Income statement letters from embassies no longer required, confirms Phuket Immigration

[bkkguy1970]

25 minutes ago, Delight said:

 The official advised that the letter would be acceptable if the British Embassy  stamped  it.

...

All that is required then  is for the embassies to apply the stamp-no doubt for a fee.

 

Thai Immigration has stated that the current embassy concept of "stamp" is no longer acceptable so what new concept of "stamp" does this "official" think the embassies will produce that will be acceptable? and how close is his understanding of the concept compared to say the head of Thai Immigration and more importantly the laws of the UK, USA, Australia etc as to what it means for their consular staff to "stamp" a document

 

what everyone is still waiting for is clarification of what Immigration will accept going forward for proof of income and I don't think vague waffling like this from an "official" is particularly helpful for anyone

 

bkkguy

 

[the guest]

I think Thailand has every right to expect money in the country if you living as a non-tourist. Obvious things like insurance where many foreigner choose not have to have any will cover any burden on the country in the event something goes wrong. 

 

Try getting in Europe without proper insurance or a good income  !

[ubonjoe]

A off topic post and a reply to it have been removed.

[Moonlover]

14 hours ago, Delight said:

 Paid a visit to Jomtien Immigration

I took with me a letter from my Main pension provider which stated that I had a pension for life with a value of £xxx. This value increasing every year in line with UK inflation

The official advised that the letter would be acceptable if the British Embassy  stamped  it.

So this may be the work around.

Essentially the visa-extension applicant has to do the work i.e obtain the letters from his/her pension provider(s)

All that is required then  is for the embassies to apply the stamp-no doubt for a fee.

If this were to be introduced the  same letter can be used for every subsequent application.

This is tantamount to asking the embassy to verify an income. And that is what all the fuss is about. The embassy cannot not and therefore will not do that.

[OJAS]

13 hours ago, pontious said:

They mean an embassy letter - from the 12th Dec the BE will not issue anymore. There will be no embassy stamp.

And, in the absence of any Embassy letter or stamp, the most which, I suspect, the Jomtien officer can expect would be a version of @Delight's pension provider letter which has been duly legalised in accordance with the tediously bureaucratic procedure set out at https://www.gov.uk/get-document-legalised

 

But this IMHO would be tantamount to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut - and would, in practice, probably be the greater of 2 evils when compared to 800k in the bank seasoned for 3 months.

[onera1961]

14 hours ago, Delight said:

The official advised that the letter would be acceptable if the British Embassy  stamped  it.

How can British embassy stamp the letter as genuine? Only the proper legislation office can apostille it. May be BE will facilitate an apostille service and then stamp it as apostilled as TI will require some form of BE stamp on the letter. But it will cover people who have a pension and not other forms of incomes. Again why BE will be facilitating a service that helps only a certain group of people and exclude other groups for the same end-goal? That will be discriminatory, I think

[Olmate]

14 hours ago, the guest said:

I think Thailand has every right to expect money in the country if you living as a non-tourist. Obvious things like insurance where many foreigner choose not have to have any will cover any burden on the country in the event something goes wrong. 

 

Try getting in Europe without proper insurance or a good income  !

Are you serious.Into Europe? What for?

 

 

 

 

 

[onera1961]

14 hours ago, the guest said:

Try getting in Europe without proper insurance or a good income  !

For visa exempt entry in Schengen zone, you don't need insurance or need to show any income. However, IO may ask you about your onward flights out of Schengen area. as I was asked once.  I told her I have one from Portugal (I was entering Zurich) on a different airlines but she did not check the ticket. They may also ask how long you want to stay.

Once hospitalized in Amsterdam and account lady won't allow me to leave hospital unless I put a deposit of $2000 euro on my credit card or call somebody in Netherland who can vouch and responsible for all payments.

Edited December 1, 2018 by onera1961

[Robins]

21 hours ago, the guest said:

I think Thailand has every right to expect money in the country if you living as a non-tourist. Obvious things like insurance where many foreigner choose not have to have any will cover any burden on the country in the event something goes wrong. 

 

Try getting in Europe without proper insurance or a good income  !

Sure, but you don't let people settle here under one system, have them give up their homes abroad and acquire possessions here only to suddenly have the rules changed arbitrarily and be asked to leave.  Trump is catching a lot of deserved criticism for the deportations in America, but those are all people who entered illegally.  Forcing people with homes, possessions, cars, pets who settled here legally to leave because of an arbitrary rule change is downright evil. 

Edited December 1, 2018 by Robins

[Pattaya46]

28 minutes ago, Robins said:

Sure, but you don't let people settle here under one system, have them give up their homes abroad and acquire possessions here only to suddenly have the rules changed arbitrarily and be asked to leave.  //

It's certainly not what is happening here now. The main requirement for Income method was - and still is - to have a letter from your Embassy verifying your income. This didn't change.

