Clarification sought on requirments when changing from "Retirement" Extn to a "Marriage" Visa

[gdhm]

Hi,

 

Yesterday my wife and I (who married in Thailand 13 years ago) went to our Immigration office with all our paperwork, photos and witness information and we were given the expected "... under consideration... come back on 22 August Stamp" in my Passport.

 

We fully understand the paperwork is sent to another division for following up and investigation, however today we were taken by surprize with an unexpected request.  An Imm. offcier phoned my wife this afternoon and told her he required several more photos of us in our house but this time with our two witnesses.  He went on to say, when the two witnesses are asked to go to the Imm. office for an interview they must bring the photos with them. 

 

We have already taken the new photos within two hours and my wife will get them printed tomorrow.

 

My questions for clarification are:

1) are the second set of photo requirments together with witnesses a common request? I ask because I do not recall reading anything about this need on ThaiVisa.

2) We knew and so do our witnesses that they may well be asked to visit Immigration and answer questions AND we expect a sudden home visit. However, are there other requirments we should/may expect before my Marriage Visa is approved because I am not aware of anything else?

 

Many Thanks

 

 

[elviajero]

12 minutes ago, gdhm said:

My questions for clarification are:

1) are the second set of photo requirments together with witnesses a common request? I ask because I do not recall reading anything about this need on ThaiVisa.

2) We knew and so do our witnesses that they may well be asked to visit Immigration and answer questions AND we expect a sudden home visit. However, are there other requirments we should/may expect before my Marriage Visa is approved because I am not aware of anything else?

Home visits and witnesses are often required for the first spouse extension.

 

If they’ve already accepted your application it’s unlikely they’ll want more than already requested, but you never know.

[ubonjoe]

1. Not unusual at some offices wanting photos with the witnesses.

2. Nothing more that I can think of. I suspect they are asking for photos and witnesses instead of doing the home visit.

They might want you to show the 400k baht is still in the bank at the end of 30 day if you used  that option.

[gdhm]

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

Home visits and witnesses are often required for the first spouse extension.

 

If they’ve already accepted your application it’s unlikely they’ll want more than already requested, but you never know.

Para 1 is also my understanding

 

With regard to 2nd para, my understanding is that the initial necessary documents I submitted have been accepted as adequate for my Imm. office to proceed in:

1) sending them to the appropiate Division which will decide/investigate etc. whether my application yesterday will be accepted BY THEM and they will authorize (or not) the granting of my Visa based on Marriage.

 

2) Placing a stamp in my Passport which says   "...Application of stay is under consideration of the Immigration Bureau Applicant must contact this office again in person on 22 Aug 2019"

 

My surprise was the asking of another a set of near identical photos as my first (which I expected) but to include the two witnesses.

 

I can understand wanting the witnesses in photos and in our house as it ties all of us togetrher in photos very nicely.  If this a quite common requirment I wonder why this format is not asked for as the prmiamry set of photos requirement as that would save time for us and Imm. and avoid us needing take 2 sets of photos at different times (and pay for them).

 

JMHO ????

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gdhm]

3 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

1. Not unusual at some offices wanting photos with the witnesses.

2. Nothing more that I can think of. I suspect they are asking for photos and witnesses instead of doing the home visit.

They might want you to show the 400k baht is still in the bank at the end of 30 day if you used  that option.

Thanks ubonjoe

With regard 1. I have commented in my last Para to elviajero if not unusual.

Thanks for the comment in 2 . My understanding is the money has to be there for 2 months after (or is 3? ????????) but as I never intend to touch it and it will remain there all year for many years (unless I become seriously ill and need to put medical bills even if it will stop future renewal of Visa.

