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

[soalbundy]

Just now, Joe Mcseismic said:

No, it doesn't fulfill the letter of the law. It does not prove income. That's why the BE is not going to issue them any more. They are worried about liability. If it fulfilled the law, there wouldn't be a problem.

I was speaking from the standpoint of Thai IO. I show the German embassy originals from my German state pension and my company pension and a bank print out from one month showing this going into my German account (why 12 months,pensions are for life and if the IO doesn't understand that the German inspecting my documents does) I can do no more, what should the German official do, ring up the pension people and ask if their documents are real? somewhere down the line there has to be a reasonable amount of trust.

[sambum]

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes but it was/is a long established system that satisfied everyone involved, until someone started causing problems lately.

 

Thai Immigration got the income certifications they wanted, all nice and stamped by the various Embassies. The Embassies got their nice fees, and supported their citizens in the process. And all of us have been able to obtain our extensions every year and stay in the country.

 

So just who was it in this case who dumped their stinky c**p on our nice clean new white carpet?

 

Possibly the new boss of Thai Immigration, but doubtful as the Embassy has known about the change since MAY!

Most people seem to be laying all the blame on the Embassy, but it is Thai Immigration that "dumped their stinky c**p on our nice clean new white carpet?" by asking that the financial information given to them to support the application had to be verified - apparently a fairly new amendment to the Data Protection Act will not allow them to do that.

However, the Embassy are hugely to blame for the way that they are handling the matter, and I do not think they realise the implications for many of us who 

13 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

A problem that I also have

 

14 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

A problem that I also have

DELETED  -  DUPLICATED

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Immigration by demanding that the BE verify the claims.

 

Ohh... and just where has Immigration actually said anything on this subject?

 

And, if they are saying anything, how come only the British embassy seems to be turning their world upside down, while every place else is simply going about their business.

 

It's non-sensical.

[Jip99]

5 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

You clearly know who you were referring to, even if you don't know his name. You were referring to a specific individual with a certain amount in a bank account. You know enough about him to point the authorities in his direction. No more from me on this. It's between you and your conscience. 

 

Never heard of hearsay....trot on.

[Suradit69]

25 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

The British embassy lady didn't mention that and neither did the interviewer. Which begs the question, does she even know that option exists in the first place?

I think at this point we can conclude that the collective knowledge of the British embassy staff on this topic, and probably many other topics, is impressively lacking.

 

 

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, bkkcanuck8 said:

It is not philosophy games.  Usually before there is regulations or laws you have an intent on what the law / regulation will do.  If it turns out that it is not doing what it is suppose to be doing - you go back and you change the RULES.  The immigration finds out that the verification letter is not doing what it is suppose to be doing - and people are lying and not having verifiable income... they change the rules... in the end the non-immigrant (retirement) visa is nothing more than "long stay" tourist visa...  not permanent residency... they can and will change the rules to suit what they want out of it.  For some people, this may mean leaving and going back home or somewhere else.

I have no interest in engaging you further. We'll need to agree to disagree on what is relevant to focus on here, and what is not. I am focusing on the rules and potential changes to the rules which could potentially be triggered by the strange actions and lack of knowledge of actual Thai immigration rules by the British embassy. You want to focus on motivation theories. Have your fun. 

[HHTel]

2 hours ago, aonangkrabi said:

The embassy of the Netherlands has changed the procedure. Formerly I did not have to show any proof, I just declared my income and the letter of the Embassy stated that I "had declared". Now they verify. It is very simple: I just show the yearly income statements from my pension funds or I show my income tax declaration. It can be checked in a minute or so and the Embassy gets € 50 for the declaration. The Embassy makes some money this way. I don't understand why the UK Embassy can't do likewise.

I don't even have to go to the Embassy. Everything is handled by post.

But that is exactly what the British Embassy was doing.  I showed bank statements supported by pension letters.  The problem is that they can state the evidence given to them but cannot verify the source.  I would guess that is the same with the Netherlands Embassy in that they can't 'verify' the source of income.

 

Incidentally, whilst on this subject, on another forum I use, the thread about this was started by a Canadian, as after visiting his Embassy for whatever is needed for his extension, he was told that the service will be discontinued. He started the thread to ask if anyone else had heard of this.

[Pib]

Do I spend Bt65K per month in Thailand?  Probably yes. 

