Many farang must leave their families, friends and Thailand

[john terry1001]

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Old "stamps" are irrelevant.  Folks here on other types of stays should not have been expected to have been complying with 1-year extension rules.  They should only have been in-compliance with the rules for those past permitted-stays.

According to Immigration in Chonburi 'old stamps' most definitely are relevant. Their interpretation of Initial application means the first time you've applied for an extension and it doesn't mean it cancels all old stamps.

 

5 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Anyone applying for a 1-year extension for the first time should have the 2-mo option - and should not be expected to have been in compliance with an idiotic system of "so much per-month" for 12 months - long before they ever considered applying for a 1-year extension.   The rules state "average" income - not "exactly X per-month." 

You'l understand eventually............there is no two month option in the police order. It doesn't exist.

[JackThompson]

33 minutes ago, john terry1001 said:

According to Immigration in Chonburi 'old stamps' most definitely are relevant. Their interpretation of Initial application means the first time you've applied for an extension and it doesn't mean it cancels all old stamps.

The only relevant "stamp" is the last one you used to enter.  If you had a recent 1-year permitted-stay, then I can see them saying "no."  Otherwise, irrelevant.

 

Quote

You'l understand eventually............there is no two month option in the police order. It doesn't exist.

I just saw it printed above - exactly what I was remembering.  It doesn't mean your "first pension payment after retirement no matter where you lived then, needed to hit a Thai bank."  That would be insane.

 

It Makes No SENSE to expect a person on a short-term entry to have a prior 12-mo long-term plan based on a bank-account they never needed - or could not have opened before they got here.  

 

Some IOs breaking the rules to force agent-use is Nothing New.  You'll learn that, eventually.

Edited September 4, 2020 by JackThompson

[Yellowtail]

On 9/3/2020 at 1:14 PM, connda said:

Because this country is run by the heartless who have no compassion for the sanctity of the family, and although they call themselves "Buddhists", those who make laws affecting Thai/Foreign families unit lack even a thimble-full of compassion.  Virtually every other nation in the world recognizes the value and sanctity of The Family and as such have laws in place allowing those who are married to their citizens to eventually gain at least residency.

Thai lawmakers are an embarrassment to humanity and should be ashamed to claim that they follow the teaching of the compassionate Buddha.  Buddhists in name only at best.  Xenophobes are worst.

 

 

 

 

So why can't all these guys take there families to one of virtually all of the other countries in the world that that reconize the value and sanctity of the family? 

[john terry1001]

32 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The only relevant "stamp" is the last one you used to enter.  If you had a recent 1-year permitted-stay, then I can see them saying "no."  Otherwise, irrelevant.

That is just not correct. The person I'm thinking of had two years of non O visas when he was refused  an 'initial' extension. Prior to that he had been in Thailand for four years on marriage extensions before having a shortish break before returning, using those non O's.

 

The IO looked through his passport before pointing out he didn't qualify. He was told his application wasn't an intitial (first) application.

 

Many of us don't appear to have a problem. Could it be that your interpretation of the police orders is different to ours and immigration's. Maybe that could be why you'e had several rejections yourself.

Edited September 4, 2020 by john terry1001

[Tanoshi]

5 hours ago, john terry1001 said:

You've shown that example before. It's specifically for new retirees who have been retired less than a year and come to live in Thailand straight away. It doesn't allow for, say married people, deciding to move to Thailand who are not newly retired

No it isn't, read the heading.

Subject: Supporting evidence of income for Visa extensions in case of family members and retirement.

 

It would be the same Non O regardless of retirement or marriage.

[john terry1001]

9 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

No it isn't, read the heading.

Subject: Supporting evidence of income for Visa extensions in case of family members and retirement.

 

It would be the same Non O regardless of retirement or marriage.

So I'll ask again, Where does it specifically state only 2 x 40K transfers (your words not mine) for the very first extension application?