 

Based on my wife's understanding, the officer we saw yesterday said to my wife that, as I am changing from a "Retirement" Extn. to a "Marriage" Visa for the first time that if my application is granted it will be from date of my visit yesterday and not from the date my Retirement Extension expires in Aug 2019 and before when I must return on the 22nd. (my wife speaks English but sometimes things get lost or slightly changed in interpretation)

 

To be honest I am unsure if I am technically and legally (Thai) still under my Retirement Visa as it still has several weeks to run before it is due to expire. The stamp in the passport does not say my existing "retirement continues to be valid until it either expires or is replaced with a Marriage Visa if granted.

I wanted to ask the officer, but he seemed to misunderstand the motive for my few questions, which were for clarity of understanding and ease of process - nothing more).

   

 

[ubonjoe]

9 hours ago, gdhm said:

My understanding is the money has to be there for 2 months after

There is no requirement to keep the 400k baht in the bank for any amount of time after you do the application. That rule is only for retirement extensions. Keeping it in the bank during the under consideration period is just a requirement at some division headquarters that do the approval.

9 hours ago, gdhm said:

Based on my wife's understanding, the officer we saw yesterday said to my wife that, as I am changing from a "Retirement" Extn. to a "Marriage" Visa for the first time that if my application is granted it will be from date of my visit yesterday and not from the date my Retirement Extension expires in Aug 2019 and before when I must return on the 22nd. (my wife speaks English but sometimes things get lost or slightly changed in interpretation)

 

Many offices will start the new extension from the date you apply when changing the reason for your extension since they consider it a  cancelation of your existing extension when you do it. Some even cancel the existing extension and do the under consideration stamp.

The under consideration stamp allows you to stay until your extension is approved. The report back date is just that it does not end the under consideration period.

[natway09]

I would not change to a marriage visa from a retirement visa unless you had to

Too many inquisitions

[jacko45k]

5 minutes ago, natway09 said:

I would not change to a marriage visa from a retirement visa unless you had to

Too many inquisitions

Some do it for the lesser monetary requirements.

[gdhm]

Thanks for the information Ubonjoe ???? my misunderstanding

 

2 hours ago, helloagain said:

Phone up immagration and ask them what they want derrrr. Then you give that. 

I'm not sure what point you are making helloagain.  My wife and I asked at our previous two 90 reports IN PERSON what was required and we followed "to the letter" what we were told. In fact I took more than we were told (in a separate folder) (just in case) because what we were told was slightly different from what some have reported in the past on this Forum.

 

10 days ago my wife phoned Imm. to ask when the new Marriage Visa would start from (The officer my wife spoke to, was aware I was changing from a Retirement Visa). My wife was told it would be from the date my Retirement Visa expires. To be honest I was not convinced this info was correct (based upon one or two posts I have read on this Forum) so we went to Imm. 2 weeks later than I had originally intended but still several weeks early (to allow time for any unexpected requirements). When we went yesterday we were told the info was incorrect, and my wife was asked who had told us ( my wife said she did not know - she did not wish to cause conflict between two long serving officers at the Office. I said to my wife had I known I would have gone 2 weeks later. The officer (who I think speaks more English than he lets on) muttered to my wife if you want to come later OK I'll cancel what I have done. My wife told me what he had said and I said to my wife I was of course not suggesting we come 2 weeks time as we are already here, I was merely saying to her if I had known the correct info I would have done that.  He told my wife do not phone to ask for info, come to Office and ask.

 

He went on to tell my wife I should have photocopies of each item on separate sheets of A4, as hard to read when more than one is put on one sheet. I admit I do not understand this. We have never ever been told this in the past AND whist I do have 4 pages of my passport on one A4 sheet of paper the quality is excellent, they are in order and most importantly are identical in size to the original passport pages, as were all items on other photocopies. Only 2 were slightly smaller than the original (Departure slip and TM 300 but both those have little printing on them and were very clear). We have over the years found this particular officer fussier than the others. Having said that, he was not fussy or bothered when i pointed out my second middle name was omitted from his PC printout of my TM7 which he wanted me to sign as being accurate. I feel a missing middle name on such an important document IS important as technically I am signing the info IS accurate.  He also seemed impatient when I wanted a couplr of seconds to read the info to check it was OK before I signed. I felt yesterday, that whatever I or my wife asked, said or did was to his satisfaction. 

