Meeting with immigration about TM30 and the latest news about the petition

[JAS21]

13 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

Power-of-Attorney-Form for TM30.pdf 300.27 kB · 1 download

For the first registration it all depends on the requirements of your local office. Some appear to just want it done and require very little. I'm registered online now but when I originally went to my local office nearly a year ago, I was firstly told that the registered owner would have to attend but later they agreed to accept a signed copy of her tabien baan and ID card.

 

There is also a power of attorney form specific to TM30 that the official housemaster can sign and let you use - I've attached it to this post.

 

 

I found this Power of Attorney form the other day ... I now have it completed...what do I do with it? Today I was going to go Immigration and ask..can you give me a 'heads up' please

[ubonjoe]

44 minutes ago, JAS21 said:

I found this Power of Attorney form the other day ... I now have it completed...what do I do with it? Today I was going to go Immigration and ask..can you give me a 'heads up' please

A power of attorney from your landlord is not required at the majority of immigration offices to do the TM30 form submittal.

I can only recall Phuket immigration asking for one.

[KhaoYai]

9 hours ago, JAS21 said:

I found this Power of Attorney form the other day ... I now have it completed...what do I do with it? Today I was going to go Immigration and ask..can you give me a 'heads up' please

Take it with you when you make the first registration - it may be useful if you have any problems. However, going on recent reports, it seems that most offices just want TM30 doing and are not being as pedantic over the housemaster's being present etc. etc.

 

In general I have found that Thai authotities (not only immigration) do not quite understand what a power of attorney conveys. On a couple of occasions I've has a POA rejected. The PEA for example wouldn't accept a POA when I wanted to uprgade my electricity supply and like immigration, initially insisted on the 'housemaster' being present to sign the required forms.  Likewise they don't understand the powers bestowed upon the holder of a Usufruct agreement - I can build on the land I hold under usufruct but they want the housemaster present if I want an electricity supply connecting to that building!

 

The same goes for yellow tabien baan's - Pak Chong Amphur will not issue me with one unless the registered owner is physically present when I apply.

 

I could not believe the change in attitude at Korat Immigration - after initially giving me a hard time in trying to register TM30 they ended up completing the online version for me.  I guess its just something we have to accept and it will continue until each office is given clear written instructions on the process and told to stick to them.

 

The registered owner of my property lives in Surin - 260km away (3 - 3.5 hours) so its not exactly convenient for them to be present when I need something official doing.

Edited August 13, 2019 by KhaoYai

[Maestro]

On 8/12/2019 at 1:14 PM, schlemmi said:

Please give us a translation of the housemasterdefinition in the people registration act.

 

In the case of a rented residence and based on the definition of House Master in section 4 of the Immigration Act, 

“ House Master ” means any person who is the chief possessor of the residence in the capacity of tenant.

 

Tenant = chief possessor = House Master

 

Let us please stop this bickering between you and other posters about the definition of the house master or other persons (owner, possessor) mentioned in section 38 of the Immigration Act as being responsible for notifying the arrival of a foreigner to immigration.

[Max69xl]

10 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

A power of attorney from your landlord is not required at the majority of immigration offices to do the TM30 form submittal.

I can only recall Phuket immigration asking for one.

I have submitted the TM30 myself twice without anything from the landlord. This was at Chonburi Immigration. 

[lamyai3]

11 hours ago, Maestro said:

In the case of a rented residence and based on the definition of House Master in section 4 of the Immigration Act, 

“ House Master ” means any person who is the chief possessor of the residence in the capacity of tenant.

 

Tenant = chief possessor = House Master

 

Let us please stop this bickering between you and other posters about the definition of the house master or other persons (owner, possessor) mentioned in section 38 of the Immigration Act as being responsible for notifying the arrival of a foreigner to immigration.

I was googling to see if I could find if this is a Thai specific thing, or whether the laws have parity with those from the West. The best explanation I found was in this article on Zimbabwean law, which sounds quite similar in the distinction made between ownership and possession. If immigration continue to stubbornly insist on TM30s for all travel, but manage to create a user friendly and reliable app and a more reasonable timeframe for reporting, this is at least easier for people to comply with than hassling the landlord each time you return. I'd be curious if any legal minds on the forum know whether this is common legal practice in law in the major Western countries.

