Regarding new Extensions $$$ regulations

[Joe Mcseismic]

2 minutes ago, jesimps said:

I used to submit my UK govt p60 and my state pension document to the British Embassy. Both genuine official documents. Where do you recommend they draw the line on accepting documents? Why should one official document be accepted over another ie passport? It's a govt document, stamped and signed the same as an official govt letter. If the world wanted verification of every single document it'd come to a grinding halt.

The four embassies agreet with you because they can't be arsed to argue with the Thais, the rest cared more about their passport holders.

Yes, where do you draw the line?

Thai immigration wanted true verification, the embassy's don't consider it their job, or, even doable.

Rather than draw a line, they completely rubbed it out.

People are just going to have to deal with it. Opinions are not going to change a thing.

[erymax]

22 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

Letter of Income from the Austrian Consulate Pattaya dated 28 January 2019 :

 

" We hereby confirm that Mr. LuckyLuke, Belgium citizen with Passport No BE123456, upon request of the above mentioned citizen and on basis of the documents shown to the Consulate, it is hereby certified that 

 

Mr. LuckyLuke receive a monthly pension of EUR 1234,56 equivalent of approximately

ThB 98765.

 

Kind regards,

S. J.

Honorary Vice Consul. "

 

Went the day after to Immigration Jomtien, when it was my turn, verifications of documents took ca. 5 minutes, no questions or additional documents were asked.

 

My next extension based on retirement is due 09.02.2020.

 

 

 

 

 

1235 euro is not equivalent 98765 baht, best exchange rate would give you max 49000 baht

 

[Joe Mcseismic]

1 minute ago, DPKANKAN said:

No they just washed their hands of doing a simple task for which they, the UK anyway, were the most expensive in BKK!! I emailed their consul and asked them if I get my legitimate papers notarized under oath then it takes away their responsibility.

No!!! All they did was reiterate they were not providing them anymore. A typical civil servant attitude.

You think true verification is simple?

I think YOU are simple.

[luckyluke]

4 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

and what about non-governmental agencies that give pensions. Or, how about stock accounts, bank accounts, stuffed mattresses? Does your embassy truly verify those, too?

Don't know, but according to my experience and what I hear, the Austrian Consulate in Pattaya seems to only accept documents issued by a national office of pension.

 

In Belgium for sure, and I believe in many European countries,  all pensions are paid by

"The National Office of Pensions".

 

[DPKANKAN]

3 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

You think true verification is simple?

I think YOU are simple.

Yes it is? Don't you know any barristers or notary publics!! Nah I thought not!! Or are YOU too simple!! 5555!!!

[Joe Mcseismic]

Just now, luckyluke said:

Don't know, but according to my experience and what I hear, the Austrian Consulate in Pattaya seems to only accept documents issued by a national office of pension.

 

In Belgium for sure, and I believe in many European countries,  all pensions are paid by

"The National Office of Pensions".

 

A government department checking other government department's paperwork is one thing, but, not everyone has income from a government source. I would bet that your embassy ONLY verifies government issued pensions. Not exactly very helpful for your citizens that are over 50 years old who are retired here, but, are too young for the government pension, eh?

[luckyluke]

3 minutes ago, erymax said:

1235 euro is not equivalent 98765 baht, best exchange rate would give you max 49000 baht

1234,56 & 98765 are not factual amounts, the numbers used should have give you a hint.

[Joe Mcseismic]

1 minute ago, DPKANKAN said:

Yes it is? Don't you know any barristers or notary publics!! Nah I thought not!! Or are YOU too simple!! 5555!!!

They don't count, Immigration want the embassy to do it. You're starting to verify (note that word) that you really are a simpleton.

[Olmate]

8 minutes ago, erymax said:

1235 euro is not equivalent 98765 baht, best exchange rate would give you max 49000 baht

 

123456 pick up sticks!

[xylophone]

1 hour ago, Psimbo said:

I concur- instead of speculating lets see what happens and wait for Merjin to give an update with clarification.

 

And clarification is what I need right now!!!!!

 

With respect gentleman, as regards letters from the embassies, it appears to be a done deal and all we can do is to deal with it and move on the best we can.

 

And I'm moving on to something which I need some info on (please) because I have been reading the squillions of posts on other threads about this whole "debacle/fiasco/change" (take your pick) but I am going to be selfish here because I need a couple of things confirmed, so I'm hoping that the knowledgeable folk on the Phuket Forum can help, especially Merijn if he is reading this...........

