Liason Group

[KhaoYai]

I will no doubt get slagged to death for this and it may well have already been tried but.................................

 

I read many cases here where people are complaining about some aspect of Thai Immigration Policy or new rules etc. etc. - some justified, others seem to simply be people who've been bending the rules for years then get caught.

 

It seems to me that the largest single issue at the moment is that concerning the cessation of income certification letters by the embassies of some countries - clearly a game changer for some who may not be able to raise the 400,000 or 800,000 needed using the alternative financial requirments.

 

Has anyone ever thought of forming a Liason Group to hold discussions with the Thai Immigration Authorities about particular issues?  It may have been done but I haven't heard of it.  The Thai's may not accept it but nothing ventured, nothing gained. Just a thought.

[ukrules]

Why would they speak to us?

 

To clarify - we, the foreigners are the enemy of sorts.

 

We're to be kept on a short leash, made to jump through many hoops all for the glory of living in this place for 1 year at a time with multiple check ins every 90 days.

 

They appear to want us out, I have no idea why, there's plenty of room for both high flyers and people on a smaller (still large by Thai standards) fixed income.

 

Talk of replacing low earners with high flyers is complete rubbish, it should be the more the merrier. None of us are a drain on Thai services, get ill without insurance or money in the bank and you will die, it's as simple as that - the rest of us pay as we go either with insurance or cash.

 

Edited December 3, 2018 by ukrules

[JLCrab]

 

<snip>

Has anyone ever thought of forming a Liason Group to hold discussions with the Thai Immigration Authorities about particular issues?  <snip2>

No -- but you can go to the RTP IMM HQ (still) on Suan Phlu and look for this:

 

[KhaoYai]

 

Why would they speak to us?

 

To clarify - we, the foreigners are the enemy of sorts.

 

We're to be kept on a short leash, made to jump through many hoops all for the glory of living in this place for 1 year at a time with multiple check ins every 90 days.

 

They appear to want us out, I have no idea why, there's plenty of room for both high flyers and people on a smaller (still large by Thai standards) fixed income.

 

Talk of replacing low earners with high flyers is complete rubbish, it should be the more the merrier. None of us are a drain on Thai services, get ill without insurance or money in the bank and you will die, it's as simple as that - the rest of us pay as we go either with insurance or cash.

 

With respect, I've heard all those arguments many times and like so many things I hear about Thailand they turn out to be a myth.  If the Thai's wanted foreigners out, we'd be out and I doubt they'd muck about simply making things difficult.  Much of what changes seems to be a response to people bending the rules.  You can bet your last dollar that this latest problem over income certification has been brought about by the Thais becoming aware that people were cheating that system and then realising that what they have up to now considered as some form of confirmation of income - wasn't.

 

If it was possible to set up some form of group to hold discussions with the Thai's (not make demands) - then perhaps all the issues you mention could be aired.

[a977]

There was a meeting between the U.S. consulate and American expats in Chaing Mai recently which covered this topic including some relevant points. A thread was posted 3/12/18 

[JLCrab]

 

<snip>

If it was possible to set up some form of group to hold discussions with the Thai's (not make demands) - then perhaps all the issues you mention could be aired.

Well here  he is the big cheese -- I would guess he'd be just delighted to meet with a bunch of farang know-it-alls who would know better than he how extension of stay issues should be handled in the future.

Edited December 4, 2018 by JLCrab

[JackThompson]

 

With respect, I've heard all those arguments many times and like so many things I hear about Thailand they turn out to be a myth.  If the Thai's wanted foreigners out, we'd be out and I doubt they'd muck about simply making things difficult. 

Two reasons for this:

• Not all Thais want us gone - widely varying policies at different locations (offices and entry-points) indicate there is an internal struggle over this.  That split extends to amphoes, as well - some friendly to foreigners and others decidedly not so.
• The change would need to be gradual enough not to slam hundreds of thousands of Thai's jobs into the dirt in a short period of time.  If their lives are destroyed a few at a time, they will be less able to mobilize for their self-defense (similar to what happened to us in the USA, with outsourcing and foreign-worker replacement).