 

"Although the terms “ownership” and “possession” may be closely related, they are not synonyms. They, however, both relate to property, be it movable or immovable, tangible or intangible.
To start with, ownership is just that, ownership. On the other hand, possession is the state of being in actual physical control of something.
Often, ownership and possession are crocheted together where the owner and the possessor are one and the same.
It is common cause that a thing can be owned by one person and yet be possessed by another.
A good example is what happens in a lease agreement. The property is owned by the landlord but is possessed by the tenant. If you send your car to the mechanic for service, the mechanic becomes the possessor but you remain the owner."

https://www.sundaymail.co.zw/property-ownership-possession-and-the-law

[wobalt]

I was googling to see if I could find if this is a Thai specific thing, or whether the laws have parity with those from the West. The best explanation I found was in this article on Zimbabwean law, which sounds quite similar in the distinction made between ownership and possession. If immigration continue to stubbornly insist on TM30s for all travel, but manage to create a user friendly and reliable app and a more reasonable timeframe for reporting, this is at least easier for people to comply with than hassling the landlord each time you return. I'd be curious if any legal minds on the forum know whether this is common legal practice in law in the major Western countries.
 
"Although the terms “ownership” and “possession” may be closely related, they are not synonyms. They, however, both relate to property, be it movable or immovable, tangible or intangible.
To start with, ownership is just that, ownership. On the other hand, possession is the state of being in actual physical control of something.
Often, ownership and possession are crocheted together where the owner and the possessor are one and the same.
It is common cause that a thing can be owned by one person and yet be possessed by another.
A good example is what happens in a lease agreement. The property is owned by the landlord but is possessed by the tenant. If you send your car to the mechanic for service, the mechanic becomes the possessor but you remain the owner."
https://www.sundaymail.co.zw/property-ownership-possession-and-the-law

What if you don’t have a lease agreement because you are married to the Landlord and you wife don’t know you are stay overnight in her property?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[lamyai3]

2 minutes ago, wobalt said:

What if you don’t have a lease agreement because you are married to the Landlord and you wife don’t know you are stay overnight in her property?

I can't imagine why anyone would ever bother filing in such circumstances. This would be a bit like reporting to the police station and voluntarily turning yourself in for speeding, when you hadn't been caught doing it. 

[wobalt]

I can't imagine why anyone would ever bother filing in such circumstances. This would be a bit like reporting to the police station and voluntarily turning yourself in for speeding, when you hadn't been caught doing it. 

Agree , especially when you leave early in the morning to BKK where you possibly stay in a hotel,which reports you.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[lamyai3]

12 minutes ago, wobalt said:

Agree , especially when you leave early in the morning to BKK where you possibly stay in a hotel,which reports you.

Right, the TM30 deals with arriving in a place but not departing - one of it's glaring loopholes. Any would-be terrorist could show up in the country and check in to a Bangkok hotel for a night or two, before setting out to an unregistered safe house where they can assemble bombs all day long. If this sounds like an absurd exanple, it's the one used by immigration themselves in their video explaining the need for the TM30 reports. 

Edited August 13, 2019 by lamyai3

[Maestro]

19 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

...I'd be curious if any legal minds on the forum know whether this is common legal practice in law in the major Western countries...

 

What is commonly legal practice in any other country is completely irrelevant to this topic and any such information being posted would be off topic and subject to removal by a moderator.

[Mikisteel]

The TM30 is pure rubbish. It is not linking reports it is simply registering them. There is no link investigation process unless you are on police radar and they may use TM30 to track last known whereabouts. The only time you get caught is when you do not have one and you are applying for some kind of extension. Reporting back after a weekend in another province is pure rubbish and cannot be tracked. 

 

 

[ThomasThBKK]

On 8/13/2019 at 6:27 PM, Maestro said:

 

In the case of a rented residence and based on the definition of House Master in section 4 of the Immigration Act, 

“ House Master ” means any person who is the chief possessor of the residence in the capacity of tenant.

 

Tenant = chief possessor = House Master

 

Let us please stop this bickering between you and other posters about the definition of the house master or other persons (owner, possessor) mentioned in section 38 of the Immigration Act as being responsible for notifying the arrival of a foreigner to immigration.

House master is the one registered as house master in the tabiaan ban and no one else.

 

 

That's why the airport system doesn't kick anyone out of the tm30 register if he's registered in the housebook.

 

There are many cross references to this in thai law.

[roamer]

Owner = เจ้าของ

Possessor= เจ้าของ

 

Note the similarity ? Thai language has no simple way of distinguishing between the two. It follows that an English translation will also not make any distinction.

Edited August 14, 2019 by roamer

[Fex Bluse]

On 8/8/2019 at 3:08 PM, pookiki said:

I applaud your efforts.  However, I think Thai Immigration Official must clearly recognize that there are different categories addressed in your conversation.

