Retirement visa denied -Bank balance below 800k within 3 months of receiving visa

[thaibeachlovers]

On 9/13/2020 at 12:30 AM, Onrai said:

I had to provide my up-dated bank books, a print out of my bank activity from the date of my last retirement visa and a letter from the bank certifying my bank balance was 800,000+ baht. From the bank book and bank statement they could see I had not maintained 800,000 for the required 3 months after the visa was isssued.

IMO the only safe way is to have a dedicated account just for the 800,000 that never gets touched.

Still have to jump through nonsensical hoops but it's one less major worry.

[Hamus Yaigh]

19 hours ago, JaneM said:

Had the same problem, wasn't aware of the new rule that wants you to maintain the 800.000 for 3 months after renewing your visa.

In CW they now make you hold a copy of the finance requirement next to your face during the mugshot to 'prove' you know.

[Peterhua]

It does seem that if you use an agent then you will be tied to them for at least 2 years. Not sure they would still charge the full 12500+ fee for the second year if you had the required 800000 in the bank which you would need to deposit in preparation to escape their clutches for the third year. I have a feeling an agent quoted me 7000 if i had the funds.  

[steve187]

On 9/12/2020 at 4:00 PM, ukrules said:

You've been treated very badly and they simply don't care at all.

 

In fact I think it makes them happy when something like this happens, this rule was introduced for one reason only - to discourage and deter people from staying in Thailand.

 

When there's nobody left it will be mission accomplished, they're getting there much quicker than I had anticipated due to COVID.

 

i think the rule was introduced to stop people borrowing the money, under the old rules 3 people could share the money over the course of a year, if they wanted to deter people lots of easy ways to do that, rais the 800,000 to 1.5million as an example

[scotsman]

8 hours ago, JackThompson said:

If skipping the money in the bank during the last year for retirement - yes, agent-only the next year.

 

Marriage - only have to prove 2-mo with 400k pre-application, so no agent the next year.

Retirement - if he has 800K when applying, then 800K for 3 more months, then 400K until the 800K top-up 2-mo before next time, would be OK.
 

This would only change, if the IOs started demanding TWO years of bank-statements for every new application, in which case it would take two years of agent + correct bank-balance to escape the agent-money payoff cycle.

Thank you for the reply The question about going back the next year after using a visa Agent for the first year for a marriage extension using the 400k for 2 months will the immigration officer not ask to see your bank statements and bank book to verify you had the 800k and did not drop below that for the previous year that you got from the visa Agent?  As that extension was for Retirement. 

Regards 

Scotsman  

 

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, scotsman said:

...

The question about going back the next year after using a visa Agent for the first year for a marriage extension using the 400k for 2 months will the immigration officer not ask to see your bank statements and bank book to verify you had the 800k and did not drop below that for the previous year that you got from the visa Agent?  As that extension was for Retirement.

Normally IO will only be interested in checking whether you meet the requirements for the specific extension you are applying for.

Obviously if you use the same bank-book as the one you used for the Agent's extension the previous year, that might 'give you away'.  But simply opening a new bank-account and using that one to provide the evidence of 400K seasoned for 2 months when applying for your upcoming 1-year extension of stay for reason of marriage, would effectively 'cover your tracks'.

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

But simply opening a new bank-account and using that one to provide the evidence of 400K seasoned for 2 months when applying for your upcoming 1-year extension of stay for reason of marriage, would effectively 'cover your tracks'.

What if he wants to see the 12 month banking statement to see if you were financially kosher with your previous one year extension? Sounds like using an agent to sidestep financial requirements puts you into a Hotel California situation going forward....

[Peter Denis]

5 minutes ago, JimGant said:

What if he wants to see the 12 month banking statement to see if you were financially kosher with your previous one year extension? Sounds like using an agent to sidestep financial requirements puts you into a Hotel California situation going forward....

Why should the IO want to see your 12-month bank-statement?  Such statement is not required when applying for the 1-year extension of stay for reason of marriage, as that only requires 2 months of seasoning of the 400K on your personal thai bank-account when applying.  So the 3-month bank statement that any Bank branch can provide you will suffice, in combination with the 'new' bank-book showing the 400K being maintained for at least 2 months at the moment of application.

[scubascuba3]

8 minutes ago, JimGant said:

What if he wants to see the 12 month banking statement to see if you were financially kosher with your previous one year extension? Sounds like using an agent to sidestep financial requirements puts you into a Hotel California situation going forward....

you think they go back 2 years? I've not read any reports of that 

[checkered flag]

12 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Why should the IO want to see your 12-month bank-statement?  Such statement is not required when applying for the 1-year extension of stay for reason of marriage, as that only requires 2 months of seasoning of the 400K on your personal thai bank-account when applying.  So the 3-month bank statement that any Bank branch can provide you will suffice, in combination with the 'new' bank-book showing the 400K being maintained for at least 2 months at the moment of application.

