Thai immigration to show leniency to foreigners applying for retirement & marriage extensions

[JackThompson]

13 minutes ago, ancharee said:

I was told for the marriage extension it was 2 months prior

Yes, and then 1 or 2 months more, after you apply, during the "under consideration" period (sometimes the "consideration" takes more than a month, per reports). 

 

This back-door "after application" additional seasoning trick / "new unpublished rule" is not reported as being utilized against us at all offices yet, but is now reported at Chang Wattana - the main office -  so may be utilized to discourage honest, in-person applications everywhere, soon.

 

15 hours ago, from the home of CC said:

obviously Bangkok imm wanting to see the the bank balance before and after suggests that funds were deposited only to be withdrawn once the paperwork went in.

They already required 2 months seasoning when you submitted the application, as per the written rules.  This is an "extra month" (or sometimes two) they are taking on, to nail those who need that money to support their Thai families here. 

 

17 hours ago, from the home of CC said:

17 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Yes, 400k in a Thai bank is still good, assuming you meet all the other requirements for a marriage extension...  Though note, at least for BKK, there have also been some reports lately that CW is requiring people to keep the 400K balance in their accounts also during the 30-day under review period, and then show an updated bank book again on the 2nd visit back to obtain the stamp for marriage extensions.

imo  Obviously that's the result of people trying to scam the system . Most of hoops we have to leap through generated here and everywhere result from folks who think they're smarter than the rules/regs. As people get caught systems are tweaked. Essentially, people cause their own problems and unfortunately everyone has to pay for their idiocy. 

No, it's the ones running the huge agent-immigration money-pipeline - now boosted heavily by this move of the income-based goalposts - who are the obvious scammers, not your fellow expats. 

 

We do everything they ask (published), yet they add "new unpublished requirements" - like this "extra month of seasoning," as just the latest example.  Legs not showing in one of your "prove your marriage" pictures? - or your "witness" not in the "bedroom shot"?  Go away! (with the not so subtle-message, "... and pay an agent, so you don't have to do any of this pointless stuff").

 

To spite this activity literally in our faces, some manage to blame expats - rather than the blatant actions of a corrupt den of thieves - for what is being done to us.  Never mind that we are helping Thailand and Thai families with our years of foreign-capital spending/investment - without even so much as the assurance we can live here and be with our families beyond a year. 

 

Marriage-based apps, in particular, are a nightmare at many offices.  Now, at Bangkok CW Immigration no less, they have Moved The Goalposts AGAIN - making the seasoning-period 3 months, instead of the published requirement of 2 months (though sometimes they aren't done with consideration after 30-days, so force the "seasoning" to 4 months). 

 

Is this unpublished "extra seasoning" change because of "abuse"?  It appears not, because meanwhile, if one uses their agent-buddy for an "extra fee" of 10x or so the official-cost, one Doesn't Need Any Seasoning At All.  They obviously do not care a whit about "abuse" - only that they get to profit from abuse, by twisting, spinning, and outright-breaking the rules to do it. 

 

It could not be more clear that this change is just another way to force people into their agent-money system - extorting the most financially vulnerable, and emotionally-invested (Thai family) where they have maximum (heartless) leverage.

[NanLaew]

8 minutes ago, AjarnMartin said:

... I don’t want to be hampered by suddenly finding that I am unable to repatriate my assets. I’ve always had a ‘grip’ as you so eloquently advise, but thank you all the same... ????

I think the next 'big thing' on these forum pages will be from those discomfited foreigners who wisely use this 'leniency' period to simultaneously keep their Thai bank account topped-up while earnestly researching the 'greener pastures' option. When they do commit to abandoning Thailand for their new Nirvana, they will encounter all the challenges presented by Thai banks to foreigners trying to take their money with them.

[farangx]

34 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Where did the requirement ever state that one needed to import the full 40K/65K - or must import it monthly?  Or, is this some "spirit of the law" / "loophole" theory, where immigration can re-write clear historical-intents, whenever they change or "re-interpret" the rules?

 

They moved the goalposts a full 50 yards down-field, but folks claim we should still be able to kick the field-goal from our formerly good field-position (having more than the necessary gross-income).

Their rules are theirs to change, not for you to make them.

 

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

I think the next 'big thing' on these forum pages will be from those discomfited foreigners who wisely use this 'leniency' period to simultaneously keep their Thai bank account topped-up while earnestly researching the 'greener pastures' option. When they do commit to abandoning Thailand for their new Nirvana, they will encounter all the challenges presented by Thai banks to foreigners trying to take their money with them.

