New Procedures At The Vps Today

[topfield]

This afternoon a Thai lady friend returned back from the VFS absolutely fuming.

[This was not a case where a refusal was likely or even possible as two years remained of a valid five year visit visa but as a new passport had been issued to the lady, it was time to get a fresh visa in the new passport, what with the huge fee increase due from 2 April ]

On arrival at the VPS, this lady related , the security guard at the door, who she immediately saw was untrained and uneducated and neither spoke read or understod English demanded the application and accompanying documents be handed over to him for him to check !

The lady refused saying it was not the job of a security guard to peruse applications and she was not prepared to hand over important private confidential documents to him.

A senior Indian officer of the Co was called and came over to the entrance door . He explained these were new regulations of theirs and that the lady had to comply if she wished to enter the VPS.

The guards were, he said, now instructed to go through all applications and reject any applicant whose documents were not complete or in order.

The above was related to me today by the lady herself and although I find it hard to believe , she would never lie.

Has any other applicant had this experience since the start of the week and if correct could it be right for untrained security guards to check through visa applications at the VPS ?

[the gent]

Topfield,

Given your raison d'etre have you not contacted the ECM at the Embassy to obtain an explanation?

The Be is the principal in the conduct of UKvac who are acting under contract on their behalf.To post such an inflammatory account without first seeking confirmation is only half the story and possibly unhelpful.

Perhaps in the course of your business you could take this forward?

Regards

[Naam]

VFS / VPS / ECM / Be / UKvac

seems to be a quite interesting story. that is... if one masters foreign languages

[guru]

I hope they've given some training to the security guard because back in January he said my Bangkok Bank Bankers Draft wasn't acceptable when clearly it was.

[topfield]

Topfield,

Given your raison d'etre have you not contacted the ECM at the Embassy to obtain an explanation?

The Be is the principal in the conduct of UKvac who are acting under contract on their behalf.To post such an inflammatory account without first seeking confirmation is only half the story and possibly unhelpful.

Perhaps in the course of your business you could take this forward?

Regards

GENT

1. The processing centre is not controlled by the Embassy , Get your facts straight.

2. The account has been confirmed by the lady in question . The security guards at the door ARE indeed perusing and checking applications. THAT IS A FACT.

2. If a posting is made with the aim of bringing to the attention of people a new and irregular practice at vfs (thailand ) there is no need for stupid hostile and ridiculous personal comments such as 'inflammatory account' and 'half the story'

[G. if you have nothing better to do than flame other members ...and anyone reading the posting including the moderators can see your posting for what it is , you should read the rules of this forum which state that flaming is a clear breach of the rules. Your flame is very similar , and in fact uses the same wording as another member who employed the same tactic. G ..its hard to believe you are not one and the same person as the other G. ]

[topfield]

VFS / VPS / ECM / Be / UKvac

seems to be a quite interesting story. that is... if one masters foreign languages

Yes , Dr Naam ,

The Embassy refers to them as the VAC...VISA APPLICATION CENTRE

Yet they call themselves VFS !

Indeed confusing !

[the scouser]

I see neither flaming nor hostility in the gent's post. In fact, his points are valid. Certainly, the visa application centre is under contract to the embassy, and if they're wrongly applying their remit, this is worthy of mention to the embassy visa section.

The application centre recently declined to take in the application of a client of mine, but a quick fax to the embassy and it was accepted the next day without question.

Scouse.

[Eff1n2ret]

The Scouser will perhaps remember how it worked at the Visa Section of another British Embassy, where there was a counter at the front door and a brief check on documents before they were let into the waiting room. This was for the laudable aim of ensuring that they had at least filled in the application form before they got to the counter inside, to enable the maximum number of proper applications to be processed and cut waiting times (at least inside the building). But the checkers were properly briefed and supervised locally-engaged staff, not security guards (who were also present).

It is reasonable for the VAC in BKK to employ a similar system, but ultimately the British Embassy has to take some responsibility for how their applicants are treated, and ensure that whoever scrutinises the applications, whether in the office or at the front door, is properly trained.

[topfield]

I see neither flaming nor hostility in the gent's post. In fact, his points are valid. Certainly, the visa application centre is under contract to the embassy, and if they're wrongly applying their remit, this is worthy of mention to the embassy visa section.

The application centre recently declined to take in the application of a client of mine, but a quick fax to the embassy and it was accepted the next day without question.

Scouse.

Seems then that Mr Grant the Entry Clearance Manager is wrong ! Only last week he himself told me that they do not 'control' the VAC . They have a contract with them which sets out the guidlines / framework under which they operate and within that framework they set their procedures .

They do have regular meetings, he said, to discuss issues which presumably includes the current issue of the role of the security guards.

The fact they declined to take an application as mentioned above illustrates clearly their powers and it took a fax to the Embassy before the application was accepted.

As for your comment that the posting was not hostile these are the facts.

A posting is made describing an incident at the VAC the previous day. A posting is then made in response saying that the facts are "inflamatory" and "half the story". Please explain why a sincere and truthful posting made in good faith should be questioned in this way when only facts were related and no opinion whatsoever given ?

Please explain the comment "given your raison d'etre" if it was not intended to villify the person posting .

Thank you

Edited March 28, 2007 by topfield

[topfield]

The Scouser will perhaps remember how it worked at the Visa Section of another British Embassy, where there was a counter at the front door and a brief check on documents before they were let into the waiting room. This was for the laudable aim of ensuring that they had at least filled in the application form before they got to the counter inside, to enable the maximum number of proper applications to be processed and cut waiting times (at least inside the building). But the checkers were properly briefed and supervised locally-engaged staff, not security guards (who were also present).

It is reasonable for the VAC in BKK to employ a similar system, but ultimately the British Embassy has to take some responsibility for how their applicants are treated, and ensure that whoever scrutinises the applications, whether in the office or at the front door, is properly trained.

Eff1n2ret..absolutely correct. I was there hundreds of times and the small office /booth at the entrance was indeed manned by Embassy officials who checked all the documents and papers submitted and made sure everything was in order.

This is in fact what the trained staff behind the counter at the VAC do before forwarding to the Embassy.

What we are refering to is the uniformed SECURITY GUARDS at the entrance. My friend ascertained these were not officials trained in visa work nor could they even speak English but were what they purported to be .....and their uniform showed them to be ......security guards plain and simple.

[the scouser]

The fact they declined to take an application as mentioned above illustrates clearly their powers and it took a fax to the Embassy before the application was accepted.

Hardly. It illustrates the mistaken belief of some of the VAC staff that they can decline to accept an application, which they can't.

Here's a direct quote from the e-mail which I received from the embassy visa section in response to my fax:-

....I have noted your comments about VFS and accept that it is not within their parameters to refuse to accept an application.....

The visa application centre is under contract to the British embassy to take in and pass on visa applications, in addition to arranging for the decision to be disseminated. If you have any problems with how the VAC conducts its contractual obligations, you may make representation to the ECM in the first instance.

Scouse.