Belgian Embassy letter rejected by CW Immigration

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, elviajero said:

You misunderstand the OP.

 

He wrote an affidavit that the Embassy then certified. That is no different to what was happening at the US and some other Embassies.

 

It has always been a worthless piece of paper. All the embassy do is witness the person signing the document.

Edited 53 minutes ago by elviajero

It is not a worthless piece of paper because the US Embassy  makes an applicant swear an Oath that if they lie- they can be prosecuted as a felon with a penalty  being prison.

 

I would agree that it is much better for each Embassy to simply ask for the backup evidence.  1.  An  award letter from the Government entity.  2.  A bank statement from a foreign bank showing the exact same amount being direct deposited into one;s bank account.  3.  How do you get your money into Thailand ?  Answer-  Via Thai ATMS using 4 Foreign Debit card and the last 4 digit of the credit cards is shown on my bank statement along with the exact location of the Thai ATM where it was disbursed- time and date.  I also have the ATM slips for further proof.

One might be able to fabricate the letters; doubtful the bank statement and no way will you be able to duplicate the ATM cards or the ATM slips.

 

When One provides the Embassy letter which show income- there is no requirement that this income be transferred each month into Thailand.   Since one has to maintain a residence; pay for food etc- at this point it is assumed that the applicant is getting their money into Thailand and it is certified by the letter that the income is correct. It is only 3 Embassies that have stopped the letters- the other  Embassies are providing them and Thai Imm has always had the presence to ask for the proof of income.  They asked me once years ago and I provided my award letters; American Bank statement and ATM cards. There was never a question as to how much I obtained from the Thai ATM.  The IO knew I had the required income level. The Amount declared on the Embassy letter matched to the cent the amount direct deposited into my US Bank Account

 

It should also be noted  that the 400K/800K method establishes nothing other than an amount in a Thai bank.  I can get the amount anywhere- even in Thailand and place it in the bank-season it and it is legal. Since I have that money in the bank- the IO assumes I use this as my local support for rent/living etc.

 

The easier thing for all  (applicants and Thai Imm) is to use the Embassy Letter; for the three offending Embassies to restore it-  have the applicant self certify the amount of income;; proved by award letters or bank statements and than signed under Oath.   Thai Immigration accepts the letter as they have in the past but randomly asks for some applicants to show the proof.  If there is a discrepancy- deny the extension and report back to the issuing Embassy there maybe a problem.  The very fact that there is a real possibility of being caught out if lying will stop the majority of it,  A single conviction by either the Thai Courts or the US FBI  would stop any fraud 

[ThaiBunny]

4 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

It is not a worthless piece of paper because the US Embassy  makes an applicant swear an Oath that if they lie- they can be prosecuted as a felon with a penalty  being prison.

How many times has that happened in Thailand?

[Thaidream]

2 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

How many times has that happened in Thailand?

I have no idea but there is an FBI office at the US Embassy Bangkok who could easily determine if fraud was evident and if so- they could recommend the Federal Prosecutor- move the case forward.  All Thai Imm has to do is  at random- every 50th applicant  or any number they choose- ask for award letters; military pay letters; pension letters; documentation proving these monies deposited into a bank- foreign or Thai; ATM cards.   If the amounts do not match simply refuse the  extension and refer the matter to the Embassy or the Thai Prosecutor.

 

 

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

I have no idea but there is an FBI office at the US Embassy Bangkok who could easily determine if fraud was evident and if so- they could recommend the Federal Prosecutor- move the case forward.

The answer is NEVER and the reason is that they regard the whole exercise as an utter waste of their time.

[Thaidream]

3 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

The answer is NEVER and the reason is that they regard the whole exercise as an utter waste of their time

Who is 'they' and how can you know no one was ever prosecuted.  The oath is the same some takes when testifying in court; testifying before a government official and  filling out a loan application.   The issue is moot- because the US/UK/AUS refuse to issue the letters but they could certainly work out an agreeable solution for themselves; the applicants and Thai Imm.  It's called negotiation.

If they wanted to not only assist their citizens but also their host country they would do it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dave98]

20 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I have no idea but there is an FBI office at the US Embassy Bangkok who could easily determine if fraud was evident and if so- they could recommend the Federal Prosecutor- move the case forward.  

 

 

Never going to happen.  It would not be easy to determine if any fraud would be evident because as a US citizen you are not required to cooperate with them during any investigation.  This would mean that the FBI would need to first determine if their was fraud in the first place and then actually prove it, which would tie up lots of resources.  They are not going to chase a few guys for fudging their income affidavit because they want to live in Thailand on the cheap and chase Thai hookers.