Yes, but hopefully the DeeMoney service will provide an exporting baht solution at least for some. 

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, farangx said:

Their rules are theirs to change, not for you to make them.

 

Nobody is saying they aren't.

But I'm saying we've entered a red zone of truly onerous for married or retired expats that can no longer get embassy letters.

 

[JackThompson]

Just now, farangx said:

Their rules are theirs to change, not for you to make them.

I was replying to the notion we were "always supposed" to be importing it all. 

 

And if there is an actual published rule-change, certainly it would be announced at least a year in advance of the change being required.  People's lives are involved, after all.

[garyk]

Does anyone else see the heading as Object, object? 

Kinda of curious what this is. Looks like an Object oriented programming language problem?

I have seen it several time here on TV? 

[Tchooptip]

21 hours ago, NCC1701A said:

the back peddling has begun.

The negative comments, on the other hand, follow their course as usual

[SuperTed]

21 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

How do you say mutatis mutandis in Thai?

โดยอนุโลม

[SuperTed]

This result seems quite reasonable. And well timed. For all the whinging, it could be worse. 

[jacko45k]

50 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Where did the requirement ever state that one needed to import the full 40K/65K - or must import it monthly?  Or, is this some "spirit of the law" / "loophole" theory, where immigration can re-write clear historical-intents, whenever they change or "re-interpret" the rules?

You have quoted something that did not exist at the time you posted. I had already edited it deeming it inaccurate belatedly. 

Simplistically, shall we say the requirement is to show a person has the means to live in Thailand, else why would a retirement extension require the 800k or 400k to be in a bank, in Thailand, in your name. (But no obligation to spend it). The alternative was, something amounting to similar, demonstrated as income, anywhere in the world. Then that became more stringent (or not) that a confirming Embassy letter was obligated. My complaint was of the comment some only needed to show 3 months worth of this income ,and the Embassy gave a letter.... some Embassies didn't even bother checking. 

Now it is consolidated into being money already in, or being brought into Thailand. A pity it isn't averaged over the year though.

[farangx]

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Nobody is saying they aren't.

But I'm saying we've entered a red zone of truly onerous for married or retired expats that can no longer get embassy letters.

 

Embassy letters that can implicate the embassy if they turn out to be false.

[JohnOFphon]

Can I get a refund on that income cert. I got from the US consulate Dec. 31...as I no longer need it.  ????????

[farangx]

27 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

And if there is an actual published rule-change, certainly it would be announced at least a year in advance of the change being required.  People's lives are involved, after all.

But TI is showing leniency, is this not a good thing?  Whether it is 1 or 2 years in advance, it makes no difference if people choose to game it and the agents are there like you said.

 

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, farangx said:

Embassy letters that can implicate the embassy if they turn out to be false.

I think that is wildly exaggerated. Only four embassies have discontinued the service. That means the vast majority of nationalities haven't. 

I can only speak for the U.S. embassy service.

They were taking expats word for their income and were unwilling to even look at income proving documents.

But that is not the only way they could provide the service.

They could look at standard documents such as social security and military pension benefit letters and verify those for acceptance at Thai immigration just as the U.S. embassies in Colombia and Peru are doing for the retired American expats there.

Something is rotten here on this callous cutoff of an essential service. 

[nicolee]

Do those of us with European Nationalities whose embassies still provide letters of income still have to provide Thai bank statements to immigration?

[Jingthing]

Just now, nicolee said:

Do those of us with European Nationalities whose embassies still provide letters of income still have to provide Thai bank statements to immigration?

As I read it, no, if you're doing a pure income method.

In case of combo applications for retirement of course they need to see your bank book for that.

[farangx]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think that is wildly exaggerated. Only four embassies have discontinued the service. That means the vast majority of nationalities haven't. 

I can only speak for the U.S. embassy service.

The 4 embassies where their citizens formed the bulk of those on long stay here ....

 

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

They could look at standard documents such as social security and military pension benefit letters and verify those for acceptance at Thai immigration just as the U.S. embassies in Colombia and Peru are doing for the retired American expats there.

Something is rotten here on this callous cutoff of an essential service. 

Thailand is not Colombia or Peru.  The choice is up to you on where you want to live.

 

[OJAS]

4 hours ago, Arkady said:

 

That is why they need a separate letter from the bank to certify that the remittances were from overseas. The statements or passbook copy will be used to cross check that the amounts came into your account monthly.