 

But do I actually bring 65K per month "into Thailand" like doing a bank/money service transfer from my home country bank to a Thai bank?   "Definitely no" because the great majority of my spending is through use of my home country "credit" cards which do not charge a foreign transaction fee and pay me 1.5% cash back reward.  Each month when I get the credit card bills I pay them in full from my home country bank. 

 

Now although I don't have to transfer much money into Thailand due to use of my home country credit cards to pay day-to-day living expenses, Thailand still fully benefits.  Tesco Lotus doesn't care if I pay in cash or by credit card because they still got paid...Big C don't care either....Foodland/Tops don't care either....mall stores don't care either...the petrol station don't care either....HomePro don't care either...the hospital don't care either...the dentist don't care either....etc...etc...etc....they got paid....they are happy.  

 

Use of my home country credit card to pay my living expenses in Thailand provides the same benefit to Thailand businesses and government as if I had paid cash from money I actually transferred into Thailand.

 

Oh yea, I also have multiple home country "debit" cards which do not charge a foreign transaction fee and reimburse ATMs fee.  So, when I need some cash I just use one of the zillion ATMs in Thailand or do a bank counter withdrawal to pull the money from one of my home country bank accounts....money in-hand within minutes. 

 

Simply no need for me to have Bt65K actually flowing into a Thai bank account each month like a monthly direct deposit/automatic transfer....nor is it remotely desired.

 

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Just now, sambum said:

Possibly the new boss of Thai Immigration, but doubtful as the Embassy has known about the change since MAY!

Most people seem to be laying all the blame on the Embassy, but it is Thai Immigration that "dumped their stinky c**p on our nice clean new white carpet?" by asking that the financial information given to them to support the application had to be verified - apparently a fairly new amendment to the Data Protection Act will not allow them to do that.

However, the Embassy are hugely to blame for the way that they are handling the matter, and I do not think they realise the implications for many of us who 

 

 

And so assuming your speculation that Thai Immigration is really behind this is correct, how would that explain NONE of the many other embassies thus far saying anything about needing to make the kind of changes the BE is doing? And in fact, other embassies publicly saying they will continue as they have all along....  It makes no sense.

 

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, Suradit69 said:

I think at this point we can conclude that the collective knowledge of the British embassy staff on this topic, and probably many other topics, is impressively absent. 

Yes, exactly.

But I've said before if they had only bothered to focus doing THEIR narrow  job (just find a way to keep issuing the REQUIRED letters) then they wouldn't need to know jackfruit sheet about Thai immigration policies. But now that they're getting involved in trying to change Thai immigration policy, British people (and others as it may impact them as well) are justified in expecting ACTUAL EXPERTISE from them. Sadly, if there is no there there, that might be expecting too much. 

[sambum]

13 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Since when does one government tell another government what they have to do.  They might ASK them to do it but the UK is a sovereign country and they have chosen to 'throw out the baby with the bath water'.  They are using this request as an excuse to stop providing this letter for their citizens as they can save money by not doing it. It's quite clear from the interview.

 

As an American what I resent is the BE attempting to say that Americans are also affected.  Really-  The Us Embassy may have been  asked the same  of the Thai Imm but the US has responded to its citizens by stating the letter will continue for the foreseeable future while the issue is being studied.

 

The BE Embassy is also attempting to tell the Thai Imm what they should accept from  applicants which is very narrow and shows a complete lack of understanding the Thai Imm Act of 1979 and the Police Order of 2014.  They should be asking the Thai Imm office to accept a verity of documentation  to prove monthly income rather than trying to force Thai Imm to have people transfer funds to a Thai bank account on a monthly basis.  The Thai police order even now doesn't say that  with or without an Embassy letter.

 

If as British subjects- you agree with your Embassies actions- that is of course your prerogative. I and other Nationalities as well as some British  citizens  have differing viewpoints.

"the US has responded to its citizens by stating the letter will continue for the foreseeable future while the issue is being studied."

 

For once, a sensible response to the problem.

[rott]

4 hours ago, salavan said:

Because the Brits like to stick their nose in everywhere it's not wanted. It's an inherited throw back from colonial rule royal Britannia Britannia rules the waves

Snotty-mouthed individual.

 

And at.least get the words right.

[Russell17au]

35 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

I have a feeling this letter business was created by the Thais, trying to avoid dealing with cranky old buggers and their various bits of paper from whatever country they're from.   

 

Surely, Thai Immigration isn't interested in taking on this paper tiger again, so they'll continue to accept the letters, and reserve the right to ask for more evidence randomly, or as necessary, which is how it works now.