In case some are wondering, my wife and I are always pleasant and not aggressive when we visit Imm. I always have all the correct documents and photocopies when I have applied for my Visas/Extns over the last 13 to 14 years.

 

I think helloagain it should be understood different Officers and/or different Offices, have different personalities and occasionally different extra requirements and it is not uncommon to be occasionally told different things on different occasions. Certainly that has happened to us on a few occasions over the years.

 

----------------

Anyway moving on ????

Having got our photos done yesterday with our two witnesses, my wife went to get the photos printed first thing this morning and it was lucky she did this so quickly, because as soon as she got home she got a call (10:25am) from the officer who asked for them. He told my wife she, me and the 2 witnesses should come to the Imm. Office today for a 11:00am interview (35mins after call). I was still in bed. My wife went to get the 2 witnesses and phoned the officer and told him it was going to be physically impossible for us to get there by 11:00am (even allowing for me not shaving or showering). She was told if she is late he will see the witnesses at 1:00pm and we will have to wait. My wife asked if I was needed and he said yes because he needs to make sure I am the same person in the photos.

 

We did well getting there around 11:15am.  When he saw I am not very well (very obese (160 Kg), High BP massive oedema on lower legs and I cannot walk very far (seldom leave home) He kindly told my wife I could wait in another room which has Air cons as he did not need to speak to me. He also told her that had he known I'm not very well he would not have asked me to come today.  My wife told him that she had mentioned it yesterday but maybe she had not said it clearly enough.

 

He interviewed our two witnesses within 10 mins (telling my wife he had fitted us in because he could see I am not that well, which was very kind of him). He told my wife he will now pass the paperwork over to the next group who are responsible for visiting us at home. My wife said he was very pleasant today (up to now he had sounded a little aggressive over the phone). He mentioned he wanted to deal with us quickly because Monday is a Holiday and he wants to clear his tasks.

 

I think we have done very well.  Contacted mid afternoon yesterday and and asked for photos of us in our house with our 2 witnesses. We did that within 2 hours, and got the photos printed first thing today. Phoned today at 10:25 am and asked to bring our witnesses to Imm. Office for an 11:00 AM interview. We got there only 15 mins late. We have done all this as requested of us in less than 1 day. We were of course  very lucky our 2 witnesses we chose were not workers and were both able and willing to help us immediately we asked on both days.

I'm not complaining, but am surprised with all the requirements and speed in which we are being processed and seemingly we and our witnesses are expected to be able to drop everything at almost a "drop of a hat". Never mind c'est la vie ????. Should be very easy form now on

 

My wife seems to think that before we are visited at home by Imm. they will phone first, whereas I am inclined to think they will just turn up. Does anybody know what is most likely. It's not an issue for us either way we as have noting to hide, but with me virtually always at home it means my wife is more likely to be out and about getting shopping or whatever.  If Imm. just turn up unannounced she may well not be at home and I speak Zero Thai (just cannot learn Thai)

 

Regards to all

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

21 hours ago, gdhm said:

Yesterday my wife and I (who married in Thailand 13 years ago) went to our Immigration office with all our paperwork, photos and witness information and we were given the expected "... under consideration... come back on 22 August Stamp" in my Passport.

 

What Immigration office was involved?

[gdhm]

1 hour ago, natway09 said:

I would not change to a marriage visa from a retirement visa unless you had to

Too many inquisitions

 

I had not choice natway09, when Imm told Embassies they must investigate Proof of Income documentation before producing the usual P.O.I letter.