 

1). As regards all of these changes, I did read and see that they take place on March 1. However another couple of posts have suggested that one will need the requisite amount of funds in the bank starting January 1, that just gone by, so is March 1 still the implementation date and the date from whence my funds will actually be calculated.

 

2). Some posts have suggested that the funds need to be clearly marked as to be from overseas, whereas the letter posted on this thread basically suggests "evidence of adequate finance of more than 65,000 baht monthly" needs to be shown on one's bank statement. If that's the case then all well and good, otherwise many of these companies transferring funds from overseas who do it basically by using a Thai based bank will not show up as "international transfer". So will a total of 65,000 baht transferred into my Bangkok bank here be accepted irrespective from whence it came?

 

3). Following on from the previous paragraph.......my transfers from overseas to cover the 65,000 baht will consist of three separate transfers but adding up to that total amount and more. Is that sufficient?

 

If anyone can throw some light on this, it will be great, as I did post something like it in another thread but obviously it didn't resonate, or someone has stopped reading that thread, and not only that, March 1st is very quickly going to be upon us/me so some action is needed.

 

Thanks in anticipation.

 

Edited February 14, 2019 by xylophone

[luckyluke]

2 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Not exactly very helpful for your citizens that are over 50 years old who are retired here, but, are too young for the government pension, eh?

indeed, but being in Thailand for more than 19 years, of course not 100% sure, but I can tell that the gross of the Belgian expats here are pensioners.

 

We are happy that we are not among the 4 ones.

 

But of course anything here can change tomorrow.

 

[digger70]

54 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

Not getting the logic. If you are married then all your expenses are essentially halfed, you have 2 incomes/pensions/contibutions etc. Why would you need twice the money for half the expenses.

In theory 2 people renting a house, running a car, buying groceries are splitting the cost, not doubling the costs.

You are presuming anyone who marries a Thai is fully supporting them, not everyone pays a salary to a BG.

If you married cost go up , but ok you go with the thai Logic

[DPKANKAN]

1 minute ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

They don't count, Immigration want the embassy to do it. You're starting to verify (note that word) that you really are a simpleton.

Ah!! You must be a civil servant too!! Do I need to write slowly for you??

1) You get your papers notarized by Barrister or Notary Public. OK so far?

2) You send your papers already notarized by a Barrister or Notary public to the Embassy. Yes?

3) They have legitimate papers duly notarised, thus covering their <deleted> and issue affidavits suitably worded.

There. Simple enough for you now!!

 

[Joe Mcseismic]

5 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

Ah!! You must be a civil servant too!! Do I need to write slowly for you??

1) You get your papers notarized by Barrister or Notary Public. OK so far?

2) You send your papers already notarized by a Barrister or Notary public to the Embassy. Yes?

3) They have legitimate papers duly notarised, thus covering their <deleted> and issue affidavits suitably worded.

There. Simple enough for you now!!

 

A barrister, or, notary is just doing what the US embassy used to do. It is NOT independently verifying your claimed income. It is NOT contacting those organizations that you claim to be getting money from. It is just verifying who you are and what you claim.

Your village want's you back. Better hurry as there are plenty of others that can take your job.......

Edited February 14, 2019 by Joe Mcseismic

[phuketrichard]

19 minutes ago, HHTel said:

I'm sure what the OP posted is true regarding Phuket Immigration.  However, it'll never work like that.

 

You are granted an extension of stay based upon your activity in the previous year, never granted on what may or may not happen  in the future!!

When you renew your extension to stay,  you are stamped and approved to remain in the country for a further 12 months.  That cannot be revoked unless you commit a crime or something similar.

When you renew your permission to stay in 2020, conditions will be checked over the previous 12 months.  i.e. 800K in the bank after your previous extension, 800K in the bank prior to the current application and not less than 400K in between.  Failure to do so may result in your application being rejected.  

It should be noted that the IO ultimately has the discretion to grant or refuse your application regardless of stated rules.

 

Some IO's have great difficulty in understanding something that is quite simple and just like posters here, will invent all sorts of hurdles!!

 

That's how it'll work.  Anyone want to put a side bet on??

true and I hope that the way it turns out to be

BUT

if your on an extension (B) cause your working and lose your job, your extension ends

your on an extension cause your married, get divorced, lose your extension.

 

Only thing we know is nobody knows, BUT for those of us who have upcoming extensions after march 1st, (apirl, may, june) we have concerns what will and wont be accepted and wont have time to compile with new regulations and the thought we might not meet the new rules and have to leave thailand is very stressful.