 

It has not affected Australia or any other country that uses a Stat Dec. It is only affecting the British.

[marko kok prong]

As i stated in another thread the British Embassy IS  NOT HERE TO HELP BRITISH CITIZENS,they are civil servants who have done well at home and the Ambassador is usually an ex Mp or the like,so they get rewarded to an Embassy posting,they are not here to work,it is a jolly,all garden parties and cucumber sandwiches. Now as a dual passport holder UK and Australia,the difference at the Aussie embassy is staggering,no long waits,very polite and effecient and helpful a complete contrast to the Brit embassy,why they actually have any at all i really don't know,absolutely useless.

[pontious]

4 minutes ago, sambum said:

the US has responded to its citizens by stating the letter will continue for the foreseeable future while the issue is being studied."

  

So they may change. Why study it if you were not.

[Kmar]

Hang on a minute.......Big Joke is running immigration now isn't he? Clearly the man has a strong desire for emppathy with the other Big Joke in Bangkok. Quite a partnership

[DPKANKAN]

4 hours ago, BobBKK said:

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

But that is HISTORIC not what WILL be in your bank for the NEXT 12 months....????????????

[Thaidream]

7 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

Surely, Thai Immigration isn't interested in taking on this paper tiger again, so they'll continue to accept the letters, and reserve the right to ask for more evidence randomly, or as necessary, which is how it works now.

I agree and there is always the possibility of using a general Embassy Affidavit- hand write in a statement indicating you are declaring xxx amount and the source and asking your Embassy to notarize it.  I can't see how any Embassy would refuse a notarization.  I have done this several times when I have need a notarize letter sent for Revenue Department (IRS); Child Support etc. Always accepted everywhere. Now whether the Thai Imm would accept it-in lieu of the pre printed form is unknown.

[david555]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

That's not hard to answer. Each embassy represents a sovereign government. The embassies are under rules set back in their own nations as far as specific details of embassy services. That's why there is variation between nations. Just as the British embassy can't dictate Thai embassy policy (though it sounds like they're trying) the Thai government can't dictate every detail of every process to foreign governments. The Thais have the right to accept or not accept the embassy letters from any government. They still have and have always had the right to demand further evidence to support the claims in the letter. 

 

It's quite obvious that the British embassy should just keep issuing the letters using whatever language they're OK using on it and put the ball back in Thailand's court about acceptance of their letters. What they are doing now is a big mess and may impact other nationals as well -- trying to get Thai immigration to change their enforcement policies only for their nationals. Such an effort may possibly spark unintended negative consequences for all nationals. 

That is the final point ,it seems some think they are still in colonial ages, besides Thailand has never being colonized .

The only point that should be made is a clear understanding , and if new implications from TH. immigration a transition period , sufficient in a normal timeframe to adapt to it...

All this stirring and pushing could Immigration making deciding just the 800K or the 400K to have to be in Thailand as a retired person, besides the 800?400K , could also be seen as buffer for critical situations (example a return home country for several reasons ..) never understood some can live so far away from home country whiteout a minimum financial base ...

[Russell17au]

21 minutes ago, sambum said:

Possibly the new boss of Thai Immigration, but doubtful as the Embassy has known about the change since MAY!

Most people seem to be laying all the blame on the Embassy, but it is Thai Immigration that "dumped their stinky c**p on our nice clean new white carpet?" by asking that the financial information given to them to support the application had to be verified - apparently a fairly new amendment to the Data Protection Act will not allow them to do that.

However, the Embassy are hugely to blame for the way that they are handling the matter, and I do not think they realise the implications for many of us who 

 

DELETED  -  DUPLICATED

The blame is on the British Embassy otherwise every other embassy would be doing the same thing and they are not. I can still get my Stat Dec done at the Australian Embassy and they have no plans to change things Nothing has changed with the Thai Immigration Act.

[DPKANKAN]

4 hours ago, keith101 said:

I cant see why the Embassy wont issue these letters as they are a part of the British Government and the Pensions are issued from the same Government , it should be a very simple matter to confirm the applicants identity and issue the statement . The other possibility is that they are just to lazy to do the job there being paid for .

You could not meet the requirements of retirement here on a UK goverment pension which is only about 30,000 baht a month before tax!!! Its tbe private pension element which is the issue!!

