Do all Non-O ME border bouncers need to switch to yearly extensions?

[innosiem]

3 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

There is a reason now. 

Borders closed and requirements for reentry may be very difficult. 

They may even suspend visa exempt entries. Obtain non o (marriage) 

why cherry pick just part of my comment to quote?
when i had already stated
"because some of us don't need to, but obviously if there is no other option, then we must, "
????‍♂️

the 1 year extension will not need to be applied for until late October afaict
so we have until then to decide if there is a reason to or not. 
there is no reason to "NOW" as you state

[trucking]

14 hours ago, stoicccc said:

I have one FTT 75k transfer from July 21st. If I do another one August 3rd and go to IO couple days after, will there be some issue with the dates? Should I wait til Aug 20th-22nd to do the other transfer? I know it's a silly question but I just wanna cover all bases.

 

Additionally I have over 12 months of 40+ transfers with Transferwise to BKK Bank account from Europe, but not none of them have the FTT code.

 

It is never silly to try and cover yourself against all potential problems. Forewarned is forearmed.

I don't know myself if the exact date of the transfers are important. Ubon Joe would be the man better informed on that although I guess if the dates were closer it wouldn't hurt and might help.

 

When getting money sent by Transferwise you have to specify reason for transfer. Be sure you tick the box marked ' for extension of visa ' to make sure you get the correct code in your bank book..

 

Last month I knew absolutely nothing about any of this but have , like you , been obliged to swot up on it by reading every relevant thread in the hope that I will do things correctly and to the best advantage.

 

 

[Stocky]

1 hour ago, STD Warehouse said:

I was trying to understand what happens to all the Non-O (and also Non-B) visa holders who would normally border bounce every 90 days.

I opted back in May to just switch to the 1 year extension. My permission to stay was nearing the end and my Non-O ME due not long after. I couldn't be doing with the uncertainty as it was obvious the virus situation wasn't about to change anytime soon. I'm glad I did.

[Tanoshi]

4 minutes ago, trucking said:

When getting money sent by Transferwise you have to specify reason for transfer. Be sure you tick the box marked ' for extension of visa ' to make sure you get the correct code in your bank book..

There is no 'for extension of Visa' option as the reason of transfer.

The correct option is the last one 'Funds for long term stay in Thailand'.

[trucking]

14 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

There is no 'for extension of Visa' option as the reason of transfer.

The correct option is the last one 'Funds for long term stay in Thailand'.

 

You are right. I stand corrected. I did not bother to look up the exact wording.

 

thanks for the correction.

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, stoicccc said:

Still curious if "savings and investments" will suffice as explanation in most IOs for the 2 months of 40k? And how often do they actually ask for proof with the 2x 40k method?

It appears random, but many will only accept proof of Pension.

 

If your from Europe, you could as an alternative submit an Embassy Income Letter as proof of income, rather than overseas transfers to a Thai bank.

These are rarely questioned by IO's

 

It's only the UK, US and Australian Embassies that no longer offer the 'Income Letter' service.

[ubonjoe]

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

So, if I understand you correctly, you believe that senior immigration officials are sympathetic to those who do not want to return to home country, but wish to easily leave Thailand and return without doing so?

I did not exactly say that. But it is a correct assumption.

 

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

I believe there are some elsewhere in authority who would like to keep foreigners here for economic reasons, but those at the top of immigration feel foreigners should return to home country if they cannot satisfy the requirements for a long term extension of stay.

Nothing wrong with wanting people to stay here. It is good for economy.

I am not sure anybody in authority want people to return to their home country. They would probably prefer that people were able to leave the country and apply for a new visa to stay in the country or re-enter with a existing visa.

But everybody should be aware that is not really possible at this time for many people.

[john terry1001]

6 minutes ago, trucking said:

It is never silly to try and cover yourself against all potential problems. Forewarned is forearmed.

I don't know myself if the exact date of the transfers are important. Ubon Joe would be the man better informed on that although I guess if the dates were closer it wouldn't hurt and might help.

It doesn't need to be around the same date each month..... But some people, on a first extension, have been known to  try and abuse the rules by making one transfer at the end of one calendar month with a second one on the 1st of the next month. IO's will reject this and say transfers must be done around the same date each month.