The actual 400K must not be touched until the visa is finally approved in Bangkok which takes about another month. Then , as I understand, the money is available. The 2 month before and 3 months after is for retirement visas.

[JimGant]

4 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Why should the IO want to see your 12-month bank-statement?  Such statement is not required when applying for the 1-year extension of stay for reason of marriage,

Right. But for some reason I thought we were talking about someone who, before applying for a marriage extension, had been on a retirement extension the previous year. As such some (many?) Imm offices are asking for the 12 month bank statement for historical purposes, i.e., to see whether or not you adhered to the financial requirements for the previous year's retirement extension. Fail that test, sorry Charlie, no new extension of any flavor.

[Peter Denis]

8 hours ago, JimGant said:

Right. But for some reason I thought we were talking about someone who, before applying for a marriage extension, had been on a retirement extension the previous year. As such some (many?) Imm offices are asking for the 12 month bank statement for historical purposes, i.e., to see whether or not you adhered to the financial requirements for the previous year's retirement extension. Fail that test, sorry Charlie, no new extension of any flavor.

If that is true, the information I provided is incomplete/incorrect and I apologize but I have never come across such a 'historical' check in reports posted.

Do you by any chance have a report from an applicant applying for a 1-year extension of stay for reason of Marriage using the 400K funds-in-bank method, where his IO required him to provide a 12-month bank statement?

@ubonjoe > Hi UJ, do you know of any reports confirming that?

[ubonjoe]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

If that is true, the information I provided is incomplete/incorrect and I apologize but I have never come across such a 'historical' check in reports posted.

Do you by any chance have a report from an applicant applying for a 1-year extension of stay for reason of Marriage using the 400K funds-in-bank method, where his IO required him to provide a 12-month bank statement?

@ubonjoe > Hi UJ, do you know of any reports confirming that?

They certainly have the right to check if a person complied with the requirements for their current extension. No need to top up the account to 800k baht since only 400k baht is needed for the new extension.

I don't recall any reports of it happening yet but it could well of been done but it would up to the immigration officer whether they would do the new extension based upon marriage or not.

[Pib]

Today at CW I applied to switch from OA retirement extension of stay to a OA marriage extension of stay which was approved (i.e, got the standard issue 30 days under consideration Thai wife/marriage extension stamp in my passport). 

 

Early into the application process the IO had me sign a form which stated if approved for an extension, like a retirement or marriage extension, that if you do not maintain the required income during the extension's period of time you will "not" be approved for a future extension because basically you didn't live-up to the income requirements of your current extension. You are not in a overstay, but you just would not be approved for another extension.  You would then need to leave the country to obtain a new visa....basically start over with a fresh visa.  

 

And I had to sign a form about 90 day address reporting and another form talking deportation/blacklisting for overstays of different lengths.

 

Then the IO started reviewing my application package. 

 

For my extension today I had my bank letter which I got today and my passbook also updated today.  The passbook showed a transaction for each month since this acct pays interest monthly and every four months or so I go update the passbook. I rarely use the account as I just let the money set and serve as my extension of stay and emergency money.   There are none of those consolidated/lump sum transactions that occur when you wait too long to update your passbook.  Since my passbook showed "all" individual transactions (no consolidated periods)  the IO did not require/ask for a 12 month statement which would take about a week to get.  

 

Now it was obvious from how the IO "closely" reviewed my passbook several times that she was first looking back approx 12 months to ensure I had met the income requirements of my current retirement extension which was the Bt800K for three months after it's approval...then I could drop down to a low as Bt400K if desired for seven months....and then I must be back up to at least Bt800K for two months before applying for another retirement extension. 

 

And then if living-up to those requirements, then the IO looked to ensure I met the requirements for my marriage extension of stay application which was Bt400K for two months prior to the application. 

 

But if I hadn't lived up to my current retirement extension income requirements I'm sure my application for a marriage extension would have stopped there....would not have been allowed to apply for another extension of any kind since I didn't live-up to the terms of my current extension.  Would have left CW a very unhappy camper.

 

My passport is now sporting the 30 under consideration stamp....come back in mid Oct for the final stamp that grants one year.   The IO stressed on the day I come back I must update my passbook on that day and provide a copy of the passbook as that is another check to ensure you are complying with the income requirements.

 

Yeap, it's obvious as the big nose on my face that CW is looking to confirm you have complied with the income requirements of your "current" extension before they look to see if you meet the income requirements for the extension you are now applying for.  

