Yet more confusion over the removal of Income Certification Letter for British expats

[soalbundy]

1 minute ago, CharlieH said:

Would be interesting to see what that would actually cost to do ?

Those that have built homes etc it could provide a possible alternative if financially viable.

It shouldn't be too expensive considering the alternative, however such things take time, appraisal by the bank and then wait for the branch to get permission from Bangkok, can take up to 4 months, perhaps leave it in the bank and pay the loan off over 5 years or so, the wife or partner have the safety that should the retiree die before it's paid off the 800k is still in the bank.

[Spidey]

 

Just now, CharlieH said:

Assuming 1% per month, ok got it.

Oops! Sorry got my maths wrong. 2% per month seems to be the norm for short term loans, so double the figures I gave.

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, rtco said:

Why? The original post says "The spokesperson claimed that the income letters are not always required by Thai immigration and that expats can simply show a copy of their bank statements when submitting their application. However, anyone who has ever applied for a marriage or retirement extension in Thailand will know that is not the case and that the income certification letter has to date been a requirement."

 

I am just proving that the income certification letter has not been a requirement!

You're proving NOTHING that we don't all know.

Dude, get with the program here.

There are TWO very different application paths.

The INCOME method (which is what this controversy is about). For the INCOME method, embassy letters are REQUIRED.

 

Then there is the show money in the bank method, and seasoned. For that method an embassy letter had never been required. NOT NEWS!

THIS TOPIC IS NOT ABOUT THAT.

It's a popular option of course. 

Clearly some people currently using the income method will be switching to it.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Jingthing

[dick dasterdly]

47 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

You don't turn over the account numbers or the Debit card numbers. You r direct deposits are listed month by month-in your bank  summary normally on 1 or 2 pages with a summary- Easy  for an Imm Officer to use the exchange rate in force on the date of the extension.  They do the same now when you take the Embassy Letter to the Imm Office- if you watch them they calculate  the amount for each letter in Thai Baht.

 

You can back the above up with letters from your pension provider which will match the direct deposits or even your tax return which will normally show similar amounts. You  highlight the pertinent amounts so the IO has no problem viewing the info. A few minutes of  looking  by the IO and  no prob.   You can even show foreign debit cards that match your bank statements or Thai ATM receipts.  I always carry multiple proof and backup to Thai Imm but using the Embassy Letter has always worked until the BE decided not to issue the letter.

The bank account statements I receive from my UK account, show the account number and sort code as well as my name.

 

On one hair raising occasion I also had to give my (previous) agent copies of my Thai bank account ATM card - both front and back as a result (apparently) of the requirements at the time of the local IO.

 

Edit - I'm perhaps too 'sensitive' about providing this sort of info. as a result of fraudulent ATM withdrawals from my UK account from the Philippines - even though I hadn't used my UK ATM card in years!

 

Off topic, but happy to say that the UK bank immediately agreed that the ATM withdrawals were fraudulent, and reimbursed my account.  I've still no idea how on earth it could happen in the first place.

Edited October 14, 2018 by dick dasterdly

[CharlieH]

10 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

It shouldn't be too expensive considering the alternative, however such things take time, appraisal by the bank and then wait for the branch to get permission from Bangkok, can take up to 4 months, perhaps leave it in the bank and pay the loan off over 5 years or so, the wife or partner have the safety that should the retiree die before it's paid off the 800k is still in the bank.

There are many permutations and uses here, if the loan could be at a reasonable rate, it could be used as back up for medical crisis, if the relationship went sour the husband walks away with something, ???? or even just reverse savings.! ......interest and other charges would be the key to viability. The wifes agreement too ! Which might be an issue for some ????

[galt67]

6 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

It shouldn't be too expensive considering the alternative, however such things take time, appraisal by the bank and then wait for the branch to get permission from Bangkok, can take up to 4 months, perhaps leave it in the bank and pay the loan off over 5 years or so, the wife or partner have the safety that should the retiree die before it's paid off the 800k is still in the bank.