[madmen]

IMO its illegal not to issue an affidavit or Stat dec based on its content. Thats the whole point of having it in the first place

[elviajero]

2 hours ago, Spidey said:

On the US embassy affidavits, wasn't the amount that the citizen declared to be his income stated on the affidavit? If so, this appears to be the difference.

I don’t think it matters what it says. Immigration want evidence of the income, and the embassy are not providing certification that they’ve had any evidence.

[Spidey]

Just now, elviajero said:

I don’t think it matters what it says. Immigration want evidence of the income, and the embassy are not providing certification that they’ve had any evidence.

It may make the difference to them honouring stat docs for the statutory 6 month period.

[elviajero]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

It is not a worthless piece of paper because the US Embassy  makes an applicant swear an Oath that if they lie- they can be prosecuted as a felon with a penalty  being prison.

If is completely worthless as it doesn’t provide the evidence immigration rules dictate.

[Dave98]

2 hours ago, davhend25 said:

 

I am legally married to a Thai national and have already filed the I-130 spousal visa application for her to come to the U.S.  So I need 4 to 6 months more to stay here in Thailand until her visa is issued. If this extension should fail, what are my options for staying that 4 to 6 month time period??

 

Thanks in advance for any helpful replies.

 

DH

 

 

 

 

 

1.-  Use an agent.

2.-  Get a double entry tourist visa.

3-  Get a 1 year visa (not sure what it is called) based on marriage.  Will need to leave every 90 days, but no income proof requirement.  

 

You a smart to get out of Thailand.  I know I was!

[SEtonal]

2 hours ago, fvw53 said:

 

That is a bank statement showing 12 monthly transfers.  The transfers happen to be over 100,000 baht each.  The smallest transfer was about 132,000 and the largest was about 145,000. 

[arithai12]

3 hours ago, elviajero said:

In immigrations world they expect a retiree (income based) to have to have a regular monthly pension and that the pension is transferred to Thailand — even though they haven’t (usually) asked for proof in the past.

 

The only thing that immigration expects is that you transfer 65k every month (for income based as you say).

The "regular monthly pension" and "pension is transferred to Thailand" is not true.

[JackThompson]

3 hours ago, JohnnyBD said:

Just FYI, you don't need your own made-up income affidavit. You only need what most need who are using the income method and that is proof of 12 monthly transfers into a Thai bank account using an updated bank book & an official bank letter. In 2019, you should he able to renew with less than 12 transfers since the rules just went into effect in December. If you don't have the 65k in monthly transfers, you may want to check with your embassy to see if they can issue an official embassy affidavit if they still do them. They may want proof of your income.

19 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

The only thing that immigration expects is that you transfer 65k every month (for income based as you say).

The "regular monthly pension" and "pension is transferred to Thailand" is not true.

Some offices are now insisting you show proof your transfers come from a "government pension" only - some marriage only, other(s) retirement also.

 

Some who can still get embassy letters brought the transfer-proof instead, and IOs told them, "No, your country has embassy letters, you must get one."   The new rules state the "proof of transfers" only applies to those who cannot get the letters - but, of course, the IOs don't have to follow any rules, unless they feel like it.

 

They love to play "ping pong" games with folks who apply honestly and in-person.  It's about finding a way not to process a "retail price" application - not finding out whether anything is "genuine" or not.

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, davhend25 said:

I have the U.S. Embassy affidavit of income (income letter) dated December 21, 2018, along with my U.S. bank statements clearly showing my pension and Social Security monthly direct deposits into my U.S. bank account. I also have individual monthly stubs from my two pensions and an official letter from U.S. Social Security, stating my monthly net benefit for 2019. The total adds up to about 90k baht, monthly.  This is what I have successfully used the last 2 years to renew my extensions based on "Retirement."

 

I have never transferred money into a Thai bank, as I have never had a Thai bank account. I thought the embassy letter I got in late December would give me one more year under the old policy.

 

I will be applying for my annual extension based on "Retirement" next week, in Chanthaburi, my home province.

 

Should I pack my bags, or do I have a chance at obtaining this extension??

I would say you have good odds with that.  But it all depends on how the IO "feels" about doing the extension.  They don't have to follow any rules - can deny because they got a hang-nail that morning (or not enough "agent" business this week).  This is what you get when you have a government-agency whose personnel are not held to any sort of standard, and where corruption is rampant and nothing even attempted to strike at the roots of it.

 

2 hours ago, davhend25 said:

I am legally married to a Thai national and have already filed the I-130 spousal visa application for her to come to the U.S.  So I need 4 to 6 months more to stay here in Thailand until her visa is issued. If this extension should fail, what are my options for staying that 4 to 6 month time period??