[Bluetongue]

I don't know about British, American or Danish embassies. Senior staff at the Australian Embassy would not give a stuff about some old expat, they are in the middle of a juicy career at a plum posting. To complete the posting without having made a wave, having avoided responsibility for anything and having as little as possible contact with the unwashed Australian masses is the goal. All the while enjoying a tax free salary, luxury paid for accommodations, flextime and balancing work and life and other benefits thrown into their workplace agreements.

 

The plan is to then return to Canberra for a few more years to do the same thing but different in the mandarin scented halls before proceeding on another plum posting at an even higher grade. An offer to such a class of person of an option to opt out of a function they whilst not performing, have had some unpleasant responsibility for, is not going to be refused. Or even the possibility with a minimum of fuss to stop doing same ie wait for the Americans to stop it first.

[Spidey]

31 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Yes, where do you draw the line?

Thai immigration wanted true verification, 

 

Absolutely no evidence for this whatsoever, although good evidence to the contrary, which I have shown you.

[Joe Mcseismic]

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Absolutely no evidence for this whatsoever, although good evidence to the contrary, which I have shown you.

Here you go. From the British embassy, who I kinda think is more credible than you and your opinions.

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1061149-british-embassy-bangkok-to-stop-certification-of-income-letters/

Edited February 14, 2019 by Joe Mcseismic

[Spidey]

3 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Here you go. From the British embassy, who I kinda think is more credible than you and your opinions.

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1061149-british-embassy-bangkok-to-stop-certification-of-income-letters/

Far less credible actually. The British Embassy have lied and deceived constantly throughout this farrago.

 

Show me something that actually quotes the statement made to them by Thai Immigration.

 

As I've explained to you, many times. with evidence, the BE jumped on the bandwagon an ceased the letters for their own reasons. Then they put up a smokescreen to try to justify their actions. For anyone with half an ounce of common sense, the smokescreen didn't fool them.

[DPKANKAN]

19 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

A barrister, or, notary is just doing what the US embassy used to do. It is NOT independently verifying your claimed income. It is NOT contacting those organizations that you claim to be getting money from. It is just verifying who you are and what you claim.

Your village want's you back. Better hurry as there are plenty of others that can take your job.......

I can see you never did any legal work before you found your bar stool!!!! Never mind if you could find your way back to your village it would certainly be a triumphant return. Oh well bored with trying to educate people who never learn.... 

[Joe Mcseismic]

2 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Far less credible actually. The British Embassy have lied and deceived constantly throughout this farrago.

 

Show me something that actually quotes the statement made to them by Thai Immigration.

 

As I've explained to you, many times. with evidence, the BE jumped on the bandwagon an ceased the letters for their own reasons. Then they put up a smokescreen to try to justify their actions. For anyone with half an ounce of common sense, the smokescreen didn't fool them.

....and as I have constantly said, yours is just an opinion. Any hard evidence for your conspiracy theory?

[DPKANKAN]

1 minute ago, Spidey said:

Far less credible actually. The British Embassy have lied and deceived constantly throughout this farrago.

 

Show me something that actually quotes the statement made to them by Thai Immigration.

 

As I've explained to you, many times. with evidence, the BE jumped on the bandwagon an ceased the letters for their own reasons. Then they put up a smokescreen to try to justify their actions. For anyone with half an ounce of common sense, the smokescreen didn't fool them.

Absolutely correct!! As I have just tried to point out to another of our less clever TV  keyboard shufflers. People with education, brains and a mind set achieve things. These civil servants would not last 2 minutes in the real world!

[Joe Mcseismic]

3 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

I can see you never did any legal work before you found your bar stool!!!! Never mind if you could find your way back to your village it would certainly be a triumphant return. Oh well bored with trying to educate people who never learn.... 

Please point out what in my post is wrong? Do notaries and barristers contact the organizations to back up the persons claims?

Don't bother. I know they don't. So, what's the difference between them and the way the US embassy did it?

[DPKANKAN]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Far less credible actually. The British Embassy have lied and deceived constantly throughout this farrago.

 

Show me something that actually quotes the statement made to them by Thai Immigration.

 

As I've explained to you, many times. with evidence, the BE jumped on the bandwagon an ceased the letters for their own reasons. Then they put up a smokescreen to try to justify their actions. For anyone with half an ounce of common sense, the smokescreen didn't fool them.

Yes same one is having a go at you now!! 5555 ????????????????????????

[DPKANKAN]

1 minute ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Please point out what in my post is wrong? Do notaries and barristers contact the organizations to back up the persons claims?