My understanding (based on what I also believe to be @ubonjoe's) is that the bank letter is to be identical to the one used for the 400k/800k seasoning method, as per the attached specimen example in the case of Bangkok Bank. Is this not, in fact, the case?

 

BKKB letter example.pdf

 

Also, do you know from where we can download the original Thai version of the memorandum referred to in the OP, please?

 

EDIT: It would appear that it was the 400k/800k letter which the OP of the thread below eventually obtained for his recent retirement extension at Chiang Mai.

 

 

[jacko45k]

15 minutes ago, JohnOFphon said:

Can I get a refund on that income cert. I got from the US consulate Dec. 31...as I no longer need it.  ????????

Yeah, you pop along there and ask to see Hank!

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, farangx said:

The 4 embassies where its citizen forms the bulk of those on long stay ....

 

Thailand is not Colombia or Peru.  The choice is up to you on where you want to live.

 

I don't have the stats on expats but a significant percentage of married and retired expats here are NOT from those four nations.

I think your statement about Colombia and Peru not being relevant here is totally off base. The issue is about what services U.S. embassies are willing to offer their citizens at their embassies anywhere. The U.S. embassy in Thailand is a U.S. embassy the same as the ones on Peru and Colombia also being U.S. embassies. The U.S. embassy gave a lame excuse that internationally they can't "verify" income. They never did look at documents. I'm saying there IS another way they could do and their excuse is bogus. The evidence is what the U.S. embassies in Peru and Colombia are doing. They are able to look at certain income documents and they are able to officialize those income documents for their respective immigration offices. That's proof the U.S. embassy here unlike their excuses, COULD do the same. Could but don't want to. That doesn't seem good enough. Then the question is would Thai immigration accept such documents. I can't answer that but first the U.S. embassy would need to do their job and provide the verification, and then after that it could be determined whether such documents would be accepted by Thai immigration.

[mmail2you]

So is the 800k in the bank for 3 months prior to application, Acceptable ?

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, mmail2you said:

So is the 800k in the bank for 3 months prior to application, Acceptable ?

Yes.

 

The changes concern income based applications for people that can no longer get embassy letters.

 

At this point in time I suggest that people that can't get embassy letters that hoped to use the combo method (the income method when your income is under 65K monthly) prepare for the 800K bank method instead if they can. 

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, mmail2you said:

So is the 800k in the bank for 3 months prior to application, Acceptable ?

Yes yes yes! 

[jesimps]

21 hours ago, keithet said:

That's how I see it too. I suggest people should check with their banks now to see how transfers are recieved. I just switched to bangkok bank because my other bank shiws domestic. 

I'm glad I checked before my next transfer for February. 

I'm with SCB. Of my last three TW transfers, two went via BB but one went via TMB. If I banked with BB, would that one not show up as a domestic transfer on my BB statement?

[wgdanson]

44 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yes.

 

The changes concern income based applications for people that can no longer get embassy letters.

 

At this point in time I suggest that people that can't get embassy letters that hoped to use the combo method (the income method when your income is under 65K monthly) prepare for the 800K bank method instead if they can. 

If your income is under 65k, prepare to borrow some to reach 800k.

[Petchou]

Some ambassies still provide affidavits letters confirming financial resources for their citizens such Canada.  Does it mean, a letter still be accepted as proof of resources or not?

[Mark mark]

Does it have to be 12, Monthly payments (Eg a Pension) (Possibly not something that many people will have ?) .... or can it still be the 800,000 Bart in the bank for 3 mths, before the Visa Extension, as I was just told in my local Immigration office ? 

 

Mark mark

[ubonjoe]

4 minutes ago, Petchou said:

Some ambassies still provide affidavits letters confirming financial resources for their citizens such Canada.  Does it mean, a letter still be accepted as proof of resources or not?

Yes it will be accepted. See this topic that has a translation of the amendment.

 

[nauseus]

22 hours ago, mtls2005 said:

Sounds reasonable, and seems like what they mentioned early on for the transition period of 2019? One assumes that monthly foreign transfers, exceeding the minimus, beginning in January 2019 and continuing through to the date of application, be it June, July. August, September, October, November or December will suffice? (No clue what happens for those applying Feb-May though, will 2 ~ 5 months be sufficient?

 

Now how many IO's understand the legal term "mutatis mutandis" remains to be seen.

Thought it was some kind of flying dinosauris dinosaurum.