 

I also must say "all" immigration personnel I dealt with today from the ones handing out queue tickets to several IOs the wife and I talked to were all professional, polite, and seemed to be in a good mood.   I left CW today a "happy" camper.

 

[Pib]

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

They certainly have the right to check if a person complied with the requirements for their current extension. No need to top up the account to 800k baht since only 400k baht is needed for the new extension.

I don't recall any reports of it happening yet but it could well of been done but it would up to the immigration officer whether they would do the new extension based upon marriage or not.

Today in applying to switch from a OA retirement extension of stay to an OA marriage extension of stay at CW I had to write a short memo addressed to Immigration explaining why I wanted to switch from retirement to marriage extension.   I wrote a few sentences explaining it was for medical and financial reasons and to live with my Thai wife and family for the rest of my wife.   That memo then became an attachment of my application package.

 

The IO also explained to me in English and to my wife in Thai that once switching from a retirement extension to a marriage extension I can "not" switch back to a retirement extension based on my current underlying visa.  Instead, I would need to leave Thailand to kill-off the current visa/extension of stay and then get a new visa....start fresh.  With a new Visa I could then do a retirement extension again if desired.

Edited September 15, 2020 by Pib

[Peter Denis]

2 minutes ago, Pib said:

Today at CW I applied to switch from OA retirement extension of stay to a OA marriage extension of stay which was approved (i.e, got the standard issue 30 days under consideration Thai wife/marriage extension stamp in my passport). 

 

Early into the application process the IO had me sign a form which stated if approved for an extension, like a retirement or marriage extension, that if you do not maintain the required income during the extension's period of time you will "not" be approved for a future extension because basically you didn't live-up to the income requirements of your current extension. You are not in a overstay, but you just would not be approved for another extension.  You would then need to leave the country to obtain a new visa....basically start over with a fresh visa.  

 

And I had to sign a form about 90 day address reporting and another form talking deportation/blacklisting for overstays of different lengths.

 

Then the IO started reviewing my application package. 

 

For my extension today I had my bank letter which I got today and my passbook also updated today.  The passbook showed a transaction for each month since this acct pays interest monthly and every four months or so I go update the passbook. I rarely use the account as I just let the money set and serve as my extension of stay and emergency money.   There are none of those consolidated/lump sum transactions that occur when you wait too long to update your passbook.  Since my passbook showed "all" individual transactions (no consolidated periods)  the IO did not require/ask for a 12 month statement which would take about a week to get.  

 

Now it was obvious from how the IO "closely" reviewed my passbook several times that she was first looking back approx 12 months to ensure I had met the income requirements of my current retirement extension which was the Bt800K for three months after it's approval...then I could drop down to a low as Bt400K if desired for seven months....and then I must be back up to at least Bt800K for two months before applying for another retirement extension. 

 

And then if living-up to those requirements, then the IO looked to ensure I met the requirements for my marriage extension of stay application which was Bt400K for two months prior to the application. 

 

But if I hadn't lived up to my current retirement extension income requirements I'm sure my application for a marriage extension would have stopped there....would not have been allowed to apply for another extension of any kind since I didn't live-up to the terms of my current extension.  Would have left CW a very unhappy camper.

 

My passport is now sporting the 30 under consideration stamp....come back in mid Oct for the final stamp that grants one year.   The IO stressed on the day I come back I must update my passbook on that day and provide a copy of the passbook as that is another check to ensure you are complying with the income requirements.

 

Yeap, it's obvious as the big nose on my face that CW is looking to confirm you have complied with the income requirements of your "current" extension before they look to see if you meet the income requirements for the extension you are now applying for.  

 

I also must say "all" immigration personnel I dealt with today from the ones handing out queue tickets to several IOs the wife and I talked to were all professional, polite, and seemed to be in a good mood.   I left CW today a "happy" camper.

Hi Pib,

Many thanks for this detailed report!

And it proves me wrong.

As you clearly indicate > CW is looking to confirm whether you have complied with the income requirements of your "current" extension before they look to see if you meet the income requirements for the extension you are now applying for.  

So that means that when you used an Agent to get your 'current' 1-year permission to stay, you are 'hooked' for the next extensions as well.  With only two ways of escaping that Agent-IO stranglehold:

 1 - Using an Agent for your next extension but making sure that despite the Agent taking care of your finances, you would have to do the necessary to be in actual compliance during the full year for that new extension.  And that would allow you at the end of the year to 'break the bond' when applying for the next 1-year extension of stay.

2 - Exit Thailand when your permission to stay is almost due to expire, and start again from scratch.  E.g. by applying abroad for a new Non Imm O Visa, or re-entering Visa Exempt and applying for such new Non Imm O Visa in-country. 