My British Embassy was one of the 4 that said they could not do it. I only had 240,000 Baht in my savings account and I raced to get it to 400,000 Baht for a marriage Visa.  GBP has collapsed against the Baht partly due to strength of the Baht and mainly Brexit and it was impossible for me to get 800,000 Baht into my savings account by 2 months before I needed a new Extn. My pension monies are not transferred into a Thai account each month either,but withdrawn via Thai ATM's. Essentially I had Zero choice. I do not think I will be able to save another 400,000 Baht for around 2 years (and that depends on my health emergencies and Brexit). However future "Marriage" Extn.'s should be much easier as I believe photos, witnesses and home visits are not necessary for Extensions (only first application).I stand to be corrected if I am mistaken in believing that.

 

What amazes me is that Imm. believe that all the other Embassies who still produce P.O.I letters are now fully investigating Income sources each year.

Without any accurate knowledge, I find it hard to believe that many/most Embassies, when told they must investigate income sources in future are now doing so, maybe they nodded their heads in agreement and continued doing what they always have done. (I am happy for Expats who need P.O.I letters who are not from one of the 4 countries who ceased produced them). The Brit Embassy told Thai Imm. honestly, that it was a new Embassy function they cannot do. Additionally, I think all Brits here know the UK is saving money for Consular services and Passports as much as they can and IMHO the Brit Embassy in Thailand were probably only too happy to have a reason to remove the P.O.I  service.

[gdhm]

15 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

What Immigration office was involved?

Forgive me but I'd prefer not to say, because if my truthful accounts got back to my Imm. Office it may be problematic if they were unhappy.

Hope you and other's understand my caution.

[StevieAus]

21 minutes ago, gdhm said:

 

I had not choice natway09, when Imm told Embassies they must investigate Proof of Income documentation before producing the usual P.O.I letter.

My British Embassy was one of the 4 that said they could not do it. I only had 240,000 Baht in my savings account and I raced to get it to 400,000 Baht for a marriage Visa.  GBP has collapsed against the Baht partly due to strength of the Baht and mainly Brexit and it was impossible for me to get 800,000 Baht into my savings account by 2 months before I needed a new Extn. My pension monies are not transferred into a Thai account each month either,but withdrawn via Thai ATM's. Essentially I had Zero choice. I do not think I will be able to save another 400,000 Baht for around 2 years (and that depends on my health emergencies and Brexit). However future "Marriage" Extn.'s should be much easier as I believe photos, witnesses and home visits are not necessary for Extensions (only first application).I stand to be corrected if I am mistaken in believing that.

 

What amazes me is that Imm. believe that all the other Embassies who still produce P.O.I letters are now fully investigating Income sources each year.

Without any accurate knowledge, I find it hard to believe that many/most Embassies, when told they must investigate income sources in future are now doing so, maybe they nodded their heads in agreement and continued doing what they always have done. (I am happy for Expats who need P.O.I letters who are not from one of the 4 countries who ceased produced them). The Brit Embassy told Thai Imm. honestly, that it was a new Embassy function they cannot do. Additionally, I think all Brits here know the UK is saving money for Consular services and Passports as much as they can and IMHO the Brit Embassy in Thailand were probably only too happy to have a reason to remove the P.O.I  service.

I don’t wish to reopen the debate on proof of income letters provided by Embassies and your contention regarding the motives of the British Embassy may well be correct.

In relation to the Australian Embassy however I don’t think it is correct as they were only witnessing a signature on a Statutory Declaration in which the person states how much they were receiving this process for which they were well paid took less time than processing the payment,

This are still providing this service but not for income purposes.

The information I was provided with was that Thai Immigration requested that they confirm that the income stated was correct.

The Embassy advised so I was told that it was not their role and something they could not do.

In relation to the latter it is something I can accept as my pension is non government and the Embassy, whatever hurdles they might face in relation to verifying government pensions would have no hope of verifying mine.

[gdhm]

2 hours ago, StevieAus said:

I don’t wish to reopen the debate on proof of income letters provided by Embassies and your contention regarding the motives of the British Embassy may well be correct.

In relation to the Australian Embassy however I don’t think it is correct as they were only witnessing a signature on a Statutory Declaration in which the person states how much they were receiving this process for which they were well paid took less time than processing the payment,

This are still providing this service but not for income purposes.