 

Much of what changes seems to be a response to people bending the rules.  You can bet your last dollar that this latest problem over income certification has been brought about by the Thais becoming aware that people were cheating that system and then realising that what they have up to now considered as some form of confirmation of income - wasn't.

Rule "bending" is done by immigration, when they process an agent-application, and waive the required bank-seasoning.  This is legal for them to do - hence a "bent" rule.

 

By contrast, someone lying on an embassy affidavit would be outright breaking the rules, and committing a passport-country Felony at the same time, in many cases.

 

 

If it was possible to set up some form of group to hold discussions with the Thai's (not make demands) - then perhaps all the issues you mention could be aired.

As the primary obstacle would be rooting out the corruption that drives most of the bad policies, I doubt this could work.  The policy shifts we don't like are intended to increase agent-money.

 

If it were a "pool money to pay them off, to leave us alone" org, it could be very effective in theory, as it would work along the existing framework.  But, that would also involve all parties in an illegal conspiracy, so a very bad idea.

Edited December 4, 2018 by JackThompson

[JLCrab]

 

<snip>

Rule "bending" is done by immigration, when they process an agent-application, and waive the required bank-seasoning.  This is legal for them to do - hence a "bent" rule.

<snip2>

Per Section 35 of the Immigration Action , this would be legal for them to do if ...

"Each application of an alien for extension of temporary stay shall be made in the form and with payment of fees as prescribed in the Ministerial Regulations."

 

So if you are only charged 1900 baht for the waiver, it is perfectly legal.

[samran]

There are...they are called Chambers of Commerce. Here’s the secret. Join, put your hand up and run for an elected position, or volunteer on one of their committee if they are big enough. 

 

Strangely enough, the Thai government often reaches out to them. 

[allane]

Let's start at Square One:  In Thailand, the Immigration Bureau is part of the Royal Thai Police. They are there to control us, not to serve us. They are not operating a restaurant, or even the Tourism Authority of Thailand.

For foreigners who want to visit or live here, there are several alternatives, even if there will soon be one less for some of them.

[JackThompson]

 

Per Section 35 of the Immigration Action , this would be legal for them to do if ...

"Each application of an alien for extension of temporary stay shall be made in the form and with payment of fees as prescribed in the Ministerial Regulations."

 

So if you are only charged 1900 baht for the waiver, it is perfectly legal.

We are supposed to pretend that the "agent fee" is only to pay for the agent's time, trouble, and "developed relationships," and that none of the agent's fee finds its way into the hands of anyone at immigration.  Until a case goes to court, and those involved sing, anything beyond that has not been proved.  I think it is wise to avoid being involved in this - or if it cannot be avoided, maintaining independent-proof that their application for extension was 100% legit.

 

It is not too dissimilar to when one accused of a crime pays a high-priced Ivy-League lawyer in the USA who, just coincidentally, graduated from the same law-school and belonged to the same fraternity as the judge hearing one's case - he is just "paying for expertise," not "buying special consideration."  Of course - one could stay legal, and avoid being in court in the first place in the USA - much like wearing a moto-helmet here, to avoid trouble with traffic police. 

 

But avoiding agent-use at immigration is increasingly challenging - maybe impossible for many who have the required income in the future (Danish, already), though they have (in the past) and would do things honestly, if they could.

[JLCrab]

11 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

We are supposed to pretend

Pretend away.

[FritsSikkink]

7 hours ago, ukrules said:

Why would they speak to us?

 

To clarify - we, the foreigners are the enemy of sorts.

 

We're to be kept on a short leash, made to jump through many hoops all for the glory of living in this place for 1 year at a time with multiple check ins every 90 days.

 

They appear to want us out, I have no idea why, there's plenty of room for both high flyers and people on a smaller (still large by Thai standards) fixed income.

 

Talk of replacing low earners with high flyers is complete rubbish, it should be the more the merrier. None of us are a drain on Thai services, get ill without insurance or money in the bank and you will die, it's as simple as that - the rest of us pay as we go either with insurance or cash.

 

Loads get ill without insurance and go to Go Fund me.

[KhaoYai]

I expected negativity - keep on moaning then.