30 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You are being pedantic. Almost everyone refers to 1 year extensions as visas. A visa being something that gives a foreigner permission to enter or stay in a country.

 

It is a permit (form of visa) granting an extension of stay.

 

They are referring to issuing any letter required by immigration or embassies to issue visas/permits.

 

No "almost everyone" does not. A friend of mine, panicked by this and a coincidental IO home visit was enquring about changing over to "volunteer/ voluntary" status. He was further worried by being told that he needed a non-imm O. I told him he already had one and his reply was, no he had a retirement visa. Eventually he got it.

 

These are the problems the likes of you cause.

 

Will ubonjoe please come clean and say that for a long time he was admonishing people for using the phrase "retirement visa" and advising that it was a retirement extension.

29 minutes ago, elviajero said:

The British embassy didn’t check anything. They just asked for evidence of the income being claimed by the applicant.

They did check but they didn't verify. After half-a-dozen threads and several hundred posts on this business, I thought that would have been clear since it the crux of the dispute. Thai Immigration wants embassies and consulates to verify the proof of income being provided. They can't so they don't do it any more.

 

In the Australian and US procedure, there was absolutely nothing to check as it was totally grounded on a legally supported presumption that the applicant was being honest. That's not even close to a verification since anything sworn under penalty of a foreign country's laws has no legal standing in Thailand.

 

At the end of the day and regardless of being imprecise, the end result is the same. However, I am interested to hear if any changes come from the Dutch embassy. At least two Dutch members claimed that their embassy does access national pension data and does actually verify the applicants state-provided income. That's fine if one is getting a pension (I believe that all Dutch qualify for a pension) but pretty sure that some will be funded less than others and since the Dutch embassy doesn't consider alternative income streams, they may mostly be in the same boat anyway?

1 hour ago, Pib said:

The Danish embassy action is definitely harsh.  Their action will surely screw those Danish using the income letter for their annual extension and whose extension expires within 3 months.  Gives them no chance to season Bt800/400K in a bank for 3 months even if they had the Bt800/400K to immediately put in a Thai bank account.

 

And I don't know if this really pressures Thai Immigration to put out guidance ASAP as Thai Immigration will just say the Danish embassy should not have cut their citizens off immediately....should have done it like the UK/UK/AU embassies did it by giving everyone a few more months to get letters that should be valid for 6 months. 

 

Thai Immigration may just see this as a Danish self-inflicted wound.  Or maybe said another way, Poor Planning on Your Part (Danish Embassy) Does Not Create An Emergency For Me (Thai Immigration).

 

Maybe they want their citizens back. 

31 minutes ago, elviajero said:

The British embassy didn’t check anything. They just asked for evidence of the income being claimed by the applicant.

Surely, that's checking.

 

Oz and USA just got you to swear that you had X amount of funds and that's it. The UK would not issue a letter if you couldn't show the necessary funds.

Lemmings all starting to line up for the race to the cliffs ... At least this should put an end to the anti-UK/US/Oz Embassies outbursts.

The interesting quote from the Danish announcement is not the verification , but TI requiring the guarantee future level of pension/income.

 

 

12 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

They did check but they didn't verify.

To be precise they did not check - they said you had presented documents that said you received xyz.  That is not checking. Checking would mean verifying.

24 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The interesting quote from the Danish announcement is not the verification , but TI requiring the guarantee future level of pension/income.

 

 

But one must prove one's level of income each year, therefore it doesn't really matter about a future guarantee.  That would be a concern if the level of income were established one-time only but that's not the way it works.  So I agree that it was a very strange thing to mention in the statement.  If one could prove (guarantee) future income why would they need to prove that every year?  Surely one-time only would be sufficient.

 

2 hours ago, joevanwyck said:

Wow, with immediate affect, they didn't even give their citizens a heads up. I feel bad for them.

Yeah, there could have been citizens on flights from the far north or south turning up at the door only to be sent away.

2 hours ago, jackdd said:

...According to their website you can apply for an extension of stay at border crossings:

http://thaiembassy.dk/extension-of-stay-and-re-entry-permit/

 

 

The term "checkpoint" is used on several pages on the immigration website for what we generally know as "immigration office"

How many Danes are there in Thailand?

3 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

unable to fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements to guarantee the future level of pension/income

well technically very few things are guaranteed.  Do the Danes mean the government is not guaranteeing that the current pension levels won't be maintained?  I think technically many countries have that situation.  Or are the Danes just saying they can't meet whatever the Thais are now asking for, as far as documentation?