1

No bank necessary.

There are 'private lenders' (non-banks) that make collateral based loans with quick closings.

The interest rate is 15%/annum.

[HHTel]

12 hours ago, rayw said:

As I said in the other thread it should be very easy to be able to verify income using the UK Governmetn data network linking to the Inland Revenue department, which can then easily show the persons tax code and earnings which should be exactly as claimed by the applicant for the income confirmation letter.  It should be very simple once set up and not time consumming at all, and especially so for the rip off price they charge for this letter.  So there is NO EXCUSE IMHO

Not so.  I get some tax free income (quite legal)  plus over taxed by some companies requiring me to claim tax back from the Inland Revenue.  

[watso63]

It's all well and good showing bank deposits totalling 800.000/400,000 from the previous year but that doesn't guarantee everyone will have that for the upcoming year. At least income verification from a recognised pension agency, especially DWP should be verifiable still. Oh dear what a mess. The "rubber stamp" lady really has been coining it in on behalf of the UK GOV over the years. Nice work if you can get it but now their scam has been rumbled by the Thai authorities. What's next, freedom to marry certificates? Couldn't run a pi$$ up in a brewery????????????

[wgdanson]

38 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

Assuming 1% per month, ok got it.

Can a wife not borrow at less than 12% using the house as collateral. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by wgdanson

[jimn]

42 minutes ago, rtco said:

Why? The original post says "The spokesperson claimed that the income letters are not always required by Thai immigration and that expats can simply show a copy of their bank statements when submitting their application.cHowever, anyone who has ever applied for a marriage or retirement extension in Thailand will know that is not the case and that the income certification letter has to date been a requirement."

 

I am just proving that the income certification letter has not been a requirement!

Please you need to stop showing your complete ignorance of the issue here. Your reply to me above is confusing in itself and then you choose to repeat it to Jingthing. Both Jingthing and myself understand the issue, you sir do not.

Best keep your uninformed comments to yourself or read the hundreds of posts on the issue to bring yourself up to speed.

[sledpull]

Always wondered why million baht++++ homeowners or car owners cannot use that to satisfy immigration.

Homeowners especially are obviously serious about Thailand. 

I can see what is happening in the UK Embassy migrating to the US Embassy.  The expat crowds I encountered the other day are mostly for notary services. It would obviously cut down a lot of work for the staff. I loved the UK online services which I subsequently found that the UK Embassy canceled. I just now hope I get to continue to make my annual mandated migratory trip to Bangkok!

[chris2004]

You might own a million +++ house/car but that doesn't provide for your living expenses. I presume the 800k is there to show you can afford to live and not be a burden on Thailand. Shame the Uk doesn't do the same for all our r@pefugees.

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, CharlieH said:

here are many permutations and uses here, if the loan could be at a reasonable rate, it could be used as back up for medical crisis, if the relationship went sour the husband walks away with something, ???? or even just reverse savings.! ......interest and other charges would be the key to viability. The wifes agreement too ! Which might be an issue for some

Could work- Once could also go to a money lender- pay the interest for 3 months- then return the balance-  a bank will want a complete proof of income; possibly a Chan not search at the land office- however a money lender just wants  it registered at the land office.

Actually- for people legally married- I can't understand why a land title document- Chanot is not enough- Thai law indicates a husband and wife are entitled to 50% each if they split.  Thais use Land Title deeds to guarantee bail. 

 

As an aside- i did a search and found the BE  has a list of Law Offices in Thailand and these Offices employ British Barristers- certainly could outsource the letters to the Barrister- He keeps the fee- BE simply provides them x amount of BE letterhead to do the letters- if BE can outsources Passports- they can do this.  Keep issuing the Letters and then Thai Imm can ask for added info as desired from the applicant. To me-that is a win-win for everyone/

 

All the BE has to do is either continue to issue the letter or outsource it- place a statement that  the Embassy or other entity cannot fully guarantee the  applicant's statement or if the Law permits- use a statement like the US that the applicant has sworn under penalty of perjury that info is correct.   No further   Other Embassies such as the Aussies; Canadian and currently American do it in a similar way.