Don't bother. I know they don't. So, what's the difference between them and the way the US embassy did it?

Yawn Yawn Yawn!! Come on you need to go at Spidey now!! 5555

[Spidey]

1 minute ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

....and as I have constantly said, yours is just an opinion. Any hard evidence for your conspiracy theory?

I've already given you the evidence.

 

The decision to cease the income letters was made at the behest of Foreign Office auditors, not a decision made by the British embassy Bangkok, at the same time as they ceased a number of other notary services. And at a time when they were making plans to move to a new much smaller embassy.

 

Every other embassy who carry out the same verification process as the British Embassy, have seen no need to cease the letters.

 

I have already outlined how some American citizens were treated by CM immigration between the May meeting and the cessation of income affidavits.

 

This is evidence, facts. Happy?

 

4 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

I can see you never did any legal work before you found your bar stool!!!! Never mind if you could find your way back to your village it would certainly be a triumphant return. Oh well bored with trying to educate people who never learn.... 

Ditto. You can't teach stupid.

[Suradit69]

2 hours ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

I believe that the four embassy's that stopped the letters did the right thing. Obviously, you would rather they were dishonest as long as it benefits you.

How were they, at least the US Embassy, being dishonest? The form they used made no claim that they did verify income. It was clearly a sworn affidavit that relied on information provided by the applicant. If Thai immigrations refused to accept that, then that would be on them, not the embassy.

 

If some applicants were being dishonest, immigrations could have, at their discretion, asked for some backup evidence. I always had documentary proof for what I claimed. So I benefited from the service and I was not making false claims, but I, along with a lot of other honest people, are being punished.

 

Some people lie when giving testimony in court. The courts know this but don't stop accepting sworn testimony. They punish those who lie.

 

 

[Joe Mcseismic]

42 minutes ago, DPKANKAN said:

Yawn Yawn Yawn!! Come on you need to go at Spidey now!! 5555

That's it? What a cop-out.

[Joe Mcseismic]

38 minutes ago, Spidey said:

I've already given you the evidence.

 

The decision to cease the income letters was made at the behest of Foreign Office auditors, not a decision made by the British embassy Bangkok, at the same time as they ceased a number of other notary services. And at a time when they were making plans to move to a new much smaller embassy.

 

Every other embassy who carry out the same verification process as the British Embassy, have seen no need to cease the letters.

 

I have already outlined how some American citizens were treated by CM immigration between the May meeting and the cessation of income affidavits.

 

This is evidence, facts. Happy?

 

Ditto. You can't teach stupid.

It was made by the foreign office. Decisions like this always are. So what if it was auditors? The reason it was done was as I have tried to explain to you.

Are you saying that the three embassies that followed the UK example did so for the exact same reasons as you postulate for the BE?

No, they did it for the same reason as I claim the BE did it. Think about that.

[xylophone]

HELP NEEDED PLEASE........A RE-POST OF MINE.

 

With respect gentleman, as regards letters from the embassies, it appears to be a done deal and all we can do is to deal with it and move on the best we can.

 

And I'm moving on to something which I need some info on (please) because I have been reading the squillions of posts on other threads about this whole "debacle/fiasco/change" (take your pick) but I am going to be selfish here because I need a couple of things confirmed, so I'm hoping that the knowledgeable folk on the Phuket Forum can help, especially Merijn if he is reading this...........

 

1). As regards all of these changes, I did read and see that they take place on March 1. However another couple of posts have suggested that one will need the requisite amount of funds in the bank starting January 1, that just gone by, so is March 1 still the implementation date and the date from whence my funds will actually be calculated.

 

2). Some posts have suggested that the funds need to be clearly marked as to be from overseas, whereas the letter posted on this thread basically suggests "evidence of adequate finance of more than 65,000 baht monthly" needs to be shown on one's bank statement. If that's the case then all well and good, otherwise many of these companies transferring funds from overseas who do it basically by using a Thai based bank will not show up as "international transfer". So will a total of 65,000 baht transferred into my Bangkok bank here be accepted irrespective from whence it came?

 

3). Following on from the previous paragraph.......my transfers from overseas to cover the 65,000 baht will consist of three separate transfers but adding up to that total amount and more. Is that sufficient?

 

If anyone can throw some light on this, it will be great, as I did post something like it in another thread but obviously it didn't resonate, or someone has stopped reading that thread, and not only that, March 1st is very quickly going to be upon us/me so some action is needed.

 

Thanks in anticipation.