 

One example is visitors arriving in Phuket, marrying a Thai, and then disappearing. I fail to see how these kind of nefarious individuals fit it with long-term expats.  These people are simply ignoring the law and are overstayers.

 

Second example - migrant workers. I seriously doubt the Thai Immigration is maintaining a TM30 database for migrant workers in the same way as for other long-term expats or persons who are on work permits who aren't migrant workers.  The vast majority of properly documented migrant workers use agents for most, if not all, of their interactions with Thai Immigration.  For this group of people, the TM30 is simply not an issue.

 

Third example - leaving the country for long-term expats and foreigners on work permits who aren't migrant workers. If the information on the TM6 and on the subsequent TM47 was the same as previously reported, then there should be no need to file another TM30.  The TM30 should only be required if there is a permanent change in address.

 

Fourth example - internal travel within Thailand.  If a Thai hotel reports a TM30 for a long-term expat or a foreigner on a work permit, it should be disregarded in its entirety as it does not note a permanent change in address.

 

There is a difference between 'good guys' and 'bad guys' and its really quite easy to differentiate!

Correct. The problem is that to Thais, we are ALL just foreigners. No other designation matters. They do not care that long-term foreigners, like those on Non Immigrant Visas, have already been vetted. They only care that we are foreigners.

 

The hilarious part of this whole thing is that the Thais themselves habitually break laws and so many get involved in crimes. Yet, they are not being tracked as vigorously.

[Martyp]

5 hours ago, Mikisteel said:

The TM30 is pure rubbish. It is not linking reports it is simply registering them. There is no link investigation process unless you are on police radar and they may use TM30 to track last known whereabouts. The only time you get caught is when you do not have one and you are applying for some kind of extension. Reporting back after a weekend in another province is pure rubbish and cannot be tracked. 

 

 

In addition the fines are not cumulative. You can not report several times and the fine is the same. However you better file a TM30 just before you apply for a 1 year extension.

[KhaoYai]

Pages and pages of members arguing who should file a TM30 report, who is the housemaster, who is the possessor......bla bla bla. Why?

 

Just make the report yourself - its not your landlord/owner/housemaster/possessor who's going to get hassle when you do your renewal/90 day report/extension/any other visit to immigration, its you. If you want to make sure its done, do it yourself.

 

It used to be that they would only let the housemaster (etc.) or hotels register (+anyone else using the power of attorney form) you but that was before the recent enforcement. Now its seems they simply want the report doing.

 

You may have to do the first report manually because it appears online registration is taking a while but once you have that, its very very easy.

 

Tip - unless its changed since my last visit, no receipt (via email) is sent with online reporting so just in case of a problem, take a screenshot of the registration page once you've completed it and save it. Better safe than sorry.

Edited August 15, 2019 by KhaoYai

[lamyai3]

7 hours ago, Maestro said:

What is commonly legal practice in any other country is completely irrelevant to this topic and any such information being posted would be off topic and subject to removal by a moderator.

Maybe so, but my reason for querying it was along the lines of "Did they just make this up by themselves?" What's wrong with someone chipping in here and saying, yes actually this is a normal legal distinction in many other countries? I stand by my question - is the owner-possessor dichotomy some unique legal invention of Thailand, or is it commonplace in other legal systems?

 

 

[jackdd]

7 hours ago, roamer said:

Owner = เจ้าของ

Possessor= เจ้าของ

 

Note the similarity ? Thai language has no simple way of distinguishing between the two. It follows that an English translation will also not make any distinction.

Did you even have a look at the law or the TM30 form?

They use these words, so the english translation is about correct:

เจ้าบ้าน = housemaster

เจ้าของ = owner

ผู้ครอบครองเคหสถาน = possessor

and in the law they also define:

“เจ้าบ้าน” หมายความว่า ผู้ซึ่งเป็นหัวหน้าครอบครองบ้าน ในฐานะเป็นเจ้าของผู้เช่า หรือในฐานะอื่นใด ตามกฎหมายว่าด้วยการทะเบียนราษฎร

Which (besides other things) defines that housemaster can mean tenant

[Max69xl]

6 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Currently i'm not teaching an IO, but the people here who rent a house / condo and say the owner has to do the report, and then maybe even complain if they get fined for not having done a TM30.

When we are talking about a house or condo, the tenant and the owner are both obligated by law to submit a TM30 if a foreigner is staying there. (If one of them does the TM30 that's enough, but in case none of them does the TM30, both can be fined)

It's the "tenant or the owner", not both. I have never heard of both getting fined for not doing the TM30. 

