BREAKING NEWS Foreigners now need to keep 800k in Thai bank for three months AFTER retirement extension is granted

[jacko45k]

14 minutes ago, indepth said:

There has been millions of posts that the old rules have changed. Funds seasoning is now law.

It was actually required previously, for 20 years I am informed. And I assure you that requirement was somehow bypassed using agents. 

Quote from an advert....

 

Quote

We help you even if you have no savings or any pension income. We do not judge you, we want to help you stay legally in Thailand 

 

[Henryford]

13 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

If using the 65k baht income option you do not need to keep any money in the bank. Just prove it was transferred into the country.

That is the big IF we are all unsure about. How do you prove it? A FFT code in your Bangkok Bank book, if you have an account with them. My Krungsri bank shows it as TN. Do we all need to move banks to BB.

[moe666]

I love all these post, it is all about mememememe, when it is all about th Thais deciding they have had enough of retirees going to their Embassy and lying about their income and other hiring agents who put the 800,000 in the bank for them. Blame these people for making it harder for some people, who are legal, to stay. These are the people given a pass and were cheating. Some say doesn't affect you why do you care, well guess what it has now affected everyone who is retired here with new requirements that some cannot meet or do not want to meet.

[marcusarelus]

14 minutes ago, moe666 said:

I love all these post, it is all about mememememe, when it is all about th Thais deciding they have had enough of retirees going to their Embassy and lying about their income and other hiring agents who put the 800,000 in the bank for them. Blame these people for making it harder for some people, who are legal, to stay. These are the people given a pass and were cheating. Some say doesn't affect you why do you care, well guess what it has now affected everyone who is retired here with new requirements that some cannot meet or do not want to meet.

If you were correct why only citizens of 4 out of 100 embassies affected?  Time to look at reality.  Case of embassy lazies. 

[Olmate]

8 minutes ago, moe666 said:

I love all these post, it is all about mememememe, when it is all about th Thais deciding they have had enough of retirees going to their Embassy and lying about their income and other hiring agents who put the 800,000 in the bank for them. Blame these people for making it harder for some people, who are legal, to stay. These are the people given a pass and were cheating. Some say doesn't affect you why do you care, well guess what it has now affected everyone who is retired here with new requirements that some cannot meet or do not want to meet.

Best to just do n say bugger all then? Majority here are concerned with me, because it does concern me but also every other me, you,him,her. Same old .... with the letters n agents bit, no need to rehash thanks. If your into blame ,suggest you look in the other direction

[sumrit]

9 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

Case of embassy lazies. 

No. A case of the four Embassies, where the vast majority of expats in Thailand come from, were not prepared to tell lies.

[wayned]

29 minutes ago, sumrit said:

No. A case of the four Embassies, where the vast majority of expats in Thailand come from, were not prepared to tell lies.

They never told lies, they always represented it as a sworn notarized statement.  If they had stood up to immigration and told them that due to financial laws in their countries that what all that they could provide just like the US Embassy did in 2014 when the UK Embassy did this crap once before.  It all blew over then and would have this time also.

[marcusarelus]

37 minutes ago, sumrit said:

No. A case of the four Embassies, where the vast majority of expats in Thailand come from, were not prepared to tell lies.

But 100 others were?  Just silly. 

[sumrit]

18 minutes ago, wayned said:

50 minutes ago, sumrit said:

No. A case of the four Embassies, where the vast majority of expats in Thailand come from, were not prepared to tell lies.

They never told lies, they always represented it as a sworn notarized statement.  If they had stood up to immigration and told them that due to financial laws in their countries that what all that they could provide just like the US Embassy did in 2014 when the UK Embassy did this crap once before.  It all blew over then and would have this time also.

Because many expats were falsifying income declarations, Thai Immigration again wanted the Embassies to confirm the income declared was accurate. That was not possible, for the Embassies to do so they would have been telling lies. This they were not prepared to do.