Edited September 4, 2020 by john terry1001

[SEtonal]

3 hours ago, Tanoshi said:

I can attest to the fact that many members of US, UK and Australian nationals have acquired extensions based on both marriage and retirement with proof of 2 x 40/65K transfers since the Embassies stopped issuing Income letters.

 

Some enter VE or TV and obtain the Non O with only 1 x 40/65K transfer, then the extension with 2 x 40/65K transfers before this amnesty.

You are deliberately ignoring the fact that local immigration offices were asked to show leniency to applicants from Australia, the UK, and the US in 2019 due to their loss of embassy income verification letters.  Leniency was only for 2019, not 2020.

[Tanoshi]

2 minutes ago, SEtonal said:

You are deliberately ignoring the fact that local immigration offices were asked to show leniency to applicants from Australia, the UK, and the US in 2019 due to their loss of embassy income verification letters.  Leniency was only for 2019, not 2020.

That was for those renewing extensions due to the cessation of Embassy Income letters.

The reply was in relation to a first time extension application from a Non O Visa.

[BritTim]

First, I am completely sympathetic to problems people may have staying with their Thai wives and children. I would always be willing to provide suggestions on how those with limited finances can achieve that. However, I am also clear eyed about what the intent of different visa options and extensions was when they were introduced.

 

Which seems to you more reasonable? Multiple entry Non O visas were introduced:

• to provide an easy alternative for those who cannot meet the financial requirements to stay in Thailand using an extension, by allowing them to travel to and from the border instead; or
• to facilitate those working outside Thailand (who very possibly did not have a Thai bank account, and would have no reason to transfer money to themselves when outside the country) to periodically visit Thailand to see their Thai wives and children when not working.

My own opinion is that it was the latter. Indeed, I think consulates started introducing the need to show money (at least in bank accounts outside Thailand) because they observed visas being used in a manner that was not initially envisaged.

 

Let me repeat: I am perfectly comfortable with people using visas in ways they were not designed for to achieve their objective of staying with their family. However, it is just unreasonable to say that Thailand must find a way to help those who previously lived in Thailand using visas that were never intended for that purpose.

[mommysboy]

On 9/3/2020 at 12:23 PM, Sheryl said:

Bear in mind that while there is no law against border runs, ME visas were not designed with the intention that they would be used in that manner; they are designed for people who make multiple separate trips here, with genuine gaps in between, and the "border run" approach is basically a loophole. 

 

So no reason for Immigration to view inability to do border runs as a legitimate problem; from their standpoint people living here full time should get annual extensions of stay.  "I can't afford to meet the financial requirement"  will get zero sympathy as the government does not want retirees here who lack the minimum required funds.

 

Many countries don't like to see parents separated from their children, however.  Effectively then, it's just another example of poor people having no human rights.  People fall on hard times for many reasons, and it can be a reflection of failings in the economic system as a whole.  A mixed Thai/farang family is in fact stateless, one having no residency rights in Thailand, and the Thai unable to enter the foreign country.  

 

 

[mommysboy]

6 hours ago, BritTim said:

First, I am completely sympathetic to problems people may have staying with their Thai wives and children. I would always be willing to provide suggestions on how those with limited finances can achieve that. However, I am also clear eyed about what the intent of different visa options and extensions was when they were introduced.

 

Which seems to you more reasonable? Multiple entry Non O visas were introduced:

• to provide an easy alternative for those who cannot meet the financial requirements to stay in Thailand using an extension, by allowing them to travel to and from the border instead; or
• to facilitate those working outside Thailand (who very possibly did not have a Thai bank account, and would have no reason to transfer money to themselves when outside the country) to periodically visit Thailand to see their Thai wives and children when not working.

My own opinion is that it was the latter. Indeed, I think consulates started introducing the need to show money (at least in bank accounts outside Thailand) because they observed visas being used in a manner that was not initially envisaged.

 

Let me repeat: I am perfectly comfortable with people using visas in ways they were not designed for to achieve their objective of staying with their family. However, it is just unreasonable to say that Thailand must find a way to help those who previously lived in Thailand using visas that were never intended for that purpose.