 

BTW a bit harsh to critic Thailand on that as by the past Thai Immigration mainly "grandfathered" people who were on easier requirement at the few times they changed their rules.

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

4 hours ago, Robins said:

Sure, but you don't let people settle here under one system, have them give up their homes abroad and acquire possessions here only to suddenly have the rules changed arbitrarily and be asked to leave.  //

It's certainly not what is happening here now. The main requirement for Income method was - and still is - to have a letter from your Embassy verifying your income. This didn't change.

According to our embassies, what Thai immigration will accept from them for income-letters has now changed - so the embassies stopped (or will soon stop) providing the letters.   If there was a problem, at least a full-year should have been provided, with a public-letter from Thai-immigration notifying all parties of the change in-advance.

 

Many who have the required valid-income have no idea what will be accepted for future extensions, without the income-letters.

[Pattaya46]

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

According to our embassies, what Thai immigration will accept from them for income-letters has now changed - so the embassies stopped (or will soon stop) providing the letters. //

And according to some other embassies' staff, UK and US embassies overreacted when Thai Immigration reminded them that they were supposed to verify the amount declared on their letters...

We may never know the truth, except if TI clearly declares/publishes that it has changed the requirements about these letters.

[soalbundy]

7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

According to our embassies, what Thai immigration will accept from them for income-letters has now changed - so the embassies stopped (or will soon stop) providing the letters.   If there was a problem, at least a full-year should have been provided, with a public-letter from Thai-immigration notifying all parties of the change in-advance.

 

Many who have the required valid-income have no idea what will be accepted for future extensions, without the income-letters.

According to our embassies.... They aren't the main players here.

[JLCrab]

Especially as the  OCT 26, 2018 notice was apparently decided at Foggy Bottom in WashDC, it seems to me that the US Department of State got to the point where it felt the terms of notary service that it offers to its citizens in Thailand, and around the world, were being dictated in a manner in conflict the 1963 Vienna Protocol on consular Relations which states at 

 

Article 5 Consular functions Consular functions consist in:

 

(f) acting as notary and civil registrar and in capacities of a similar kind, and performing certain functions of an administrative nature, provided that there is nothing contrary thereto in the laws and regulations of the receiving State

 

To which the US State Department told IMM in no uncertain terms we are not changing any guaranteed by protocol procedure, with both Thailand and USA as signatories,  based on your whims.

Edited December 1, 2018 by JLCrab

[soalbundy]

26 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Especially as the  OCT 26, 2018 notice was apparently decided at Foggy Bottom in WashDC, it seems to me that the US Department of State got to the point where it felt the terms of notary service that it offers to its citizens in Thailand, and around the world, were being dictated in a manner in conflict the 1963 Vienna Protocol on consular Relations which states at 

 

Article 5 Consular functions Consular functions consist in:

 

(f) acting as notary and civil registrar and in capacities of a similar kind, and performing certain functions of an administrative nature, provided that there is nothing contrary thereto in the laws and regulations of the receiving State

 

To which the US State Department told IMM in no uncertain terms we are not changing any guaranteed by protocol procedure, with both Thailand and USA as signatories,  based on your whims.

your last paragraph indicates you were there as an insider so do tell more. As far as I can tell nobody knows what the TI said to the embassies, was it a careless remark or an official letter ???

[JLCrab]

3 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

your last paragraph indicates you were there as an insider so do tell more

As I wrote in the first paragraph: It seems to me

[soalbundy]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

As I wrote in the first paragraph: It seems to me

doesn't seem to be the sovereign way to go, rather it should have been IMO, 'your whims don't interest us, we have a duty as an embassy and will continue to issue affidavits to our citizens it is up to you whether you accept them or not. 

[JLCrab]

39 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

doesn't seem to be the sovereign way to go

Well it seems the US Department of State has a different notion as to what is the sovereign way to go.

[Thaidream]

• 1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

  doesn't seem to be the sovereign way to go, rather it should have been IMO, 'your whims don't interest us, we have a duty as an embassy and will continue to issue affidavits to our citizens it is up to you whether you accept them or not. 

  IMO- there was no demand from anyone in either the Thai Imm or Ministry of Foreign Affairs for anything other than a request to verify/certify  income information.  Thais do not do business like this.

• The diplomatic answer should have been that under US law we are unable to do this because of Data protection; however, the letters will continue and you may request added information direct from the citizen.

• The US State Department became involved simply because the local Embassy couldn't or wouldn't make a decision on what to do- so IMO- rather than get into a diplomatic hassle- the State Department said just stop the letters.

• I also believe that the US/UK/ AUS Embassies collaborated on this decision and there were other reasons we will never be privy to.  Denmark simply followed the leaders.

• The Canada statement makes the most sense- we will continue to issue the letter and it's up to Thai Imm to accept it or not.