The information I was provided with was that Thai Immigration requested that they confirm that the income stated was correct.

The Embassy advised so I was told that it was not their role and something they could not do.

In relation to the latter it is something I can accept as my pension is non government and the Embassy, whatever hurdles they might face in relation to verifying government pensions would have no hope of verifying mine.

 

Sorry all for being off topic. This will be my last comment on P.O.I. but (with the Mods permission) I would like to respond to StevieAus as he kindly posted to me.

 

Hi StevieAus ????

In the case of Brit Embassy they have always required an original Letter, bank statements or whatever that support the stated Income amount. 

In my case I submitted an annual Pension amount letter from my Private staff Pension Provider and the HMRC Pension letter advising me of my Frozen amount Pension when I started my UK state Pension.

 

I am not suggesting The Brit Embassy in Bangkok ceased P.O.I letters because they wanted to save money, but I am of the belief they were not unhappy to cease and save money and streamline their services rather than find a solution for us Brits.

 

I am sure the Brit Embassy recognizes an original HMRC Pension letter and the Private Pension Letter is from a large Insurance Company in UK. it would be quite easy to look up a phone number online and ask for confirmation.

HAVING SAID THAT, I accept that is not a function of the Brit Embassy to investigate Proof of Income whether easy or not.

What I am saying however is that apparently all but 3 or 4 Countries Embassies who were producing P/O/I letters have managed to find a solution to continue whereas Brit, US and Australia could not. Additionally, the Brit Embassy was the very first to announce cessation of the Proof of Income Letter.  It is unimportant how all, but 3 or 4, other Embassies managed to accommodate Thai Imm. requirements but it seems pretty clear the Brit Embassy chose to cease faster than everybody and could find no alternative solution, unlike many other Embassies.  Forgive me for thinking they were not unhappy to cease issuing P/O.I letters and help their citizens who relied upon them.

 

You suggested StevieAus that you accept your Embassy would have no hope of verifying your Non Govt pension and I have no reason or desire to doubt what you say. The fact however, still remains that all the other countries Embassies who produce P.O.I (except 3 or 4) must have some Expats with Non Govt pension or other non Govt. income and they have found a way to be able to continue to producing P.O.I letters. Let us be honest the US is the Worlds largest economy, UK is 5th and I believe Australia is 14th. These are rich countries and I cannot help thinking that had there been a will they would have found a way, like the other Embassies have managed to continue.

 

Sorry all for being off topic.

 

Regards

 

 

 

[brianthainess]

I applied on the 12/7 only took one witness no prob, imm came to my home and told us witness must attend (my friends wife) yes they took more photos of all 3 of us sitting on our bed ! and in the kitchen. no photos of our witness at our house were given at time of application as its not in the rules. But read # 8 and # 14 i.e. up to them.

[gdhm]

Thanks brianthainess

My Imm. Office does provide a similar type of requirements list but regretfully its only in Thai and I cannot speak, read or write Thai it was not much use to me. My wife does her best to interpret for me but I worry when this is necessary because thinks can get confused with interpretation.

 

I already have noticed differences of requirements.

In my case

1) I was told 4 photos needed (I ended up with 5).

2) My wife was not asked for a Birth Certificate, but then her date of birth is clearly shown on her Thai National ID card.

3) They wanted a TM30 (which I always have stapled in my passport (I had already assumed that would be required).

4) They wanted 2 handwritten T.M.7s (not one original with one signed photocopy). I actually asked if info could be typed in and T.M.7 signed but I was told that would not be acceptable.

 

Currently we are waiting for the expected visit to our house.  If without warning, I just hope my wife is home at the time, because I cannot deal with Imm. Police myself unless English is spoken. One thing they do not have to worry about is, whether we are in a genuine marriage (vs marriage of convenience etc.) because ours is not a new or recent marriage as we have been married over 13 years, and lived in our own home (current address) for over 11 years of those, and I have lived in Thailand constantly throughout except a 10 day period just over 13 years ago).