[sumrit]

7 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

45 minutes ago, sumrit said:

No. A case of the four Embassies, where the vast majority of expats in Thailand come from, were not prepared to tell lies.

But 100 others were?  Just silly

Up to them if they want to tell lies, that doesn't mean it's acceptable for all Embassies to lie.

 

It's the expats that have been lying for years that have created this problem.

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, sumrit said:

Because many expats were falsifying income declarations, Thai Immigration again wanted the Embassies to confirm the income declared was accurate. That was not possible so for the Embassies to do so they would have been telling lies. This they were not prepared to do.

British expats didn't falsify income claims. They provided documentary evidence to the embassy regarding their income and no, it wasn't easy to forge those documents. The British Embassy letter clearly stated to TI what documents they had seen and based their income verification on. No lies, no deception involved. You have had this explained, in detail, to you before.

 

Change the record.

[Olmate]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

British expats didn't falsify income claims. They provided documentary evidence to the embassy regarding their income and no, it wasn't easy to forge those documents. The British Embassy letter clearly stated to TI what documents they had seen and based their income verification on. No lies, no deception involved. You have had this explained, in detail, to you before.

 

Change the record.

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Yesterday at Phuket valid UK letter AND supporting evidence was rejected,

No lies involved here but still no extension?

[Spidey]

14 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Yesterday at Phuket valid UK letter AND supporting evidence was rejected,

No lies involved here but still no extension?

That's Phuket for you. Ever thought of moving to Pattaya? Lovely and sunny here.

[brokenbone]

6 minutes ago, Spidey said:

That's Phuket for you. Ever thought of moving to Pattaya? Lovely and sunny here.

valid embassy letter with supporting transfers has also

been rejected in pattaya, thats why i wont ever go again in person, and will leave if/when body allow for travel

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, brokenbone said:

valid embassy letter with supporting transfers has also

been rejected in pattaya, thats why i wont ever go again in person, and will leave if/when body allow for travel

Which embassy?

[Spidey]

28 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Yesterday at Phuket valid UK letter AND supporting evidence was rejected,

No lies involved here but still no extension?

Reason given?

[brokenbone]

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

Which embassy?

european, this was long before the recent modifications

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, brokenbone said:

european, this was long before the recent modifications

I know of 2 British people who have gained visa extensions since January 1st. Embassy letter, no supporting evidence, no problem. Jontien Immigration consistently give the message out that all embassy letters will be accepted for 6 months post the date of issue.

[Pattaya46]

7 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

Valid embassy letter with supporting transfers has also been rejected in pattaya, //

You need to give more information on that.

Pattaya is very easy and friendly for people using an Embassy Letter to get a Retirement Extension.

This person must have been very "special" in some way ??

 

[Joe Mcseismic]

46 minutes ago, Spidey said:

British expats didn't falsify income claims. They provided documentary evidence to the embassy regarding their income and no, it wasn't easy to forge those documents. The British Embassy letter clearly stated to TI what documents they had seen and based their income verification on. No lies, no deception involved. You have had this explained, in detail, to you before.

 

Change the record.

And you have been repeatedly told that the embassy could not do what TI wanted them to do (the embassy's public explanation). If you don't want to believe it and start making up conspiracy theories, then maybe it should be you that "changes the record".

[sumrit]

29 minutes ago, Spidey said:

35 minutes ago, sumrit said:

Because many expats were falsifying income declarations, Thai Immigration again wanted the Embassies to confirm the income declared was accurate. That was not possible so for the Embassies to do so they would have been telling lies. This they were not prepared to do.

British expats didn't falsify income claims. They provided documentary evidence to the embassy regarding their income and no, it wasn't easy to forge those documents. The British Embassy letter clearly stated to TI what documents they had seen and based their income verification on. No lies, no deception involved. You have had this explained, in detail, to you before.

 

Change the record.

You are wrong! The BE  only stated what they were shown. That may not have been accurate.