You sound like a politician! Your comment simply doesn't get to grips with the problem. 

[JackThompson]

14 hours ago, john terry1001 said:

That is just not correct. The person I'm thinking of had two years of non O visas when he was refused  an 'initial' extension. Prior to that he had been in Thailand for four years on marriage extensions before having a shortish break before returning, using those non O's.

 

The IO looked through his passport before pointing out he didn't qualify. He was told his application wasn't an intitial (first) application.

 

Many of us don't appear to have a problem. Could it be that your interpretation of the police orders is different to ours and immigration's. Maybe that could be why you'e had several rejections yourself.

I never said someone who had been doing 1-year EXTENSIONS AT IMMIGRATION before, could use the 2-mo rule.  In fact, I rejected the idea (in old threads) where people claimed they would just "go out for a new visa next year," after obtaining a 1-year extension, then taking out their money early, missing a mo-xfer, etc.  "Noooo" I said, that would circumvent the purpose of the crazy rules - agent-money-payoffs.

 

In my cases, I Always had MORE than the required income - and income was not the made-up excuse to block in the first cases with corrupt Jomtien (landlord must fly back to Thailand for docs), nor the last attempt at CW ("new" re-prove your work-permit docs + more added).   Only one Issan office used income to block me - said I could only qualify to use income with "A State Pension."

[BritTim]

6 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

You sound like a politician! Your comment simply doesn't get to grips with the problem. 

To "get to grips" with any specific individual's problem, I need to know the specifics of that individual's situation. All I was doing is pointing out that it is pointless waiting for the Thai authorities to change their extension rules because people were using visas to stay in Thailand in a way they were not designed for. That is not "getting to grips" with the problem, it is wishful thinking.

[Yellowtail]

7 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

Many countries don't like to see parents separated from their children, however.  Effectively then, it's just another example of poor people having no human rights.  People fall on hard times for many reasons, and it can be a reflection of failings in the economic system as a whole.  A mixed Thai/farang family is in fact stateless, one having no residency rights in Thailand, and the Thai unable to enter the foreign country.  

 

 

 

I can't speak to other countries, it if you are married it is relatively easy to bring your spose to the US.

 

As far as the poor not having human rights, illegally immigrating is not considered a human right in most countries. 

 

 

[bangkokbonecollector]

21 hours ago, Myran said:

Holy <deleted>, are people really this bad at reading comprehension? No, it's not a loophole in the literal sense, which is why I put it in "quotation marks". Furthermore, I specifically stated in my post that "there aren't any rules in place to prevent people from doing just that, which is fair enough".

 

Do you understand what that means? It means, "It's completely fine for people to use this visa to stay long-term in Thailand, because there aren't any rules that say they can't". Isn't it funny how that completely contradicts what you're trying to claim that I said?

 

The point was that this is a visa that is meant for entering multiple times during a year, and it comes with the benefit of not having to show any money. But, it's not all sunshine and puppies, because it also comes with the requirement to leave the country in order to make a new entry and be able to stay longer. People complaining now seem to want all the pros of having this type of visa, but none of the cons. Everything comes with pros and cons, and when you accept the pros, you have to accept the cons as well.

Ok, now you have explained your point of view explicitly, I apologise for jumping the gun on your position. I dont think anyone is complaining, I think we are just asking for some common sense from the IO. We would normally quite happily leave after 90 or 150 days but due to this unforeseen crazy situation, we can't. What is pissing me off is how some fellow expats on here are just twisting the knife into our backs which is not helpful and if you are in the sort of situation I am in, it's just not ethical. Literally, some of you sound like the, 'computer says no', IO we have all had to deal with at some point in our stay here. Again, it's not helpful to say I told you so, should have got your shift in order etc etc not everyone is the same and not everyones situation is as easy and simple as putting money in a thai bank once a year. 

[DrJack54]

17 minutes ago, bangkokbonecollector said:

not everyone is the same and not everyones situation is as easy and simple as putting money in a thai bank once a year. 