 

If Thai Imm desires added info- all they have to do is ask the applicant to prove their statement- bank statements; pension letters etc etc. If I was Thai Imm- I would ask for proof   every so often just like they are doing now in CM for Americans.  Some are asked for proof- others not.   If you have lied on the Embassy affadavit and now you can't prove the income- you have lied to a Thai police Officer which is a crime not to mention possibly luying under Oath if you are swearing to a statement.

 

There is no 100% full proof system of proving anything other than a preponderance of evidence/documentation.  How does the BE Embassy or any other Embassy issue Visas-  Identify check- Passport- income verification- Drivers License- etc-  

 

The BE is making all of this too complicated and causing all Embassies to be suspect and I would imagine irritating Thai Imm by not cooperating and continuing to issue a simple letter/

 

 

Edited October 14, 2018 by Thaidream

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, Expattaff1308 said:

I have my State Pension paid direct to my Thai Bank

L I would be happy showing 800k+ (on my statements or Bank Book) coming into the account over the year that equates to the 65k, However Immigration to date wont accept that, despite what the Notary Officer at the BE says they still want an Embassy Letter. It is this that is leaving us in No Mans Land.

You can show 800,000 in Thailand bank for 3 months the only letter required then is a letter from Thai bank confirming that. 

I did that until I got a marriage extension. 

[Orac]

Could work- Once could also go to a money lender- pay the interest for 3 months- then return the balance-  a bank will want a complete proof of income; possibly a Chan not search at the land office- however a money lender just wants  it registered at the land office.
Actually- for people legally married- I can't understand why a land title document- Chanot is not enough- Thai law indicates a husband and wife are entitled to 50% each if they split.  Thais use Land Title deeds to guarantee bail. 
 
As an aside- i did a search and found the BE  has a list of Law Offices in Thailand and these Offices employ British Barristers- certainly could outsource the letters to the Barrister- He keeps the fee- BE simply provides them x amount of BE letterhead to do the letters- if BE can outsources Passports- they can do this.  Keep issuing the Letters and then Thai Imm can ask for added info as desired from the applicant. To me-that is a win-win for everyone/
 
 

They haven’t outsourced the issuing of passports - just the admin of receiving applications. I would be very surprised if BE would authorise a Thai legal company to issue and sign letters on a BE letterhead here either as I believe Barrister/Lawyer is a protected profession here so British Barristers can only technically advise.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Pib]

18 minutes ago, Orac said:

They haven’t outsourced the issuing of passports - just the admin of receiving applications. I would be very surprised if BE would authorise a Thai legal company to issue and sign letters on a BE letterhead here either as I believe Barrister/Lawyer is a protected profession here so British Barristers can only technically advise.

 

 

It will surely end up with corruption....that is, some barristers signing the forms saying your have Bt800K in income when you really don't.  Like what goes on with some Visa agents now.  Like how Thai doctors close the Drivers License Office will sign-off on the medical form saying you are as healthy as horse for a Bt200 fee although the doctor didn't do any medical checks other than confirm you were breathing and able to hand him the Bt200 fee. 

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, Spidey said:

What puzzles me is that, as some have mentioned, it's possible to obtain a Non O-A retirement visa at the Thai Embassy in London. The financial requirements are the same and the Thai Embassy requires the same evidence of income as the British Embassy do to issue income letters.

The Thai Embassy in London accept this evidence with no further verification, yet the British Embassy are telling us that it won't satisfy Thai Immigration.

Methinks somebody is telling porkies...…...and it ain't Thai Immigration.

It is a fair point to compare with the O-A, except for the following:

1. It is Thailand that is requiring evidence of income for visa extension application in Thailand and for visa application in London.