[schlemmi]

On 8/14/2019 at 5:54 AM, lamyai3 said:

I was googling to see if I could find if this is a Thai specific thing, or whether the laws have parity with those from the West. The best explanation I found was in this article on Zimbabwean law, which sounds quite similar in the distinction made between ownership and possession. If immigration continue to stubbornly insist on TM30s for all travel, but manage to create a user friendly and reliable app and a more reasonable timeframe for reporting, this is at least easier for people to comply with than hassling the landlord each time you return. I'd be curious if any legal minds on the forum know whether this is common legal practice in law in the major Western countries.

 

"Although the terms “ownership” and “possession” may be closely related, they are not synonyms. They, however, both relate to property, be it movable or immovable, tangible or intangible.
To start with, ownership is just that, ownership. On the other hand, possession is the state of being in actual physical control of something.
Often, ownership and possession are crocheted together where the owner and the possessor are one and the same.
It is common cause that a thing can be owned by one person and yet be possessed by another.
A good example is what happens in a lease agreement. The property is owned by the landlord but is possessed by the tenant. If you send your car to the mechanic for service, the mechanic becomes the possessor but you remain the owner."

https://www.sundaymail.co.zw/property-ownership-possession-and-the-law

In german law ther is a difference between ownership and possessorship.

In German the owner is the "Eigemtuemer" and is the person with the, lets say full rights on something. No matter of mobiel or immobiel. 

 

The possessor is the "Besitzer" and is the person actually can access and use a thing.

 

Possessor and owner may be the same person or not. If the posessor is not the owner than he has restricted rights are granted by the owner.

 

In case of a rented house, the tenand is only the posessor and not the owner. Except in the case of a selfdeal when the owner makes a selfcontract and rents his own property.

 

If the owner lives in his own house them he is the posessor too.

Edited August 15, 2019 by schlemmi
typo

[schlemmi]

12 hours ago, roamer said:

Owner = เจ้าของ

Possessor= เจ้าของ

 

Note the similarity ? Thai language has no simple way of distinguishing between the two. It follows that an English translation will also not make any distinction.

There is another term in the thai law to point to the person who is what we understand as owner. Translated 1:1 (i not use the thai letters to write it except i get permission to do) "Person who has ownerright in a good" 

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by schlemmi
typo

[schlemmi]

Here the definitions "owner" and "posessor" taken from a Thai dictionary that is written in Thai. I translated to english as good as possible, but i know my english is bad. Unfortunately it was not possible to avoid the use use a few thai words:

 

ครอบครอง KrobKrong: In the sense of the law it is: To have rights, maybe limited rights, on something (movable or not movable) because it is in your access because its your own thing, or you got it from another person. 

This matches what we would say "to posess something".

 

เจ้าของ DjiauKong: Is the person with the right as owner. That means he can posess it, use it, make profit with or from it and give it to others. 

So far this matches what we would name "the owner".

 

If we are talking about "เจ้าของ DjiauKong" we point to the owner with the full set of rights. If we talk about "ผู้ ครอบครอง Poo KrobKrong" than we are pointing to the possessor.

 

The posessor and the owner could be the same person.

 

It could be, the owner is not allowed to posess something where he has ownership. E.g. Weapons, explosives, drugs, chemicals, ... Here he could be the owner but not the posessor.  But as owner he could make profit with it. Only he can not posess it because he has no licence to have this goods in his own access.

 

The ownership of a house is not registered in the TabienBaan. 

 

In the case you need to bring evidence for your ownership, you have to use a contract that gives you the ownership. Or a "Testament, last will" of the person who transfered the ownership to you. Or other evidence. 

 

For the posessorship you could use a lease contract by example. 
Every person is living in a house has possesorship because they all have access to this house, maybe with different rights. For this reason there is the term "chief possesor" to point out the person who is dedicated to do the report.

The part of article 38 of the immigration act, where the words "owner" and "posessor" are used, is not related to the first part "the housemaster". It is missleading because they use the words "the owner or posessor of the residence". That leads to the miss-understanding they want to refere to the owner or posessor of a normal registered house or condo where we expats normally live in. 

This is not correct. It should be better  "The owner or posessor of a dwellingplace". This would match the original Thai version much better. This is a second and different  group of places where people could live and a different group of persons to have to report. This group does not mean our normal houses and condos. Here we have livingplaces without any house registration and there is no houseregistration number at the district office.