So what your saying is that folk on an ME marriage cannot find under 13k USD to stick in a Thai bank for 2 months only and obtain annual extension based on marriage.

That takes care of next 12 months then go back to ME. 

If I was married it for sure be my go to visa as pre covid I visit Saigon every month.

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by DrJack54

[bangkokbonecollector]

13 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

So what your saying is that folk on an ME marriage cannot find under 13k USD to stick in a Thai bank for 2 months only and obtain annual extension based on marriage.

That takes care of next 12 months then go back to ME.

BTW I don't see ME marriage having loophole. If I was married it for sure be my go to visa as pre covid I visit Saigon every month.

 

I said not everyones situation is the same and not everyones personal opinion is the same. I'm not going to delve into my own financial situation too much but I'm comfortable month by month forever but lump sums are hard for me unless I remove my month by month injection which would be financially stupid of me to do so. It still doesnt give people on here the right to say I told you so 55555 jai yen yen this wont last forever but enjoy your, 'temporary higher farang expat status', while you can.

Edited September 5, 2020 by bangkokbonecollector

[GeorgeCross]

16 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

So why can't all these guys take there families to one of virtually all of the other countries in the world that that reconize the value and sanctity of the family? 

 

i looked into moving my family to one of these countries (UK) however in the small print i (or her) had to have £62K (2.6M Baht!) in the bank or a job paying £18.5K per year for 6 months. 

 

Ireland was even worse.

 

decided to stay here, deposit the 400K baht & endure the 1 hour hardship at immigration each year lol

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2020 by GeorgeCross

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, bangkokbonecollector said:

I said not everyones situation is the same and not everyones personal opinion is the same. I'm not going to delve into my own financial situation too much but I'm comfortable month by month forever but lump sums are hard for me unless I remove my month by month injection which would be financially stupid of me to do so. It still doesnt give people on here the right to say I told you so 55555 jai yen yen this wont last forever but enjoy your, 'temporary higher farang expat status', while you can.

 

If one is currently living comfortably it seems it would not be that difficult to save B400K in a few years and eliminate all the heartache, bother and additional expense of make visa runs. 

 

[JackThompson]

21 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

If one is currently living comfortably it seems it would not be that difficult to save B400K in a few years and eliminate all the heartache, bother and additional expense of make visa runs.

I have only been blocked on the financials once - but not due to it being insufficient.  That time was due to the source of my more-than-adequate and proven income not being a "state pension." 

 

Other ways they block non-agent-money (~15x list-price + participation in a crime) extensions for those with Thai family, include unobtanium "landlord docs," or even "re-prove your work permit and more" docs (added recently at CW).  Others have reported these and other issues. 

 

It's not like retirement, where only the local-honchos are involved.  Thai-family extensions have a "divison level" IO, who is trying to maximize the number of agent-application "signing bonuses" (~10K Baht just for him) he pockets.  Thai-Family basically doubles the corruption you must deal with.

Edited September 5, 2020 by JackThompson

[JackThompson]

42 minutes ago, bangkokbonecollector said:

... I'm comfortable month by month forever but lump sums are hard for me unless I remove my month by month injection which would be financially stupid of me to do so. ...

The solution would be to allow us to use a foreign bank/brokerage/etc statement w/ 400K equivalent or AVERAGE mo foreign-income proof of 40K+ (no monthly bank-deposit bull), like we can at the MFA's Consulate in Penang, where financials are required. 

[Yellowtail]

14 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

I have only been blocked on the financials once - but not due to it being insufficient.  That time was due to the source of my more-than-adequate and proven income not being a "state pension." 

 

Other ways they block non-agent-money (~15x list-price + participation in a crime) extensions for those with Thai family, include unobtanium "landlord docs," or even "re-prove your work permit and more" docs (added recently at CW).  Others have reported these and other issues. 

 

It's not like retirement, where only the local-honchos are involved.  Thai-family extensions have a "divison level" IO, who is trying to maximize the number of agent-application "signing bonuses" (~10K Baht just for him) he pockets.  Thai-Family basically doubles the corruption you must deal with.

