90 day signing and request to see bank details and statement of account

[Peter Denis]

9 minutes ago, Thai Terrier said:

The extension was granted at CW and I was not given a slip to report back with bank book etc after 3 months. 

It was the first 90 day report at Buriram after re-locating and therefore I do not know whether it is standard practice for the bank details also to be provided after 3 months.

I will return in the next 7 days to complete the 90 day reporting with the bank details and see what happens. By attending to sign for the 90 days I am complying with the reporting requirements but you are suggesting that the extension is now invalid . No other issues - have TM30 receipt for new address in Buriram.

From what you write I understand that IO did not order you to come back, but simply denied to process your 90-day report because you were not able to show them the (non-required) evidence of having kept 800K as bank-balance.

So in your case I would not 'rock the boat' by going back to the Buriram office with the risk of getting into trouble because of not having maintained the 800K bank-balance, which they asked for at your first visit (and which is totally unrelated to the reason of your visit, mainly doing your 90-day report in person).

You have imo 2 options:

a) Do nothing.  The 90-day reporting has been suspended during the Amnesty period (till July 31) so it is NOT needed to do it.

b) Do your 90-day report on-line if you are still in the 15-day before till actual due-date window for on-line reporting.  It is not required to do so, but if you did not do it on-line and let the due-date slip you MIGHT not be able to do your next one on-line.  And that would force you to do that next one by mail or in person at your IO, thus possibly triggering the bank-balance issue again.

[Max69xl]

On 6/16/2020 at 6:29 PM, ubonjoe said:

That was changed in March of last year.

The 800k baht has to be in the bank for 2 months before, then 3 months after and then 400k baht until you top up your account now.

I guess you mean never below 400k until you top it up for next application.

[Tanoshi]

6 minutes ago, Thai Terrier said:

I agree in that it is a grey area but the purpose of the original post was to try and ascertain whether anyone has actually returned for the 3 month bank check having breached the conditions.

That may not be the real issue here.

If you entered Jan on a TV, and obtained the extension in March, it was issued without you meeting the conditions in the first place.

I suspect you used an agent and the Non O and Extension were issued together simultaneously or one day apart, which is common at CW when converting using an agent.

[ubonjoe]

2 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

I guess you mean never below 400k until you top it up for next application.

Of course.

I think I wrote it clear enough for most people to understand that.

[Thai Terrier]

4 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Obviously not if your details are correct.

Entered Jan on a TV = 60 days until March.

Non O = 90 days March to June.

 

Again I'll ask if you used an agent?

Better still, attached edited copies of your TV, Non O and extension stamps.

Never used an agent.

My apologies should have said 30 day but I had to extend so same time limit as TV

However , can apply for extension 60 days after issue of non O. 

The relevant dates are as follows taken from passport

Returned to Thailand on 30 day - 5th Jan arrival

Extended  to 4th March  - needed 15 days remaining for non O application.

Non O issued 30th Jan

Extension 12 months granted 30th March with extension of stay until 28th April 2021

[DrJack54]

20 minutes ago, Thai Terrier said:

ascertain whether anyone has actually returned for the 3 month bank check having breached the conditions. I suspect if the balance has fallen below 800k why would anyone return for the check if it is not compulsory.

Exactly. Anyone would not report to show bankbook if they slipped below levels. They would wait untill just prior end of current extension.

IMO you will then need obtain new non o and obtain a extension. 

Your lucky that currently with amnesty in place 90 day report (address) is not required. I would do nothing if in your shoes. Also would be a bonus if the amnesty is extended.

Edited June 18, 2020 by DrJack54

[connda]

20 hours ago, natway09 said:

Maybe they should just get rid of the income method all together & use the money in the bank only

That really looks to be the plan.  Now that they have destroyed their tourism industry, why not double down and get rid of long-stay expat retirees who are able to bring a steady flow of money into the country month-over-mouth, but who can not capitalize a Thai banks balance sheet (like that isn't the point of the joint effort between banks and immigration  ????).

Goose ----> Golden Eggs -----> Knife
   ^                                             |

   |  <----------------------------V

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

37 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

It is not required to do so, but if you did not do it on-line and let the due-date slip you MIGHT not be able to do your next one on-line. 

 

Huh???   Peter, where's that notion coming from?

 

I'd assume, lots of folks, myself included, skipped doing their most recent online reports on their due dates during this supposed 90-day reporting amnesty period.  Because we were told by the government we didn't need to file.

 

I haven't heard peepers about following that government advice somehow resulting in people potentially being locked out of online 90-day reporting whenever the reporting process is opened again...

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 6/16/2020 at 11:57 PM, Thai Terrier said:

Why did the IO not let me sign the 90 days without the bank details.

Doesn't matter what the so called "rules" are, the IO can, and often does make things up. I experienced such many times while I was doing extensions.

In the end I paid an agent to make the problems go away.