2 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

This part of the notice confuses me. What are these one-year visas?

 

I know this sounds pedantic, but one would expect an Embassy to be using precise and correct terminology.

 

Are they still issuing letters for extensions of stay based upon marriage/retirement?

I'm not 100% sure, but the initial thing you get is a 3 mth non-immigrant O visa, then you get a 1-yr non-immigrant O-A visa based on retirement or marriage, then each year afterwards you get a 1-yr extension-of-stay for that type of visa... Does that make a little more sense? Ubonjoe may be able to explain a little better for you...

3 hours ago, rott said:

No "almost everyone" does not. A friend of mine, panicked by this and a coincidental IO home visit was enquring about changing over to "volunteer/ voluntary" status. He was further worried by being told that he needed a non-imm O. I told him he already had one and his reply was, no he had a retirement visa. Eventually he got it.

 

These are the problems the likes of you cause.

 

Will ubonjoe please come clean and say that for a long time he was admonishing people for using the phrase "retirement visa" and advising that it was a retirement extension.

Immigration do, Embassies and Consulate staff do, visa agents do, most people with retirement extensions do. That's almost everyone!

 

3 hours ago, NanLaew said:

4 hours ago, elviajero said:

The British embassy didn’t check anything. They just asked for evidence of the income being claimed by the applicant.

They did check but they didn't verify. After half-a-dozen threads and several hundred posts on this business, I thought that would have been clear since it the crux of the dispute. Thai Immigration wants embassies and consulates to verify the proof of income being provided. They can't so they don't do it any more.

They don't check or verify (same thing) anything, they never have.

 

They just ask for a document confirming the income being claimed. To check/verify they would have to contact the source of the income to ask the source to confirm that the income claimed in the document was correct.

 

3 hours ago, thequietman said:

4 hours ago, elviajero said:

The British embassy didn’t check anything. They just asked for evidence of the income being claimed by the applicant.

Surely, that's checking.

 

Oz and USA just got you to swear that you had X amount of funds and that's it. The UK would not issue a letter if you couldn't show the necessary funds.

No. A piece of paper means nothing. To check the income is genuine would require the embassy to contact the income source/provider to confirm its genuine. That is what the embassies are not prepared to do.

 

The income letters/affidavits have been worthless as the embassies have not checked/verified/confirmed the income.

So far just “farang” embassies. I guess the rest of Europe, and possibly South Africa and New Zealand - to point to a couple - will go the same route.

 

How long before the more “dark skinned” embassies such as Nigeria fall prey to this. Or Indian, and Middle Eastern countries.  Or are they just being ejected in a “clampdown”.

 

You can guarantee China will not be affected by this.

 

PAU

5 hours ago, skatewash said:

But one must prove one's level of income each year, therefore it doesn't really matter about a future guarantee.  That would be a concern if the level of income were established one-time only but that's not the way it works.  So I agree that it was a very strange thing to mention in the statement.  If one could prove (guarantee) future income why would they need to prove that every year?  Surely one-time only would be sufficient.

 

not so strange,

if you do your extension in September, the embassy has no basis for talking about your pension in January,

the best they can do is assume - ie guess

TI is not requesting guesswork.

 

at any point in time, the Danish national assembly can change conditions related to pensions

the embassy can relate to history not future

 

hence, it is common in many civil services to choose wording very carefully so you are not ending

up redhanded with text you cannot really stand up to 

 

pending parliamentary approval (or similar) are not uncommon phrases,

not sure it would sink down well with TI

 

 

 

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

Immigration do, Embassies and Consulate staff do, visa agents do, most people with retirement extensions do. That's almost everyone!

 

 

Oxford - Cambridge - Webster and Collins also do,

didn't bother to check Larousse

 

4 hours ago, steven2018 said:

How many Danes are there in Thailand?

The two owners of the very  known computer shop in Hua hin are from Denmark 

( sorry, don't remember the name, but everybody on TV knows them ) 

8 hours ago, joevanwyck said:

Wow, with immediate affect, they didn't even give their citizens a heads up. I feel bad for them.

Makes the British embassy look good...................no easy thing.