 

6 minutes ago, trucking said:

When getting money sent by Transferwise you have to specify reason for transfer. Be sure you tick the box marked ' for extension of visa ' to make sure you get the correct code in your bank book..

As Tanoshi has just posted, the reason for transfer must be 'Funds for long term stay in Thailand'.

 

To get an International coding the actual TW process is very easy. Firstly, have your preferred Thai bank account (must be at one of TW's partner banks, Bangkok, Kasikorn or TMB) recorded on your TW account. Then each time you make a TW transfer, select that account as your receiving bank  and select the reason for transfer as funds for long term stay in Thailand. That's it, it's that simple........but vital you use the correct process.

 

For their part, TW will see the reason for transfer and confirm the account you've selected matches the preferred account you've registered with them before sending the transfer directly to your Thai account.

 

If you fail to follow those two steps in your transfer, they might end sending it via one of their other partner banks and you'll end up with a domestic transfer coding. 

 

 

 

 

[khaepmu]

After reading the last topic  on the announcement, I guess I better start thinking about doing a 90-day report. My last border crossing was in Feb of this year so the next crossing would have been in May (I have been on a Non-O Multiple Entry based on Marriage) and I didn't have to do a 90-day report as I was only in the country for 85 days before exiting and entering Thailand.  And with the general amnesty until July 31st, I have not been required to do a 90-day report. If I am reading the the last item on the announcement correctly, I think 90-day reporting does not apply to me. Might just hop down to immigration and see what they say.

[ubonjoe]

21 minutes ago, khaepmu said:

After reading the last topic  on the announcement, I guess I better start thinking about doing a 90-day report.

Since you are not on a long stay extension I suggest that you not bother doing one. 

It appears the reporting in August is meant to be for those that are doing them due to being on a long stay extension.

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

It doesn't need to be around the same date each month..... But some people, on a first extension, have been known to  try and abuse the rules by making one transfer at the end of one calendar month with a second one on the 1st of the next month. IO's will reject this and say transfers must be done around the same date each month.

I disagree, The orders state monthly transfers, not 3 weeks, or 7 weeks apart.

The IO's have trouble reading and understanding Passbook entries at the best of times, so often scan the dates looking for the overseas transactions.

I've witnessed them throwing the Passbook back and instructing them to revisit their branch and obtain a letter just detailing the overseas transactions.

 

Selecting a fixed date in the month makes it easier for the IO to locate the transfers in a Passbook and easy for you to remember to make the transfer.

 

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

To get an International coding the actual TW process is very easy. Firstly, have your preferred Thai bank account (must be at one of TW's partner banks, Bangkok, Kasikorn or TMB) recorded on your TW account. Then each time you make a TW transfer, select that account as your receiving bank  and select the reason for transfer as funds for long term stay in Thailand. That's it, it's that simple........but vital you use the correct process.

 

For their part, TW will see the reason for transfer and confirm the account you've selected matches the preferred account you've registered with them before sending the transfer directly to your Thai account.

 

If you fail to follow those two steps in your transfer, they might end sending it via one of their other partner banks and you'll end up with a domestic transfer coding. 

With the exception of Bangkok Bank, transfers through TW from KK partner to KK branch, or TMB partner to TMB branch, will only provide the 'International' transfer on HQ statements. The Passbooks for KK and TMB will always be coded as 'domestic' (usually SMT), being the SMART system they use to transfer from the HQ branch to the local branch.

Edited July 25, 2020 by Tanoshi

[CFCjeff]

2 hours ago, innosiem said:

you don't have all the necessary documents, if one of the documents they require is a bank statement stating you have 400k ????‍♂️

from what it say on the infographic, you may have an issue
might be wise to go to immigration asap to see what your options are
and it looks like an agent (providing an illegal service) may be your only option 
(if borders are not re-opened by Sept 26th)

 

i think others have stated you can provide the transferwise receipts along with bank book etc. (but i could be wrong)

I do have all the documents for an ME O Visa , not for a 1 year extension but the VISA.  The consulate would issue it so why not immigration, would solve the problem.

[Tanoshi]

44 minutes ago, CFCjeff said:

I do have all the documents for an ME O Visa , not for a 1 year extension but the VISA.  The consulate would issue it so why not immigration, would solve the problem.

Only Thai Embassies/Consulates issue Visas.

Immigration issue permits extending your permission of stay - with one exception, they will issue a Non O for 90 days only as a prelude to applying for an annual extension of stay based on retirement or marriage.

