozmeldo said:

It is my opinion that every person that has rec'd an extension based on that shonky letter consider themselves lucky.

 

Embassy no doubt saw too much fraud. Rather than bicker about it, they just shut it down. They can't discuss it bc that opens them up to abeiting in prior fraud. So it's done. Why can't you all just glom on to that cold fact?

 

Just an attestment. I would never give someone a year's visa based on their word and photocopies. US embassy will wake up too.

 

Move on... because you're going to have to anyway. 400/800 or another country. Up to you.

Why should I consider myself lucky? I have more than the required income in pensions and I have followed absolutely every immigration rule that is set out by Thai immigration.

[Thaidream]

3 minutes ago, wayned said:

Are they accepting it without the letter, or are they requiring it in addition to the letter? 

 

AS I stated earlier, my office in Nakhon Sawan, falls under the Chiang Mai jurisdiction.  They , at present , do not want back up but have said that CM may instruct them to require back up in addition to the letter, but they say that they cannot accept back up without the letter unless the immigration laws are changed and questioned the validity of the back up that I showed her because it was not certified with either some kind of stamp or seal or (god help us) certification by the Ministry of Finance.

The Letter is still being required but CM is asking for added proof from some people- they have showed pension letters etc- no  certification on the letter other than the letter head. As stated, in the past I showed a bank statement with the  my name , address etc which matched the amount on the pension letter.  It was accepted- this was many years ago at Bangkok.

 

Just as another  note- Thai Imm could always  develop a letter that states the info you are presenting is true and accurate under penalty of perjury and ask the applicant to sign it.

 

Actually the best way is the current way- Statutory Letter signed by applicant at their Embassy and signed under Oath. Except for BE which gives no Oath- this is  acceptable and Thai Imm can ask for added info as needed.

[wayned]

20 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

 

This would be enough IMHO-

But your opinion is not written into the Thai  law!

[soalbundy]

4 minutes ago, wayned said:

Are they accepting it without the letter, or are they requiring it in addition to the letter? 

 

AS I stated earlier, my office in Nakhon Sawan, falls under the Chiang Mai jurisdiction.  They , at present , do not want back up but have said that CM may instruct them to require back up in addition to the letter, but they say that they cannot accept back up without the letter unless the immigration laws are changed and questioned the validity of the back up that I showed her because it was not certified with either some kind of stamp or seal or (god help us) certification by the Ministry of Finance.

Therein lies the rub, who is going to certify the different sets of documents and couldn't the certification be forged ? The BE already issues a caveat at the bottom of their letter so where is their problem ? If the problem is (and it may be) that the IO said we don't want a caveat we want verification then why haven't other embassies announced that they will be stopping the service?