From embasssy website. http://thailand.um.dk/en/News/newsdisplaypage/?newsID=5FD2318C-7DE7-4241-9A60-990E671E1D3F
 

Stopping pension letter services for one-year visas with immediate effect

14.11.2018  10:02   The Danish Embassy in Bangkok can no longer issue income certificates/pension letters as a supporting document for obtaining a one-year visa through the Thai authorities.
This is due to the fact that the Embassy in Bangkok is legally unable to fulfil the Thai authorities’ requirements to guarantee the future level of pension/income for Danish Nationals.
If this will affect you, we encourage you, to seek more information about alternative ways of applying for a visa on the Embassy of Thailand in Copenhagen’s web page: http://thaiembassy.dk/category/visa-application/
Affected residents can also seek information at the Thai Immigration Authorities about the current valid regulations. Here, you can find information about how to apply for a long-term visa: http://bangkok.immigration.go.th/en/base.php?page=procedure
 
The following link give you information about needed documentation: http://bangkok.immigration.go.th/en/base.php?page=service#
 
Please note, that applicants who have applied for the income certificate/pension letter already will get a fee refunded if the letter has not yet been issued by the embassy.  

"guarantee the future level of income" nobody on earth can do that especially since the income is variable depending on the strength of the Baht.
This is why I posted the topic, "What we all know". If Immigration wants to be reasonable then they need to investigate thoroughly and treat every individual as an individual.





Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

9 hours ago, chickenslegs said:

This part of the notice confuses me. What are these one-year visas?

 

I know this sounds pedantic, but one would expect an Embassy to be using precise and correct terminology.

 

Are they still issuing letters for extensions of stay based upon marriage/retirement?

Funny guy,,,,,,, I noticed the following;

 

British embassy saying;

This letter has previously served as a supporting document for obtaining a Thai retirement or marriage visa.

 

American embassy says;

The Royal Thai Government requires applicants to meet a minimum income threshold to obtain a nonimmigrant long-term stay visa

 

Have not checked the australian embassy, but if you are confused by the word VISA, than you have been confused a VERY LONG TIME my friend.

 

glegolo

Well that was pretty dam nasty of them to do that,  in this way

to there citizens.  unbelievable. ????

9 hours ago, TeaMonkey said:

 

How do they understand what is written in Danish or any other language. 

This going to get expensive if registered translation bureaus are needed for every piece of paper you have.

10 hours ago, Justin Side said:

The more the better.

Hopefully will hear from Thai Immigration soon with new requirements.

I don't believe any good will come from all this,   for any ex pats.

it's just playing into the hands of Thai immigration, to invent a few more hoops, jumps and rolly pollies for us all,  regardless of what root you go down, money or income.

All could have just been left alone. 

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, stanleycoin said:

Well that was pretty dam nasty of them to do that,  in this way

to there citizens.  unbelievable. ????

makes the BE seem positively concerned for the welfare of their citizens

6 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

3 mth non-immigrant O visa, then you get a 1-yr non-immigrant O-A visa based

I did not get non-immigrant O visa. I got one year non-immigrant O-A visa. Every time I enter Thailand, I get permitted to stay stamped for one year. My non-immigrant O-A visa will expire in 28 March 2019. Last time I entered Thailand, I got a stamp of permitted to stay October 20th, 2019. (one year from the date of my most recent entry 21 October, 2018). If I enter again on 27 March 2019, I will get a new stamp of Permitted to stay 26 March 2020. After that I need a reentry-permit if I want to leave/enter Thailand again. If I want to sty beyond 26 March 2020, I have to get an extension at the immigration inside Thailand or a new O-A from my home country (USA). 

Would be interesting if we have some Danish people here which use the Income verification.

Till now seems all people writing here are from other nations.

 

Also interesting would be to know what other Embassies do.. do they a Income check or verification and can they do the requirements of the Thai Immigrations or not. I guess in the next 1.5 months we will have more knowledge if there is any embassy which still give out this letter or all embassies have to stop.

 

And it not affect every as some writers suggest.. people which use the 800'000 or 400'000 baht in bank method are not affected by this change.

 

Maybe it would be nice to know what are most TV users use.

9 hours ago, NanLaew said:

n the Australian and US procedure, there was absolutely nothing to check as it was totally grounded on a legally supported presumption that the applicant was being honest. That's not even close to a verification since anything sworn under penalty of a foreign country's laws has no legal standing in Thailand.

This is not true the Australian Embassy can enter a persons tax file number or their Centrelink number and bingo up comes that persons file including the brand of toilet tissue they use and probably the last time they went. It is just pure laziness on the part of the Embassy to not do this, I have sent yesterday a email to the Embassy to this effect, still awaiting a reply, maybe email fell into the too hard basket.