 

What does any of that have to do with saving money?

 

I am not saying it doesn't happen, but I had a work permit for 18 years and I've been on a marriage visa since I retired and I have not suffered any of the issues you describe.  I have never used an agent and I have never had to bribe anyone at immigration. 

 

If you have a work permit why do you need a family visa?

[Yellowtail]

18 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

The solution would be to allow us to use a foreign bank/brokerage/etc statement w/ 400K equivalent or AVERAGE mo foreign-income proof of 40K+ (no monthly bank-deposit bull), like we can at the MFA's Consulate in Penang, where financials are required. 

 

Perhaps they believe it's too easy to falsify the documents. It is easy for them to substantiate money deposited in a Thai bank, foreign banks not so much. 

 

I think it worth noting that as I understand it, the issue stems from people lying to get income statements from their consulates. Another case a a few cheaters ruining it for everyone else.

 

If one is going to live in a county, what is wrong with moving some of one's money to that county? 

 

It reminds me of people that cant afford $1,000 a month for an apartment, so they rent a room for $400 a week. 

 

 

[bangkokbonecollector]

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

Perhaps they believe it's too easy to falsify the documents. It is easy for them to substantiate money deposited in a Thai bank, foreign banks not so much. 

 

I think it worth noting that as I understand it, the issue stems from people lying to get income statements from their consulates. Another case a a few cheaters ruining it for everyone else.

 

If one is going to live in a county, what is wrong with moving some of one's money to that county? 

 

It reminds me of people that cant afford $1,000 a month for an apartment, so they rent a room for $400 a week. 

 

I'll probably do this next time as the world is so craY, you never know what is going to happen. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by bangkokbonecollector

[JackThompson]

33 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

What does any of that have to do with saving money?

It means putting savings into a Thai account (where you have no rights), won't stop IOs blocking your application - They Have Other Ways.  Most of my blocked-applications were not due the financials.

 

Quote

I am not saying it doesn't happen, but I had a work permit for 18 years and I've been on a marriage visa since I retired and I have not suffered any of the issues you describe.  I have never used an agent and I have never had to bribe anyone at immigration. 

Most applicants don't fall into the "agent-only" categories, and most drunk-drivers drive home safely from the bar.  It's the other ones, where the nightmares happen.

 

Quote

If you have a work permit why do you need a family visa?

I am married to a Thai.  With my initial Non-O-Family applications, I did not work here - had a business overseas.  I switched to working here to have income which immigration would except as "valid," and to get into the SSO Medical system for the long-term.  At this point:

 

• BOI would not process my application because I entered on a Non-O, without huge money to their "lawyer" partners.  This is similar with normal immigration, where the "must go out for a B-Visa" scam is designed to force agent-use.  There is no legal reason they cannot do any Non-Imm Extension-reason on any Non-Imm entry.
• One can get a work-permit legally on a Non-O permitted-stay, and then ones permitted-stay is not tied to one's job.  So, no "need to leave by midnight if the job ends" or "apply for 7-days" routine.   Also, if you ever want to go for PR or Citizenship, a "go out for a new visa" due to a job-change starts the required 3 years of "continuous extensions" over, again.

Edited September 5, 2020 by JackThompson

[DrPhibes]

On 9/3/2020 at 12:41 PM, richard_smith237 said:

While there are flaws in your arguments what you point out is ultimately heart breaking and should garner a great deal of sympathy. 

 

This morning I watched a video of a father reunited with his children, arriving home after ASQ. It reminded me of how devastatingly torn apart I was when I couldn’t get home to my family. It reminded me of that day I was reunited with my Wife and Son.

 

I was one of the fortunate ones able to return to Thailand with a Non-Imm Type O Visa (based on marriage to a Thai) and secured a repatriation flight. But there is potentially a great many people slipping through the gaps, unable to get back to their families and loved ones and friends. 