[soalbundy]

10 minutes ago, marko kok prong said:

As i stated in another thread the British Embassy IS  NOT HERE TO HELP BRITISH CITIZENS,they are civil servants who have done well at home and the Ambassador is usually an ex Mp or the like,so they get rewarded to an Embassy posting,they are not here to work,it is a jolly,all garden parties and cucumber sandwiches. Now as a dual passport holder UK and Australia,the difference at the Aussie embassy is staggering,no long waits,very polite and effecient and helpful a complete contrast to the Brit embassy,why they actually have any at all i really don't know,absolutely useless.

Same at the German embassy,efficient,helpful and cheap, write them an Email and you get an answer within few hours, write to the BE and they (in my experience) never answer.

[david555]

2 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

You could not meet the requirements of retirement here on a UK goverment pension which is only about 30,000 baht a month before tax!!! Its tbe private pension element which is the issue!!

No it s not only  , as it could count in the combination method so even the 30 000 could be a help , but naturally not that 30 alone

[Exploring Thailand]

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

I agree and there is always the possibility of using a general Embassy Affidavit- hand write in a statement indicating you are declaring xxx amount and the source and asking your Embassy to notarize it.  I can't see how any Embassy would refuse a notarization. 

OK for non-Brits, but another problem for Brits. The British Embassy ended many of their notarial services last year. Presumably it was one of the things they deemed could be outsourced. If you ask them to witness a signature, they give you a list of local lawyers.

[Runamile]

On the Data Protection issue raised by the British Embassy. I hit this issue about three weeks ago, changing my health insurance from one company to another. Guess what? You simply give permission for the original company to deal with the new one in terms of providing personal information. You could give permission for, say, your pension provider to deal with the British Embassy OR ITS AGENT. For most people, I doubt that many income transactions would need to be covered. For me, it wouldn't be that many, but so what, since that takes me way over the 65K a month, just leave some off. Now, why did I introduce OR ITS AGENT? Reason is that Embassies of many nationalities, British included, often feel either overwhelmed by paperwork or lacking in expertise. They simply outsource to those who can cope with the volume and/or have the expertise. That is totally normal. Why not in this case?

[Expattaff1308]

4 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

You could not meet the requirements of retirement here on a UK goverment pension which is only about 30,000 baht a month before tax!!! Its tbe private pension element which is the issue!!

I am fortunate enough to have the state and civil service pension both of which can be verified if they were interested in doing so. But what is so wrong with issuing the letters and letting Immigration decide what is proof or not like the US & Aus Embassies

[Runamile]

2 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

OK for non-Brits, but another problem for Brits. The British Embassy ended many of their notarial services last year. Presumably it was one of the things they deemed could be outsourced. If you ask them to witness a signature, they give you a list of local lawyers.

Absolutely correct. And again, why can't that logic be applied re the Income letters? If not an outsourcing arrangement, why can it not be agreed with Thai Immigration that they accept a global statement of income drawn up and attested by a qualified Thai accountant?

[sambum]

5 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

And so assuming your speculation that Thai Immigration is really behind this is correct, how would that explain NONE of the many other embassies thus far saying anything about needing to make the kind of changes the BE is doing? And in fact, other embassies publicly saying they will continue as they have all along....  It makes no sense.

 

Because, as already stated, other Embassies have not been asked to verify the information!

 

For instance, (As far as I know) the American system involves the applicant signing the letter and swearing under oath that the details are correct - the British letter is not signed by the applicant, it is signed by a member of the Embassy staff to say that the applicant has given them proof of income of XXXXXX British pounds per year (which has to be the equivalent of 65,000 baht a month, or 800,000 baht a year)

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, Exploring Thailand said:

And a huge hole in this suggestion is that you could simply send 65k to a Thai Bank, take it out, send it home, and then send it again next month. You would incur charges but for most people they would not be too much of a problem.

Much less in charges than the cost of agent-fees, which is exactly why I am doubtful Thai-Imm will accept this. 

 

3 hours ago, Expattaff1308 said:

Well I think for most that equates to too much effort especially sending it home again be far easier to seek out the agent for the illegal extension stamp????

A stamp via an agent isn't illegal.  The bank letter used to get it is also not illegal.  But money given to immigration personnel by agents to get the seasoning waived on the agent's 1-day 800K loan, which is used to get the bank-letter, would be illegal.

[Suradit69]

32 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

then they wouldn't need to know jackfruit sheet about Thai immigration policies. 

Not absolutely sure, but I believe that sums up one portion of their current job description .