    I don't expect Thai Imm to do much at all . At this point nothing has changed for them- they are and most likely will continue to accept letters  and ask some people for added proof and handle new applicants who can't get letters to provide income proof.  

At some point- Thai Imm will most likely update their Police Order and that is what will determine the way forward.

 

 

[JLCrab]

3 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

IMO- there was no demand from anyone in either the Thai Imm or Ministry of Foreign Affairs for anything other than a request to verify/certify  income information. 

Which is exactly what the US State Department says it does not do in Thailand or in the 200 some other countries with which the US has diplomatic relations.

[luckyluke]

4 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Which is exactly what the US State Department says it does not do in Thailand or in the 200 some other countries with which the US has diplomatic relations.

And still there are some who expect that therefore it is to T.I. to modify their directives. 

[Thaidream]

9 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Which is exactly what the US State Department says it does not do in Thailand or in the 200 some other countries with which the US has diplomatic relations.

Agreed.   However, IMO, simply doing away with the letters was an overreaction. As I mentioned the Canadian stance makes the most sense.   

[JLCrab]

9 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Agreed.   However, IMO,

OOPS computer hiccup but as to below

Edited December 2, 2018 by JLCrab

[JLCrab]

2 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Agreed.   However, IMO,

As the New Yorkers used to say, your opinion and a subway token gets you a ride.

[DrJack54]

Interesting debate above. As for Australian embassy.... the "verification letter" from embassy was basically a stamp on the stat dec made by the au passport holder. Zero "proof of funds" was required. In essence turn up to embassy state that you receive ###baht per month. Total nonsense. The embassy can't/won't check the varsity of statement and nor can Thai immigration. That "proof of funds" was a doomed idea. 

[soalbundy]

50 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

• IMO- there was no demand from anyone in either the Thai Imm or Ministry of Foreign Affairs for anything other than a request to verify/certify  income information.  Thais do not do business like this.

• The diplomatic answer should have been that under US law we are unable to do this because of Data protection; however, the letters will continue and you may request added information direct from the citizen.

• The US State Department became involved simply because the local Embassy couldn't or wouldn't make a decision on what to do- so IMO- rather than get into a diplomatic hassle- the State Department said just stop the letters.

• I also believe that the US/UK/ AUS Embassies collaborated on this decision and there were other reasons we will never be privy to.  Denmark simply followed the leaders.

• The Canada statement makes the most sense- we will continue to issue the letter and it's up to Thai Imm to accept it or not.

    I don't expect Thai Imm to do much at all . At this point nothing has changed for them- they are and most likely will continue to accept letters  and ask some people for added proof and handle new applicants who can't get letters to provide income proof.  

At some point- Thai Imm will most likely update their Police Order and that is what will determine the way forward.

 

 

The most sensible post so far

[Olmate]

23 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Interesting debate above. As for Australian embassy.... the "verification letter" from embassy was basically a stamp on the stat dec made by the au passport holder. Zero "proof of funds" was required. In essence turn up to embassy state that you receive ###baht per month. Total nonsense. The embassy can't/won't check the varsity of statement and nor can Thai immigration. That "proof of funds" was a doomed idea. 

Not quite sure why you say “nonsense”. The stat dec clearly stated it was just that and not verified and it was accepted by TI, in most cases unquestioned. Supporting evidence was not requested.If applicant was asked to supply evidence and could do so,OK,if not You come back!

[JLCrab]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

At some point- Thai Imm will most likely update their Police Order and that is what will determine the way forward.

All they really have to do would be to better define what they deem as in the current Police Order (in the unofficial English translations) as 'evidence' as in "Must have evidence of having income of no less than Baht 65,000 per month"

Edited December 2, 2018 by JLCrab

[DrJack54]

10 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

All they really have to do would be to better define what they deem as in the current Police Order (in the unofficial English translations) as 'evidence' as in "Must have evidence of having income of no less than Baht 65,000 per month"

I'm curious as to "the proof" that was required by other embassies. As I stated above, for Australians there was no proof. You could state anything you wanted (BTW I personally have never done one). Yes it was a stat dec, but zero ramifications if Thai imm rejected it.

What docs where required by other embassies. I mean what was seriously examined by embassy and not just a tick/stamp here, with comment NEXT.

[xylophone]

19 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Not quite sure why you say “nonsense”. The stat dec clearly stated it was just that and not verified and it was accepted by TI, in most cases unquestioned. Supporting evidence was not requested.If applicant was asked to supply evidence and could do so,OK,if not You come back!

The stat dec clearly stated it was just that and not verified and it was accepted by TI

 

That is the puzzling bit in all of this IMO because the letters I got from 2 different embassies stated on the letter that this letter was not "proof" (in so many words) and this letter was always accepted by immigration, so what changed??

 

Were they just accepting it without really knowing what it said, until someone pointed this out this was not "proof" of anything, hence the new requirement being asked of the embassies????