London Embassy accepting original docs for Non-Immigrant Type O- A (Long Stay)

[spambot]

15 months ago I applied for a Non-Immigrant Type O- A.

 

At that time I supplied Originals for bank statement, Criminal record and health check, but the application was rejected and I then needed to send copies that were notoised. 

 

The website indicates a change for what can be sent (but doesn't always mean its true).

 

Has anyone used Either of the following methods recently?.

1. ORIGINAL - Bank statement, Criminal record and health check .
2. COPIES of - Bank statement, Criminal record and health check (IF certified by a Notary Public officer or Solicitors).

 

[ubonjoe]

It has always been the originals attached to one of the application forms and a certified copy on the other application form.

Quote

• Two (2) sets of application forms and 2 recent photos.
• An additional application form for O-A

And then there is this now.

Quote

Note: 

- Please submit the originals of bank statement, criminal record check, and medical record, as well as one photocopy of each document. In case that an applicant could not submit the original documents, the Embassy will accept the photocopies which have been certified by a Notary Public officer or Solicitors.

Source: http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84508-Non-Immigrant-visas.html#7

[spambot]

Thanks UbonJoe,

Great reply.

 

So this is has been added to website then (Within last 15 months)? - last image in red text.

Hence if I send the originals this time - They will not be sent back?

 

[ubonjoe]

The part in red is relatively new.

I do not think they will return the originals if you send them.

You can send copies if they have been certified.

[lamyai3]

53 minutes ago, spambot said:

Hence if I send the originals this time - They will not be sent back?

You speak of "sending" the documents - I always understood that in London application and collection for the Non O/A (unlike the SETV) had to be done in person?

 

Interested in reading more first hand reports of what the embassy is now accepting, seems it's changed in the past year. Providing originals without need of certified copies from a solicitor would certainly be helpful. 

[spambot]

1 minute ago, lamyai3 said:

You speak of "sending" the documents - I always understood that in London application and collection for the Non O/A (unlike the SETV) had to be done in person?

 

Interested in reading more first hand reports of what the embassy is now accepting, seems it's changed in the past year. Providing originals without need of certified copies from a solicitor would certainly be helpful. 

Yup - Totally agree Lamyal3.

 

For me its possibly a game changer. Getting the health, criminal and financial were relatively straight forward. However it seemed impossible to get clarification on what constituted notorised. I decided to send them originals. The Embassy cashed the postal order and send back cash together with the passport and the original health, criminal, bank docs requesting they were notorised.

 

The problem I found was many solicitors said their legal credential would not be sufficient.

 

I  got the letter with returned passport 3 days before a sale of a property and 7 days before I was to fly. Low on options I  asked my licensed property conveyencer (not a solicitor) to use a stamp saying "original document was seen by law firm xxxx (at this address) on this date...."  

 

I got the O-A Visa back 5 days after posting.

 

[spambot]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

The part in red is relatively new.

I do not think they will return the originals if you send them.

You can send copies if they have been certified.

Thanks UbonJoe,

 

In my case they did, but I didn't want them back - I was just sending them because I thought it would reduce the need for a notorised copy. However they sent mine back so as to take a copy and then get them notorised. I'm not sure either if they do send the originals back, but was not important to me.

Edited February 24, 2019 by spambot

[patinchis]

I got a O-A in person in london last August...al I took was a hard copy of my bank statement, not photocopy, a criminal record check(I got by post) and the original signed doctors form....straightforward,next day collection


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[spambot]

2 minutes ago, patinchis said:

I got a O-A in person in london last August...al I took was a hard copy of my bank statement, not photocopy, a criminal record check(I got by post) and the original signed doctors form....straightforward,next day collection


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

Yup patinchis

 

Making the face to face application works.

 

But since I would be travelling from Yorkshire and probably needed two night in London I decided to post. But you are right the option for not using notorised certainly was to visit in person.

 

Hopefully now with originals permitted the notorised part has been eliminated.

[lamyai3]

2 hours ago, spambot said:

However it seemed impossible to get clarification on what constituted notorised.

Yes, I also ran into confusion a couple of years ago in a few solicitors offices, as to what was the Thai embassy appeared to want. In the process I got a lengthy explanation from an actual notary of what notarization in the UK actually meant, including explanations of his responsibilities under the Apostille Treaty of 1961! When I asked him why it was so expensive, and mentioned that the embassy's own website recommended Ashton's solicitors in London at £5 a copy, he made it very clear that in that case, the embassy didn't need notarised copies at all, just certified ones. I then got them certified by the regular solicitor at a tenth of the price of the notary, £2 per copy and this was indeed all the embassy wanted. 

[SheungWan]

A lawyer will ask you if you want the docs notarised or certified. If you say yes to notarisation, then they may tell you that they are not qualified to do that. If you say yes to certification, then they can do it. You provide the original doc, but the lawyer makes a copy and certifies that. 

[spambot]

18 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

Yes, I also ran into confusion a couple of years ago in a few solicitors offices, as to what was the Thai embassy appeared to want. In the process I got a lengthy explanation from an actual notary of what notarization in the UK actually meant, including explanations of his responsibilities under the Apostille Treaty of 1961! When I asked him why it was so expensive, and mentioned that the embassy's own website recommended Ashton's solicitors in London at £5 a copy, he made it very clear that in that case, the embassy didn't need notarised copies at all, just certified ones. I then got them certified by the regular solicitor at a tenth of the price of the notary, £2 per copy and this was indeed all the embassy wanted. 

 

3 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

A lawyer will ask you if you want the docs notarised or certified. If you say yes to notarisation, then they may tell you that they are not qualified to do that. If you say yes to certification, then they can do it. You provide the original doc, but the lawyer makes a copy and certifies that. 

Good info Guys.

 

I did contact Ashtons in London since I knew this would be a little more certain than guessing. I did not spot the difference at that time between Certified and Notorised

- So great insight with the info again guys.

 

This is the exact response I got from Ashtons:

 

"Thank you for your email regarding certification of documents for the Thai Embassy.

 

We are required to have sight of the original documents to be certified.

 

As this would entail either an inconvenient visit by you to our offices in London or you having to send to us by post your original documents and then having them sent back to you by post which would just serve to add to the cost it might be more prudent for you to have the documents certified by a local Firm of Solicitors."