 

This is devastating and more could be done to help people. The hard line and restrictions unnecessary. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Made it to ASQ (5th day) thanks to some of your help.  Going to be tough not to tear up or just flat out sob when I hold my family again (left 1/12/20).

[JackThompson]

25 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Perhaps they believe it's too easy to falsify the documents. It is easy for them to substantiate money deposited in a Thai bank, foreign banks not so much. 

 

I think it worth noting that as I understand it, the issue stems from people lying to get income statements from their consulates. Another case a a few cheaters ruining it for everyone else.

There is not ONE CASE reported of a faked-income letter, which would have seen the violator do prison-time here and when he got home.  I am sure it would have been top-news here, if it ever happened.  

 

As to faked bank-account statements - the MFA has no problem with this.  Providing false-info to Immigration (or the MFA) would be a serious legal charge, and a few who got jail time in Thailand in the news, would serve as a sufficient deterrent. 

 

But, if either of those were really valid concerns, Immigration would not provide VIP Treatment for "bad guys" who fake the financials with their agent-partners.  Immigration's agent-partners flash the money in/out of your account in less than a day, obtaining a "balance letter" in-between, then all money-seasoning checking is magically skipped.   This status-quo is proof that Immigration do not care AT ALL if you "really qualify" - and their "concerns" about "fraud" are really just ruses to force agent-payoffs from legit-applicants.

 

25 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

If one is going to live in a county, what is wrong with moving some of one's money to that county? 

That depends - do you have "rights" in that country?  Or you just get "temporary permission" year-on-year to stay one more year. 

 

Is there any sane reason to believe, if there were a financial-shock here, that foreigners-money in banks would be safe?  In my passport-country, I have rights - and we would get paid-out, or there would be a civil-war.

 

25 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It reminds me of people that cant afford $1,000 a month for an apartment, so they rent a room for $400 a week.

Yes, I've seen this with the poor on buying food-products in tiny increments, while I tend to buy bulk for far less, because I have the "slack".  But that's not the point, here. 

 

People have what they have, and if they have 40K/mo, it should be accepted.  The Thai-wife won't stay married to a bum, and there is no foreigner-welfare here, so that is the real "test" - not immigration's agent-schemes.

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

It means putting savings into a Thai account (where you have no rights), won't stop IOs blocking your application - They Have Other Ways.  Most of my blocked-applications were not due the financials.

 

Most applicants don't fall into the "agent-only" categories, and most drunk-drivers drive home safely from the bar.  It's the other ones, where the nightmares happen.

 

I am married to a Thai.  With my initial Non-O-Family applications, I did not work here - had a business overseas.  I switched to working here to have income which immigration would except as "valid," and to get into the SSO Medical system for the long-term.  At this point:

 

• BOI would not process my application because I entered on a Non-O, without huge money to their "lawyer" partners.  This is similar with normal immigration, where the "must go out for a B-Visa" scam is designed to force agent-use.  There is no legal reason they cannot do any Non-Imm Extension-reason on any Non-Imm entry.
• One can get a work-permit legally on a Non-O permitted-stay, and then ones permitted-stay is not tied to one's job.  So, no "need to leave by midnight if the job ends" or "apply for 7-days" routine.   Also, if you ever want to go for PR or Citizenship, a "go out for a new visa" due to a job-change starts the required 3 years of "continuous extensions" over, again.

 

 

So when you said: "The solution would be to allow us to use a foreign bank/brokerage/etc statement w/ 400K equivalent or AVERAGE mo foreign-income proof of 40K+ (no monthly bank-deposit bull), like we can at the MFA's Consulate in Penang, where financials are required. "  you were just making that up?

 

I've been perusing the site a while, an it seems that far and away, most people that use the funds deposited method do not have any problem getting their visas approved.

 

Why would the BOI have to approve your work permit? I set up and managed a BOI registered company using an office manager I hired from Man-Power. While we did hire an attorney but it was not "huge money" nor was is some sort of BOI ""lawyer" partners"

 

I still do not see what rights I am missing that would stop me from moving a portion of my savings from a US account to a Thai account given the time, effort, grief and money it saves me. 