 

Thanks in advance for any helpful replies.

 

DH

Your "ace in the hole" is being married to a Thai.  Threatening to change to a marriage-based extension means extra work for them, so they might reconsider.  Still, they can use the same "show deposits into a Thai account," nonsense - to spite adequate proof you meet the rules - "having the income" not "transferring it," which is a New Rule which applies only to those not using an embassy income-affidavit (per those new rules). 

 

Worst case, if denied your retirement-based extension, go out for a Non-O Visa from a nearby consulate (Laos, Vietnam) based on marriage.  Season 400K in the bank in an account in your name for 2 months, and you can do your 1-year extension with that (but may not be able to touch that money for awhile).  Alternatively, xfer 40K Baht (or more) monthly for 3+ months, and apply using that.  Either way, you are going to need your own Thai bank account - at least for next-year's extension (no more USA affidavits). 

 

Alternatively, you can get a 1-year Multiple-Entry version of the Non-O Visa from the consulate abroad, then use that - but stuck with border bounces with optional 60-day extensions, since each entry with the Visa is only good for 90-days.  If you stick to the border bounces only, you can avoid dealing with immigration offices in-country entirely.  Your personal experience on your next visit for your annual-extension, will likely determine whether avoiding them entirely is worth the trouble.

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

It is not a worthless piece of paper because the US Embassy  makes an applicant swear an Oath that if they lie- they can be prosecuted as a felon with a penalty  being prison.

Yes, this is the core of common-law financial practices since forever.  Without this, notaries, etc can all be scrapped.  And it works precisely because you are prosecuted for fraudulent activity.   This is why they were always accepted before, and are still listed as Required (for those who can get them) in the "new rules."

 

Immigration don't really care, though - no reports of reporting fraudulent income declarations, to allow prosecution.  They are just pushing for a payoff as usual.  The "new rules" - convoluted  and unclear - will make that task even easier.

[NanLaew]

34 minutes ago, SEtonal said:

That is a bank statement showing 12 monthly transfers.  The transfers happen to be over 100,000 baht each.  The smallest transfer was about 132,000 and the largest was about 145,000. 

It's not like any Bangkok Bank account statement that I have seen before. The amounts are irrelevant inasmuch as they (over)qualify the applicant.

 

It looks like a letter for listing the specific 12 monthly qualifying deposits from overseas for immigration purposes. The reason selected is 'Other' and surprised to see the wording 'Monthly Pension Transfer' in English only. Does it state anywhere on that document that these 12 transactions have been remittances from overseas? I understand that was one of the new criteria that saw a whole lot of otherwise happy TransferWise customers get all bent out of shape. Maybe this letter is given to the immigration officer along with the full statement and/or bank book with the proper transaction codes as required?

 

Anyway, just because it may have satisfied one particular immigration officer at one particular immigration office on one particular day means bugger all in the land of arbitrary dispensation of judgement and making up the rules as they go along.

[elviajero]

30 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

The only thing that immigration expects is that you transfer 65k every month (for income based as you say).

The "regular monthly pension" and "pension is transferred to Thailand" is not true.

Rather it’s not what you want to be true.

 

Change “pension” to passive income if it helps, but the expectation is the same. The fact that they expect monthly transfers to Thailand is now proven by the additional way to prove income.

 

Most retirees in the world live from month to month on their monthly pension income. Thai immigration expect the same of those living in Thailand using the income method.

[mercman24]

i seen open corruption whilst doing my 90 day, the im officer even came outside, 3 guys *loiteriing* outside, got them to sign, gave them their passports and off they went, i chatted to a US guy he said he got a 15 month retirement ext. and an METV for 30,000 baht.   so bugger all this crap about 800,000 and 400,000 for ever, who spends 65,000 a month, when the UK pension is 27,000, these clowns are so out of touch.

Edited May 2, 2019 by mercman24

[davhend25]

26 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Worst case, if denied your retirement-based extension, go out for a Non-O Visa from a nearby consulate (Laos, Vietnam) based on marriage.  Season 400K in the bank in an account in your name for 2 months, and you can do your 1-year extension with that (but may not be able to touch that money for awhile).  Alternatively, xfer 40K Baht (or more) monthly for 3+ months, and apply using that.  Either way, you are going to need your own Thai bank account - at least for next-year's extension (no more USA affidavits). 

Thank you, JackThompson, for your kind response to my questions.