 

You must have permission of stay from a Non Imm type Visa to qualify for a 1 year extension.

Many foreigners are unaware and enter VE or TV, so they facilitate an internal method to change your Visa status (TV to Non O) or apply for a Non O when you entered VE.

 

Only HCMC and Savannakhet do not require proof of funds for the Non Imm O ME Visa, the other Thai Embassies/Consulates request the same financial proof for the Non Imm O ME, as Thailand's Immigration do for the 1 year extensions.

 

Another subtle difference is extension are to stay in Thailand, the Non Imm O ME is for the purpose to 'visit' Thai wife/family, not 'stay', and the amnesty is now highlighting this fact.

[Eibot]

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

"Assuming land and air crossing remain closed".

People should refrain from posting false statements. The borders are not closed, they are restricted. Just because people find the restrictions difficult it is no excuse for misrepresentation.

Highlights the hypocrisy in this forum, accurate terminology one minute and careless descriptions the next.

Somebody forgot his cookie and coffee this morning!

[nightfox]

I have read that some immigration offices wont accept the 40k monthly income option for extension of stay based on marriage and only want to see the 400k in the bank for 2 months.

 

Does anybody know if Kalasin immigration accepts the 40k monthly option?...I will go in person next week to find out and hope they accept that method otherwise I am screwed as my Non O expires November 4 with the 60 day extension permission to stay will be good till November 24. I am not able to come up with the 400k.

 

I highly doubt it land boarders with Laos will be open by then and if they are, getting back to Thailand will be mission and a half. My embassy wont provide any income letter as I will have to arrange transfers from abroad to my Thai bank account every month and make up some document explaining the source of the transfer like a invoice or something like that just in case immigration wants to see proof.

 

I don't know what other options are left for me if I cant extend my visa that way?

[john terry1001]

21 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

I disagree, The orders state monthly transfers, not 3 weeks, or 7 weeks apart.

The IO's have trouble reading and understanding Passbook entries at the best of times, so often scan the dates looking for the overseas transactions.

I've witnessed them throwing the Passbook back and instructing them to revisit their branch and obtain a letter just detailing the overseas transactions.

 

Selecting a fixed date in the month makes it easier for the IO to locate the transfers in a Passbook and easy for you to remember to make the transfer.

I have been using the current monthly income option since it came into it'a present format in January 2019. I have three UK pensions, two paid four weekly but on the same day, where the actual date shuffles forward by a day or two and changes each month. The third is paid calendar monthly on the first of every month. If I was to save transferring the two pensions until say the first of every month I would end up with those pensions staying in the UK for up to a month.

 

In January 2019 I contacted Immigration at Jomtien, Si Racha and the helpline 1175 to clarify the position. You might remember Tanoshi because we had various discussions on TV at the time, early last year. All three departments said the same thing. They recognised that some peoples payment dates changed over the months (some older (DWP) pensions being weekly, some fortnighty, some four weekly while others were paid calendar monthly. Plus, while some people could possibly delay some transfers, for others it was impossible because their pensions were transferred directly by DWP, pension providers, investment companis,etc) so because the dates might never align,  'TRANSFERS DIDN'T NEED TO BE SENT AROUND THE SAME TIME EACH MONTH'. They did make it VERY clear though that the transfers must be 'legitimate' and not manipulated to satisfy Immigration rules. The example they gave me was the one I posted in post #39....namely, "some people have been known to  try and abuse the rules by making one transfer at the end of one calendar month with a second one on the 1st of the next month, two try and count two months transfers. IO's will reject this and suggest transfers must be done around the same date each month". They also insisted minimum transfers must be made each and every month and a 'double transfer' to compensate a missing/lower transfer was not acceptable.

 

When I went in to Jomtien and Si Racha I even produced a one year single sheet calendar, showing all months, with my pension dates highlighted to show how two of my pension dates altered each month throughout the year.  They were more than happy to accept me transferred on those dates.

 

And they have accepted my financial proof of monthly transfers for both last year and this years marriage extensions. I also have three friends who've used the same process without any problem.

 

The proof, as well as the usual Bank letters, I provided:

 

Bank statement with FTT's highlighted

Bank book with FTT's highlighted

All TW PDF'S

A spreadsheet, detailing every transfer into my Thai account

UK bank statement showing all pension payments received and transfers to TW

Proof of pension letters from pension providers

and, of course, the attached calendar.