[Yellowtail]

2 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

There is not ONE CASE reported of a faked-income letter, which would have seen the violator do prison-time here and when he got home.  I am sure it would have been top-news here, if it ever happened.  

 

As to faked bank-account statements - the MFA has no problem with this.  Providing false-info to Immigration (or the MFA) would be a serious legal charge, and a few who got jail time in Thailand in the news, would serve as a sufficient deterrent. 

 

But, if either of those were really valid concerns, Immigration would not provide VIP Treatment for "bad guys" who fake the financials with their agent-partners.  Immigration's agent-partners flash the money in/out of your account in less than a day, obtaining a "balance letter" in-between, then all money-seasoning checking is magically skipped.   This status-quo is proof that Immigration do not care AT ALL if you "really qualify" - and their "concerns" about "fraud" are really just ruses to force agent-payoffs from legit-applicants.

 

That depends - do you have "rights" in that country?  Or you just get "temporary permission" year-on-year to stay one more year. 

 

Is there any sane reason to believe, if there were a financial-shock here, that foreigners-money in banks would be safe?  In my passport-country, I have rights - and we would get paid-out, or there would be a civil-war.

 

Yes, I've seen this with the poor on buying food-products in tiny increments, while I tend to buy bulk for far less, because I have the "slack".  But that's not the point, here. 

 

People have what they have, and if they have 40K/mo, it should be accepted.  The Thai-wife won't stay married to a bum, and there is no foreigner-welfare here, so that is the real "test" - not immigration's agent-schemes.

 

I knew three people that were lying on the income statements, one is dead, one uses funds deposited and I've lost track of the third guy.

 

In the US you are as likely to got to jail for lying on the income statement as you would be for tearing the label off a mattress. 

 

Are  we not currently in a financial shock? Was '97 not a financial shock? Have foreigners been locked of of their accounts? I'm concerned about the dollar going south much more than I am the Baht. 

 

If I were not able to meet the financial requirement to stay here legally, I would move my family to the US. 

[JackThompson]

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So when you said: "The solution would be to allow us to use a foreign bank/brokerage/etc statement w/ 400K equivalent or AVERAGE mo foreign-income proof of 40K+ (no monthly bank-deposit bull), like we can at the MFA's Consulate in Penang, where financials are required. "  you were just making that up?

Why "making up"?   Making up what?  Those are the rules at the Thai-consulate in Penang and, yes, Immigration following the same rules would solve the issue for many. 

 

Just following their own existing-rules, rather than constantly changing them to block legit-applications, would be a huge step-up.

 

Quote

I've been perusing the site a while, an it seems that far and away, most people that use the funds deposited method do not have any problem getting their visas approved.

Then you missed the MANY "landlord docs" denial-reports.  But the income-method is law, so why should it be a problem?  They are only "cracking down" to squeeze corruption-money from more "good guys" who don't (or did not previously) use agents.

 

Quote

Why would the BOI have to approve your work permit? I set up and managed a BOI registered company using an office manager I hired from Man-Power. While we did hire an attorney but it was not "huge money" nor was is some sort of BOI ""lawyer" partners"

If you used the BOI system, you know they provide BOTH the work-permit AND the permitted-stay as a package.  Unlike the regular labor-dept, who provide ONLY the work-permit, Immigration is involved in the BOI process, so have (predictably) corrupted it. 

 

I had no problem getting a work permit from the Labor Dept, but was later blocked from a permitted-stay at immigration due to "new-rules", combined with covid making meeting those "new rules" impossible. 

 

Quote

I still do not see what rights I am missing that would stop me from moving a portion of my savings from a US account to a Thai account given the time, effort, grief and money it saves me. 

Total loss of it, in case of a financial or political "event" in Thailand.  No "grief" etc, if could use a foreign bank-statement, or they would allow "average" income, or "non-pension" incomes, per their existing rules.

Edited September 5, 2020 by JackThompson