Due to this, there is no TabienBaan and the whole "people registration act" does not apply. If this act does not apply, then the "Housemaster" defininition in this act does not apply too. This would be the reason to bring this second group into article 38 of the immigration act.

 

Edited August 15, 2019 by schlemmi
some small changes.

[lamyai3]

On 8/13/2019 at 6:27 PM, Maestro said:

In the case of a rented residence and based on the definition of House Master in section 4 of the Immigration Act, 

“ House Master ” means any person who is the chief possessor of the residence in the capacity of tenant.

 

Tenant = chief possessor = House Master

 

Let us please stop this bickering between you and other posters about the definition of the house master or other persons (owner, possessor) mentioned in section 38 of the Immigration Act as being responsible for notifying the arrival of a foreigner to immigration.

Is there a written phrase in the act you can highlight which shows in Thai that I as possessor can file as owner? I need something to convince my landlady, she's making problems about the TM30 issue. 

[tassieman]

5 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Is there a written phrase in the act you can highlight which shows in Thai that I as possessor can file as owner? I need something to convince my landlady, she's making problems about the TM30 issue. 

lol...even my missus is raising her eyebrows at the TM30 "issue"...gee and i thought I was worth more than just a bit of extra paperwork down at the local IO hahahaha....guess I better start walking that ATM again ???? TM

[Peterw42]

5 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Is there a written phrase in the act you can highlight which shows in Thai that I as possessor can file as owner? I need something to convince my landlady, she's making problems about the TM30 issue. 

 

From the immigration act

 

Section 4 “House Master” means any persons who is the chief possessor of a house , whether in the capacity of owner , tenant , or in any other capacity whatsoever , in accordance with the law on people act.

 

Section 38 : The house – master , the owner or the possessor of the residence , or the hotel manager where the alien , receiving permission to stay temporary in the Kingdom has stayed , must notify the competent official of the Immigration Office located in the same area with that hours , dwelling place or hotel, within 24 hours from the time of arrival of the alien concerned.

[ThomasThBKK]

16 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

 

From the immigration act

 

Section 4 “House Master” means any persons who is the chief possessor of a house , whether in the capacity of owner , tenant , or in any other capacity whatsoever , in accordance with the law on people act.

 

Section 38 : The house – master , the owner or the possessor of the residence , or the hotel manager where the alien , receiving permission to stay temporary in the Kingdom has stayed , must notify the competent official of the Immigration Office located in the same area with that hours , dwelling place or hotel, within 24 hours from the time of arrival of the alien concerned.

 

Did you read what Schlemmi wrote?

 

"Every person is living in a house has possesorship because they all have access to this house, maybe with different rights. For this reason there is the term "chief possesor" to point out the person who is dedicated to do the report"

 

 

Chief possesor is thereby the one listed as house master in the tabiaan baan and only that one should do the report as far as i understand all these weird interconnections.

[Peterw42]

8 minutes ago, ThomasThBKK said:

 

Did you read what Schlemmi wrote?

 

"Every person is living in a house has possesorship because they all have access to this house, maybe with different rights. For this reason there is the term "chief possesor" to point out the person who is dedicated to do the report"

 

 

Chief possesor is thereby the one listed as house master in the tabiaan baan and only that one should do the report as far as i understand all these weird interconnections.

A house master is only in a blue book if they live in the house, if they live elsewhere they are not the housemaster any more.

Last Time I rented a condo or stayed in an airbnb, it didnt come with a live in housemaster. for 90% of foreigners who stay not in a hotel, there is no housemaster in the book. They are the cheif possessor as the tenant.

Nowhere does it mention degrees of possessor.

Edited August 16, 2019 by Peterw42

[Martyp]

On 8/11/2019 at 9:27 AM, tassieman said:

Thanks MartyP... I am off to a BKK hotel tonight and will check if they complete a TM30...after that will do the IO thing I guess and register at my partner's address. We often travel to her farm in Chachoengsao province (as renovating the old house). Wondering if the local cop shop (Phanom Sarakam) can do the registration also! cheers, TM

 

I fail the see the fascination with the "House master" vs "possessor" etymology. This is easily resolved. Just ask the Immigration Officer that is about to deny your year long extension.

[lamyai3]

9 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Last Time I rented a condo or stayed in an airbnb, it didnt come with a live in housemaster. for 90% of foreigners who stay not in a hotel, there is no housemaster in the book. They are the cheif possessor as the tenant.

This is my situation too, condo with the landlord living elsewhere. She seems to want nothing to do with the TM30 situation at all - as possessor can I file on my own behalf with nothing more than my rental contract? And would this be possible through the app?