 

For example, and this is 100% accurate. I know of one British National personally who didn't have enough pension each month, so three months before he needed the income letter he transferred £500.00 from one UK account to the second UK account then sent it back again two days later labelled as 'rent' (from a fictitious house rental) to show an extra monthly income he didn't actually have. With him showing three months bank statements the BE gave him a letter showing his pension and rent income totals which was more than enough to satisfy his income requirements. He just relied on nobody checking his rental claims.

 

Simple and easy to do but a fiddle and a lie. BE letters information could easily be 'falsified'.

 

So please stop your inaccurate comments and Change the Record!!!!! 

[Olmate]

11 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Reason given?

Post 285 Phuket  thread in this forum

[jacko45k]

22 minutes ago, sumrit said:

Simple and easy to do but a fiddle and a lie. BE letters information could easily be 'falsified'.

Not as easily as a Stat Dec or affidavit. 

Anyhow the guy can now use income, and transfer the money back again same same.

[Tanoshi]

21 minutes ago, sumrit said:

You are wrong! The BE  only stated what they were shown. That may not have been accurate.

 

For example, and this is 100% accurate. I know of one British National personally who didn't have enough pension each month, so three months before he needed the income letter he transferred £500.00 from one UK account to the second UK account then sent it back again two days later labelled as 'rent' (from a fictitious house rental) to show an extra monthly income he didn't actually have. With him showing three months bank statements the BE gave him a letter showing his pension and rent income totals which was more than enough to satisfy his income requirements. He just relied on nobody checking his rental claims.

 

Simple and easy to do but a fiddle and a lie. BE letters information could easily be 'falsified'.

 

So please stop your inaccurate comments and Change the Record!!!!! 

I've also witnessed an annual pension statement letter, entered as x 12 on the application form.

A difference of some 16K a year in the stated income as opposed to the actual income.

Been doing the same thing for the last 17 years.

[Tanoshi]

5 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Not as easily as a Stat Dec or affidavit. 

Anyhow the guy can now use income, and transfer the money back again same same.

A lot of expats aren't IT literate.

They don't own a PC.

Don't have internet banking.

 

With the new requirements they've now been thrown into the 21st century, which is akin to living on Mars for them.

[sumrit]

8 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

33 minutes ago, sumrit said:

Simple and easy to do but a fiddle and a lie. BE letters information could easily be 'falsified'.

Not as easily as a Stat Dec or affidavit. 

Anyhow the guy can now use income, and transfer the money back again same same.

3

Which is exactly why Immigration wanted income letter information to be confirmed as accurate.

 

He can't transfer the money back round if he has to show official documentation as to the source of the income he's declaring.

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, sumrit said:

He can't transfer the money back round if he has to show official documentation as to the source of the income he's declaring.

Although this has been rumoured for some offices, it is not required as per the IO posted requirements.

[wayned]

7 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

A lot of expats aren't IT literate.

They don't own a PC.

Don't have internet banking.

 

With the new requirements they've now been thrown into the 21st century, which is akin to living on Mars for them.

Even if they are computer literate in the US there are only a few banks that will allow you to open an account with a foreign address.  I have two pensions, one from SSA that is deposited in BBL with no problems.  The other one is a private pension and they  refuse to deposit it if a foreign bank , even BBl and they have a US bank number.  So the money goes to a relatives account and is sent here periodically but not on a regular basis due to the relatives medical problems.  I receive a statement from both SSA and the private fund that says exactly what the benefits will be for the following year and have always out the total on the affidavit and have the backup statements but it is not all deposited in a Thai Bank each month.  If the baht falls below 29/$ then I will have a problem.

[sumrit]

6 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Although this has been rumoured for some offices, it is not required as per the IO posted requirements.

We will just have to wait and see then. If it has been 'rumoured at some offices' it's obviously an option Immigration have already thought of. If too many fiddles like this are even suspected I think they will implement this as a requirement.

[indepth]

2 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

If you were correct why only citizens of 4 out of 100 embassies affected?  Time to look at reality.  Case of embassy lazies. 

Dont ruin a good argument with facts, this is TV.