 

I always kept 800,000 in the bank to avoid the sort of problems you have experienced. Separate account from the one I used for living on.

[Tanoshi]

15 minutes ago, Thai Terrier said:

Never used an agent.

My apologies should have said 30 day but I had to extend so same time limit as TV

However , can apply for extension 60 days after issue of non O. 

The relevant dates are as follows taken from passport

Returned to Thailand on 30 day - 5th Jan arrival

Extended  to 4th March  - needed 15 days remaining for non O application.

Non O issued 30th Jan

Extension 12 months granted 30th March with extension of stay until 28th April 2021

Thanks, the abnormality is explained then by how they issued your Non O.

Your Non O should have started following your previously granted permission of stay, that being March 4th for 90 days until May 2nd, then 1 year extension dated from May 2nd 2020 - May 2nd 2021.

 

I suspect Buriram could just be suspicious of the dates of issue (TV >Non 0 > Extension) and feel it may be dodgy. I've never read any previous reports of Buriram requesting proof of 800K 3 months after the extension was issued, that could just be an excuse.

Of course now you've withdrawn part of the 800K within the 3 months period your required to keep it in a Thai bank, you may as already mention have to start the procedure again.

Maybe the 'brown' envelope under the table is all that's required to fix your problem.

[Peter Denis]

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Huh???   Peter, where's that notion coming from?

 

I'd assume, lots of folks, myself included, skipped doing their most recent online reports on their due dates during this supposed 90-day reporting amnesty period.  Because we were told by the government we didn't need to file.

 

I haven't heard peepers about following that government advice somehow resulting in people potentially being locked out of online 90-day reporting whenever the reporting process is opened again...

Yes, there is NO need to do your 90-day reports during the Amnesty.

So doing them in person at your local IO or doing them by mail, is a total waste of time/effort.

And there is also no need to do them on-line, but the reason many are doing them on-line is because it MIGHT not be possible to do your NEXT one on-line if you skipped your previous one.

And since on-line 90-day reporting only takes 10 minutes why not do it, as then you will be sure you will also be able to do your next one on-line.

It's possible that it was not needed (we will know after the Amnesty) but considering the little effort it takes to do it on-line, many have opted to do that.

And again: doing them in person or by mail, is NOT needed during the Amnesty and a total waste of time/effort.

 

[ubonjoe]

7 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

And there is also no need to do them on-line, but the reason many are doing them on-line is because it MIGHT not be possible to do your NEXT one on-line if you skipped your previous one.

Why?

They can be done online I am sure. The only problem might be the local office not approving them for some unknown reason.

[Tanoshi]

13 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

And there is also no need to do them on-line, but the reason many are doing them on-line is because it MIGHT not be possible to do your NEXT one on-line if you skipped your previous one.

My understanding of the amnesty is that we're not 'skipping' anything.

 

As per the Information guidance, there is no need to do 90 day reporting, because Immigration Bureau will process them automatically when due.

Whether they do or not is a completely different matter 

 

Edited June 18, 2020 by Tanoshi

[Peter Denis]

9 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Why?

They can be done online I am sure. The only problem might be the local office not approving them for some unknown reason.

You are right of course.  But doing your next 90-day report on-line after the Amnesty and your local office then not approving that 90-day report, would not be convenient (especially if you live far away from an IO).

Doing them on-line during the Amnesty and thus ensuring that there is no 'gap' in the 90-day reporting would limit the risk of your next on-line one being refused.  

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

37 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

And there is also no need to do them on-line, but the reason many are doing them on-line is because it MIGHT not be possible to do your NEXT one on-line if you skipped your previous one.

 

I think what I was asking above is... what exactly makes you think it MIGHT not be possible for folks to do a future/next online reporting if they've skipped doing so during the amnesty period?

 

[luckyluke]

I like easy ways,

I always did and do my 90 days on line, since it was available. 

I know now that my next one is the 01 September. 

Don't have to care how it will work after 31 July. 

 

[Peter Denis]

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

I think what I was asking above is... what exactly makes you think it MIGHT not be possible for folks to do a future/next online reporting if they've skipped doing so during the amnesty period?

See posts #42, #43 and #44.

I probably worry too much and indeed there should be no reason why local IO would not approve your next on-line 90-day report once the Amnesty is over. 

But to avoid any possible issues, I simply did my on-line report when it was due - took me less than 10 minutes - and I am now 100% sure I will not have to make the long journey to my local IO, and have my next on-line reporting window already in my calendar.

 

[Nowisee]

Dumb question comes to mind as I'm reading this thread.
Does everyone that gets an extension of stay have to go back in 90 days (not a 90 day report) and prove that you did not drop below 800k?
 

 

 

 

[ubonjoe]

10 hours ago, Nowisee said:

Does everyone that gets an extension of stay have to go back in 90 days (not a 90 day report) and prove that you did not drop below 800k?

No

Only a very few offices want that done. There is no written rule that requires it.