2. Here's the kicker: The O-A application submission of income does require further verification: Income declaration has to be accompanied by letter from Bank plus documents have to be notarised/certified by a lawyer.

[Spidey]

Just now, SheungWan said:

It is a fair point to compare with the O-A, except for the following:

1. It is Thailand that is requiring evidence of income for visa extension application in Thailand and for visa application in London.

2. Here's the kicker: The O-A application submission of income does require further verification: Income declaration has to be accompanied by letter from Bank plus documents have to be notarised/certified by a lawyer.

Not my experience of applying for an O-A at the embassy in London. Reqired 3 bank statements and my P60. No bank letter, no notorisation.

[SheungWan]

3 hours ago, Thaidream said:

No Embassy in any country 'validates' anything- most provide affadavits that are then attested to by the citizen and  sworn under Oath according to the laws of the country-Most indicate and state they are nt responsible for the veracity of what is stated/  The BE Embassy letter has and will be accepted- It is the BE that has decided it does not want to play ball-  If there is some UK law that now prohibits it's employees  from issue these letters- what is it? and why hasn't the BE stated it.?

They can do whatever they want but  they need to be forthright about it- If they want to stop the letter to save money and staff so State it directly.

I don't think this is about cost cutting. I do think it is about checking now for financial documentation. Oath mode not cutting it.

[mfd101]

4 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

I don't think this is about cost cutting. I do think it is about checking now for financial documentation. Oath mode not cutting it.

The vice-consul made it perfectly clear in her radio interview the other day that this whole thing was started by a visit from the auditors/inspectors from FCO. They said, that to save resources, the consulate should cease doing for customers what the latter can do by other means. Everything goes from there.

[SheungWan]

24 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Not my experience of applying for an O-A at the embassy in London. Reqired 3 bank statements and my P60. No bank letter, no notorisation.

You are partially correct re notarization? (original documents)

http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84508-Non-Immigrant-visas.html#7

(For sure I found it a pain doing the O-A the one time)

Edited October 14, 2018 by SheungWan

[Pib]

9 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

The vice-consul made it perfectly clear in her radio interview the other day that this whole thing was started by a visit from the auditors/inspectors from FCO. They said, that to save resources, the consulate should cease doing for customers what the latter can do by other means. Everything goes from there.

What I heard during the radio interview was the BE rep tap-dancing to justify stopping the income letter because:

(1) Thai immigration had asked them to do funds "verification," 

(2) The BE determined Thai immigration really didn't need the letter and the letter was being asked for more out of habit more than anything else,

(3) streamlining efforts within the embassy to reduce workload,

(4) and some new UK law regarding privacy.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Pib

[Thaidream]

3 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Oath mode not cutting it.

BE doesn't make its applicants take an Oath. US and others do and for the US- the oath indicates a criminal penalty if lying- Herein lies the difference with the BE.

 

If the BE really wanted to assist it's citizens it would continue the letter- make their applicants appear in person- have them swear to the letter or have a British Barrister/Lawyer who is in Thailand and still can practice in the UK sign off on the letters as a British Notary.  

According to the BE website there are several British Lawyers in Thai Law Firms who they recommend to do Notarial s.  I am sure British citizens need to have documents notarized while overseas for various UK transactions- If the BE is sending it citizens to these lawyers then they must be accepted back in the UK.

 

The letter can still be issued and the Thai Imm can be told the same indicating that there is no 100% way to ensure  complete accuracy but we encourage the Thai Imm to ask our citizens to provide backup info if needed and leave it at that. Then up toThai Imm to decide to continue the status quo; ignore the BE letter or do like CM is doing with Americans-asking some for proof.

 

The US Embassy system in Thailand  is much cleaner- the Embassy makes no claim it is check anything- the applicant fills out the form- states their income- the Consul makes the applicant take the Oath- the applicant is aware that once he signs the form  and he lies- he has committed a Federal Offense subject to prison and/or  financial penalty.  It's the same Oath  any US Notary gives; US Courts use to swear in witnesses;  etc.