 

There was a thread here the past few days regarding non-o visa's based on marriage that indicated no "financials" required. Just your wife's signed tabien baan and copies of her signed Thai ID card. In HCMC they also want a letter from your wife asking for the visa. I believe Savankhet in Laos and Ho chi min city in Vietnam. And money, of course, but no seasoned money or transfers into a Thai bank account.  Am I confused??

Edited May 2, 2019 by davhend25
words in wrong order

[Leaver]

There seems to be some confusion around the word "pension." 

 

Typically, in the past, a pension is paid out by a government to its senior citizens, as it still is today, in many countries.

 

However, as more and more western countries tighten their financial criteria on senior citizens to qualify for a pension, more and more people will not be receiving a government pension in the future, and will be living off their savings and / or investments. 

 

Many people call the monthly / annual income from their own savings / investments a "pension" but this is a private income stream, not a government benefit.

 

As time goes by, less and less retirees from western countries will receive a government pension, thus, Thai Immigration's requirement the "embassy letters" relate only to government pensions will see most of these embassy letters not applicable to many retirees here.

 

In the future, I would not be surprised if immigration offices adopt a rule of not accept embassy letters from the rest of the countries still issuing them, regardless of the monthly income being a government pension, or income derived from investments, because that seems to be the way thing are going here.

Edited May 2, 2019 by Leaver

[NanLaew]

30 minutes ago, mercman24 said:

i seen open corruption whilst doing my 90 day, the im officer even came outside, 3 guys *loiteriing* outside, got them to sign, gave them their passports and off they went, i chatted to a US guy he said he got a 15 month retirement ext. and an METV for 30,000 baht.   so bugger all this crap about 800,000 and 400,000 for ever, who spends 65,000 a month, when the UK pension is 27,000, these clowns are so out of touch.

Why would anyone want "a 15 month retirement ext. and an METV" ?

 

Anyway, extensions are issued by Thai Immigration police and NOT by Thai embassies and visas are issued by Thai embassies and not Thai Immigration police.

[madmen]

1 hour ago, elviajero said:

If is completely worthless as it doesn’t provide the evidence immigration rules dictate.

Then its up to immigration to decline it. Has nothing to do with an Embassy since its crystal clear they are NOT endorsing it as proof of income in the first place.

After 20,000 posts some people still dont get what a stat dec or affidavit is.

[Leaver]

4 minutes ago, madmen said:

Then its up to immigration to decline it. Has nothing to do with an Embassy since its crystal clear they are NOT endorsing it as proof of income in the first place.

After 20,000 posts some people still dont get what a stat dec or affidavit is.

Correct, and this is why I think immigration will be declining all applications with embassy letters in the future, because the letters are issued on the "oath" of the applicant, and not any real financial checks, by anyone.

 

I predict that immigration will want to see the cold hard cash from these applicants as well, not just the applicants from the 4 embassies that have stopped issuing the letters.  

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, arithai12 said:

The only thing that immigration expects is that you transfer 65k every month (for income based as you say).

The "regular monthly pension" and "pension is transferred to Thailand" is not true.

The applicant is claiming to have an income of 65K min every month — which they must have. That income is expected to be pension type income — as in a monthly guaranteed passive income. You then have to provide evidence of that income.

 

Quote from the immigration police order;

“Evidence of income such as a retirement pension, interest or dividends;”

 

A retiree, using the income method, is expected to be receiving income in their home country, and that income is expected to be transferred to Thailand as it’s the money the applicant is claiming to live on.

 

I deliberately use the word “expected”. 

[JimGant]

6 hours ago, glegolo said:

did I understand this correctly..... did the op construct his very own affadavit and his belgian embassy did sign on off that piece of paper... yeah if that crap is true me myself would have denied it no question about that....

 

Why is not op going to his embassy and do what the rest of the freaking world is doing. present a piece of evidence of his income to the embassy and let them on their own letterhead issue the income-letter, strange people...

 

glegolo

Original silky bond paper letterhead makes no difference. From the US consulate website you download the fill-in-the-blanks PDF form, complete with a blue US Eagle at the top. Letterhead? Not exactly, at least by older standards. That you can type in the data at home (or were able to, in the old days), prior to arriving at the embassy for the signature and embossed seal, is efficient. Presumably, for Swedes, you arrive at the embassy, pick up a silky bond letterheaded piece of paper, then fill in by long-hand the data. Pretty sloppy looking to the IO; who, besides, is only interested in seeing the raised seal and signature -- screw the letterhead nonsense. Strange folks, those Swedes.

 

Interesting the Belgiques didn't follow the example of the US and Aussies; presumably they got the same lecture from Thai Immigration about verification of income letters. But, maybe they just said "scr-- it." If so, good on ya, mate.