  

The Boss at Immigration actually complimented me on the presentation and said she particularly liked the spreadsheet and calendar I supplied because of the clarity they gave.

While I recognise that, like me, you went into a lot of detail to understand the implications of the new monthly transfer rules when they were initiated in January last year and have given clarity on various issues concerning various problems... BUT....  PLEASE DON'T TELL ME (AND OTHERS) VARYING MONTHLY TRANSFER DATES ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE, THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE!!!!

 

calendar 2020 YEARLY.pdf  

[mokwit]

4 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

I am not sure anybody in authority want people to return to their home country. They would probably prefer that people were able to leave the country and apply for a new visa to stay in the country or re-enter with a existing visa.

It seems that people leaving is exactly what they want - they've had their two weeks. Remember the use of the expression 'time to clear them out'? Sorry but seeing how they have tightened up on people staying here over the years I don't share your sentiment on this.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2020 by mokwit

[ubonjoe]

28 minutes ago, mokwit said:

It seems that people leaving is exactly what they want - they've had their two weeks.

What two weeks. They have just extended the ministerial order to September 26th.

If the wanted people out they would not of done that.

[Tanoshi]

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

The example they gave me was the one I posted in post #39....namely, "some people have been known to  try and abuse the rules by making one transfer at the end of one calendar month with a second one on the 1st of the next month, two try and count two months transfers. IO's will reject this and suggest transfers must be done around the same date each month".

That's exactly what I said and suggested.

 

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

BUT....  PLEASE DON'T TELL ME (AND OTHERS) VARYING MONTHLY TRANSFER DATES ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE, THAT'S SIMPLY NOT TRUE!!!!

Why shout. I can't hear what you write.

[mokwit]

Just now, ubonjoe said:

What two weeks. They have just extended the ministerial order to September 26th.

If the wanted people out they would not of done that.

They kind of had to extend it as so many are still here with possibly legitimate reasons why they can't go back in some cases and going case by case through 400,000 people is a huge burden and also IMO they were probably expecting people to leave. It WAS an amnesty but I think they did not make it clear enough that they were expecting people to use this period to return home. Now we have effectively gone from an amnesty that was really a poorly delineated grace period to a clearly delineated grace period (that may be extended if circumstances dictate that is appropriate).

 

My reference to two weeks is a general reference as to how they seem to be doing everything to attract short term tourists while making it ever harder to stay here long term*. As I have stated before every visa option I used to stay here for 10 years between work visa and retirement visa has been closed off.

 

 

*I almost suspect that they use some kind of ratio as to how long we stay vs how much money we drop into the economy and found that the optimum tradeoff is 2-4 weeks. Less than a retiree in absolute terms but per day much more.

 

 

[Tanoshi]

41 minutes ago, mokwit said:

It seems that people leaving is exactly what they want - they've had their two weeks.

That two weeks has been prolonged to over 5 months in certain cases.

If they wanted foreigners out they could have done so before now. Repatriation flights have always been available.

[Boomer6969]

One thing I just don't get is why would one prefer a border run every 90 days over yearly extensions. So what am I missing? I am on marriage extensions and I spend maybe a full day a year, possibly two, on visa formalities. Four border runs would represent 4 or 5 times more no? 

Edited July 25, 2020 by Boomer6969

[Tanoshi]

3 minutes ago, mokwit said:

They kind of had to extend it as so many are still here with possibly legitimate reasons why they can't go back in some cases and going case by case through 400,000 people is a huge burden and also IMO they were probably expecting people to leave.

'Can't' or 'prefer not to'.

 

[mokwit]

4 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

That two weeks has been prolonged to over 5 months in certain cases.

If they wanted foreigners out they could have done so before now. Repatriation flights have always been available.

How would you do that without negative fallout for the tourist industry? IMO it was concern regarding international criticism that led to the amnesty - remember how they were expecting TOURISTS to turn up with all kinds of documents like title deeds to where they were staying? They didn't seem concerned about tourist catching Covid from being crowded together - "National Security" took precedence.

 

After a very bad start they did completely the right thing and if they had come out with the amnesty sooner/immediately their response would be above criticism - I think what they ultimately did was very sensible, but note they took much longer to implement than many countries. UK did it almost immediately.