If I had my druthers- I would imprint on the form or address a statement to Thai Imm that the applicant has sworn under penalty of perjury the info is correct.

If Thai Imm asks for added proof- so be it. If someone lies and cannot provide the proof- notify the Embassy and the FBI or arrest them due to lying to a Thai Police Officer.

If everyone has legal income- it's not that hard to provide Letters of Income Source and Amounts; Bank Statements matching the income; Debit or Cred Cards matching the bank statements.

This is not rocket science- it's simple reasoning/

 

[kevindanes]

On 10/13/2018 at 1:37 PM, BobBKK said:

Because the others do not do verification letters!  just pay in 65k a month into your Thai account?  

Australian embassy said they do not issue income letters but merely sign statutory declarations written by us. So they will continue this service. I do not understand why the British embassy do not do the same?

[Thaidream]

5 minutes ago, Pib said:

hat I heard during the radio interview was the BE rep tap-dancing to justify stopping the income letter because:

(1) Thai immigration had asked them to do funds "verification," 

(2) The BE determined Thai immigration really didn't need the letter and the letter was being asked for more out of habit more than anything else,

(3) streamlining efforts within the embassy to reduce workload,

(4) and some new UK law regarding privacy.

Yes- I also heard the same- and obviously  no one in the BE has any real experience in negotiating with Thai Officials- what we think they don't need  doesn't match what they believe they need. Thais do not like confrontation nor to be told how to 'run their affairs' Those of us here long term know the answer is to keep the status quo/

 

I wonder what a British Official we say  when a Thai Official would indicate that they are no longer providing a House Registration form so a British Visa can be issued-

 

I would also like to know who called for the meeting  between Thai Imm and the BE. I have a feeling the Thais were satisfied just the way things were or at the very least would accept the status quo.  BE threw down the gauntlet saying they are not going to do it at all- and here we are.

[SheungWan]

25 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

The vice-consul made it perfectly clear in her radio interview the other day that this whole thing was started by a visit from the auditors/inspectors from FCO. They said, that to save resources, the consulate should cease doing for customers what the latter can do by other means. Everything goes from there.

Sorry, what is 'the latter'? I would think that actually validating income statements (whatever that means in practice) requires additional resources, not the continuation of the status quo.

Edited October 14, 2018 by SheungWan

[SheungWan]

2 minutes ago, kevindanes said:

Australian embassy said they do not issue income letters but merely sign statutory declarations written by us. So they will continue this service. I do not understand why the British embassy do not do the same?

Because the UK does not necessarily follow what Australia does?

[SheungWan]

4 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Yes- I also heard the same- and obviously  no one in the BE has any real experience in negotiating with Thai Officials- what we think they don't need  doesn't match what they believe they need. Thais do not like confrontation nor to be told how to 'run their affairs' Those of us here long term know the answer is to keep the status quo/

I wonder what a British Official we say  when a Thai Official would indicate that they are no longer providing a House Registration form so a British Visa can be issued-

I would also like to know who called for the meeting  between Thai Imm and the BE. I have a feeling the Thais were satisfied just the way things were or at the very least would accept the status quo.  BE threw down the gauntlet saying they are not going to do it at all- and here we are.

Thanks for the inside info re the negotiating experience of the BE.

[Thaidream]

3 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Because the UK does not necessarily follow what Australia does?

No they certainly don't nor do they follow the US model.  The BE model while flawed was acceptable to the Thai authorities until someone at the BE saw the chance to do away with the letter instead of trying to accommodate Thai Imm or at least explain in detail what they actually do. I was under the impression diplomats assuaged feelings  and offered to work together to find a solution.

[mfd101]

7 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Sorry, what is 'the latter'? I would think that actually validating income statements (whatever that means in practice) requires additional resources, not the continuation of the status quo.

As in any normal sentence of the English language, the words 'the latter' refer back to what was mostly recently mentioned, namely - in this instance - 'customers'.