[glegolo]

6 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Original silky bond paper letterhead makes no difference. From the US consulate website you download the fill-in-the-blanks PDF form, complete with a blue US Eagle at the top. Letterhead? Not exactly, at least by older standards. That you can type in the data at home (or were able to, in the old days), prior to arriving at the embassy for the signature and embossed seal, is efficient. Presumably, for Swedes, you arrive at the embassy, pick up a silky bond letterheaded piece of paper, then fill in by long-hand the data. Pretty sloppy looking to the IO; who, besides, is only interested in seeing the raised seal and signature -- screw the letterhead nonsense. Strange folks, those Swedes.

 

Interesting the Belgiques didn't follow the example of the US and Aussies; presumably they got the same lecture from Thai Immigration about verification of income letters. But, maybe they just said "scr-- it." If so, good on ya, mate.

jim grant you are out of depth now my friend. we swedes are much more modern and educated then most of you americans. so to correct you. we come to our embassy, we do not fill in a shit.. we hand over the govermental document stating previous income, give it to the personal, pay them 400 baht, and voila 10 minutes later we have in our hand a nice document, issued by our grandios and nice embassy... beat that if you can mr envy...

 

glegolo

[Thaidream]

3 hours ago, elviajero said:

If is completely worthless as it doesn’t provide the evidence immigration rules dictate.

It is a declaration of self certification made under Oath.  If Thai Immigration wanted to test its validity- all they have to do is ask for the proof- an award letter backed up by a bank statement showing the direct deposits in the same amount plus ATM cards/ATM slips.  It is not worthless because it puts the applicant on notice that if they lie- they have committed a felony and are subject to conviction.

 

If you take the position that many lied then someone, somewhere had to know it-either Thai Imm or the Embassies.  It is against the law to lie on the affadavit and certainly to a Thai Imm official-  Why wasn't an extension denied based upon fraud and someone prosecuted?  If

 

I agree that without the Embassy actually viewing the documents its validity is limited but the 3 offending Embassies could easily rectify any issue with Thai Immigration by viewing the documents and placing on the affidavit a statement that the applicant presented  documents from XXX Source which matched the amounts the applicant stated he received.

 

I suspect that the prior Commissioner asked for something that could not be provided and rather than the Embassies negotiating the situation and coming to an agreement- they decided they would stop the letters simply because they didn't want to even look at the documentation or use their staff to provide the income letter.  It is obvious to me the 3 English speaking Embassies worked in concert on this issue and  in essence said the hell with it, we can ease our workload- we don't have to listen to complaining citizens and in some cases reduce our staff. None of the Embassies cared about the future of their citizens ; the difficulty of some making a change to their economic situation or the effect on Thai immigration- they now have to work harder with the English speaking applicants and I doubt that puts them in a favorable mood. In essence a lose-lose for all.

 

The current police order makes little sense- transferring 65K proves nothing except someone has 65K- no proof of sustained stream of income.  The same with the money in the bank- No transfers needed- I can simply borrow the money and put it in a bank. The Embassy letter has more validity than the current police orders.

 

 

[sniggie]

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

The applicant is claiming to have an income of 65K min every month — which they must have. That income is expected to be pension type income — as in a monthly guaranteed passive income. You then have to provide evidence of that income.

 

Quote from the immigration police order;

“Evidence of income such as a retirement pension, interest or dividends;”

 

A retiree, using the income method, is expected to be receiving income in their home country, and that income is expected to be transferred to Thailand as it’s the money the applicant is claiming to live on.

 

I deliberately use the word “expected”. 

I think for accuracy it should read 'and 65k baht of that income is expected to be transferred to Thailand'. I'm certainly not transferring all of my pension payments into the Kingdom every month!

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, sniggie said:

I think for accuracy it should read 'and 65k baht of that income is expected to be transferred to Thailand'. I'm certainly not transferring all of my pension payments into the Kingdom every month!

The changes for those using income as their financial proof are even more profound than I think most realise. For instance,

Old system: show you have pretax income averaging at least 65,000 baht per month, from any source, that you can spend anywhere (Thailand or home country).

New system: show transfers every month of at least 65,000 baht into a Thai bank account. This applies even if you only stay, perhaps, 6-8 months of the year in Thailand. While there may be games that can be played to avoid this, effectively immigration is trying to enforce transfer of 65,000 in after tax income into Thailand. Any expenses you have outside Thailand (such as your home country arranged health insurance) will need to be funded separately. Any income you have in Thailand, such as rental income from a condo you own, cannot be used as part of your income proof.