[mokwit]

6 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

'Can't' or 'prefer not to'.

 

Prefer not to in many cases if you consider most repatriation flights were going back near empty. I think there are people in trouble here from trying to buy a flight and maxing out their credit cards on cancelled flights. Unfortunately their plight is not recognised in any announcement and I wonder if any understanding will be shown.  I hope they can pay their hotel bills as not paying here is very serious.

[john terry1001]

3 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

The example they gave me was the one I posted in post #39....namely, "some people have been known to  try and abuse the rules by making one transfer at the end of one calendar month with a second one on the 1st of the next month, two try and count two months transfers. IO's will reject this and suggest transfers must be done around the same date each month".

That's exactly what I said and suggested.

But obviously you didn't read the context of my post.

 

I was referring to the IO's response when they new the applicant was trying to abuse the two month option.

 

I'll try and spell it out for you!!!

 

Under normal process circumstances the IO's would happily accept dates that varied in different months without a problem... BUT ...if they suspected the applicant was trying to abuse the process by, for example, making one transfer on the last day of one month and doing the next transfer on the first day of the next month, meaning two transfers in two days, that could throw up abuse of the system. An isolated instance might be overlooked but, if a pattern was fairly obvious, Immigration told me they might use a backup of the transfers being erratic and not appearing to be pension transfers. In this instance Immigration would also request proof of where the transfers originated.

 

The reason was to obtain proof of the source of those funds, which was more important than varying dates of a transfer.

[Tanoshi]

7 minutes ago, mokwit said:

How would you do that without negative fallout for the tourist industry?

They accepted negative fall out of the tourist Industry when they cancelled International commercial flight arrivals, as did many other Countries.

 

9 minutes ago, mokwit said:

After a very bad start they did completely the right thing and if they had come out with the amnesty sooner/immediately their response would be above criticism - I think what they ultimately did was very sensible, but note they took much longer to implement than many countries. UK did it almost immediately.

The UK did everything wrong.

They allowed International arrivals to continue and have only just made the wearing of face masks compulsory. Thailand responded much faster to the situation than most Countries.

Thailand and the UK's population are similar, but look at the confirmed infection and death rates if you want to make a comparison.

 

It's not surprising many Tourists preferred to stay in Thailand.

[mokwit]

8 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

They accepted negative fall out of the tourist Industry when they cancelled International commercial flight arrivals, as did many other Countries.

 

The UK did everything wrong.

They allowed International arrivals to continue and have only just made the wearing of face masks compulsory. Thailand responded much faster to the situation than most Countries.

Thailand and the UK's population are similar, but look at the confirmed infection and death rates if you want to make a comparison.

 

It's not surprising many Tourists preferred to stay in Thailand.

Not allowing tourists to come is not the same thing as being perceived to be kicking out tourists. Yes there is fallout from cancelled holidays (but some would not have come anyway), but the perception that tourists being kicked out would have been far more damaging IMO.

 

The UK got the amnesty right, and that was what I was talking about. I accept they got many other things VERY wrong. It was a nonsense that they did not restrict flights and no quarantine, but I suspect that was political - the time period was before and after a very important holiday for a certain very sensitive group in the UK  who would have cried discrimination if they could not travel at that time.

 

I think a fair amount of time had elapsed before it cam clear that Thailand was a safer option than the UK - it was not immediately apparent, especially while we still had tour groups coming here from Wuhan (according to popular belief).

 

 

Edited July 25, 2020 by mokwit

[mokwit]

17 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

Thailand and the UK's population are similar, but look at the confirmed infection and death rates if you want to make a comparison.

It has yet to be definitively established whether Thailand (and eg. Vietnam's) low rates is due to their Governments response or some other factor such as genetics, which is being suggested.

 

I don't want to detract from the Thai Governments response - they certainly did act clearly and IMO comprehensively - there would always be things that were overlooked, so I think some criticism along those lines is unwarranted.

Edited July 25, 2020 by mokwit

[beavenlen]

i beg to differ about borders not being closed,unless im mistaken 8ft high steel gates block access would say to closed,as in Mae Sott on friday 24th,a visit to imm, to make my Tm30 report,where as an interest i was offered a 1 year extension,i might add i refused being one who would fail the requirements,hope this is helpful,by the by Mae Sott DEAD