Note: It would probably be wise to do such new Non Imm O Visa application using both a 'fresh' passport and a 'fresh' bank-account to avoid your passport and pass-book giving away that you did not meet the financial requirements in the previous period(s).

 

 

 

[Pedrogaz]

Immigration went through my bank statement with a fine toothed comb. She sighted several transactions with a yellow highlighter pen, but asked no questions and issued the extension.

[Andrew Dwyer]

25 minutes ago, Pedrogaz said:

Immigration went through my bank statement with a fine toothed comb. She sighted several transactions with a yellow highlighter pen, but asked no questions and issued the extension.

Yes, same for me.

My passbook was also copied ( every stamped page ) and studied carefully on a few occasions as it traveled round the IO.

 

My question, which I decided to keep to myself at the time, is:

If requesting a 12 month statement why the need to check, and double check, the passbook ?

If the passbook is not updated regularly not all transactions are printed and therefore makes the passbook information sort of unreliable ( in respect to a dip under 800k or 400k ), so why even bother ?

 

Kind of an unnecessary step IMO !

 

Plus Greta would faint if she saw all the additional copies being made ????

[whiteman]

Did my 800,000 3 month check up yesterday all went well but they never gave me any thing to prove I had been in and done what they asked. So I guess one has to trust them that they updated there computer systems. To me that seems badly run that we get no kind of receipt to prove we are the good guys.

[problemfarang]

Well they denied my non-o multi wrongfully. I used an agent and the magic happened. If you need help contact me. 

[Pib]

I expect immigration could provide plenty of examples of some folks/agents attempting to provide fake documentation, to include fake passbooks, fake IDs, etc.   It's very easy in Thailand to get very convincing looking fake docs.  

 

Therefore, IOs closely check certain docs that are submitted but at the same time I expect they don't want to get anal on the document checking/verification on "everyone all the time" (more of a case-by-case situation) as I expect it would just make it way, way too hard for many people to easily & quickly get certain docs.  

 

Like getting an annual bank statement which includes your name, address, with bank signatures/stamps usually takes around 3-7 days and you might have to get this from the your home branch.     Yea, a person can do ibanking queries going back 6 months and some queries look more professional that others but none of these ibanking type statements will include bank employee signature/initials and bank stamps.

Edited September 16, 2020 by Pib

[JimGant]

2 hours ago, problemfarang said:

Well they denied my non-o multi wrongfully. I used an agent and the magic happened.

Maybe earlier reports in this thread clarify this, but I haven't gone back to check......

 

How can they deny a non o multi -- deny in what fashion? If the visa is still valid, then you get stamped in for 90 days (with few exceptions, like Interpol has a warrant out, etc). Of course, whe're now in the land of no more 90 day stamps, due to border closure.

 

Then, are you saying you got an agent to do a "bogus border run", whereby Imm stamped you out, then right back in for 90 days?

 

Actually, this would be a worthwhile service, and one Imm should have evaluated on its own merits. Hopefully the fee wasn't too high -- and hopefully if such a service for "bogus border runs" exists, such agents can be readily identified, as such agents are NOT in the same ilk as those sidestepping financial requirements.

[Pib]

If Thailand "really" wanted to create a vehicle for a person to do a quick border hop in light of COVID, it seems they could set down with a neighboring country like Myanmar, Laos and/or Cambodia and setup a "turnstile. COVID controlled" type border hop.  Heck, even charge some higher reasonable fee to cover the possible higher costs to the govt to implement this special border hop program.

 

Check out of Thailand....walk a few steps to check-in and then check-out of the neighboring country...walk a few steps to check back into Thailand.  All done in a COVID controlled environment.  This could also be used by the neighboring country for people who need to do a border hop.  Be of a benefit to both countries.  

 

And of course Thailand could really do a similar thing all within Thailand/at a local immigration office/no need to leave Thailand if they really wanted to.   However, doing such calls into question the true need to follow current, long established immigration rules/laws which means they will probably not bend the rules/laws too much and only for a short while like how the govt is currently bending their immigration rules/laws for a limited time frame.  

[SammyJ]

On 9/12/2020 at 11:57 AM, Onrai said:

Thanks. Yes I know that after the fact. We went to great lengths to get the checklist of requirements from the immigration officer. I got the original retirement visa in Chiang Khan and have subsequently moved and am applying for the renewal in Phuket. Unfortunately, Chiang Khan’s checklist did not include the pertinent provision regarding maintaining a balance of 800k after getting the visa. Their mistake by omission but it looks like I am the one who is going to pay. 

But this requirement is so widely discussed and listed in so many places that discuss the "retirement" visa and the 800,000 baht, did you not look on the Immigration website, an embassy or consulate website, or any of many hundreds, if not thousands, of other places, this information is clearly displayed.  Sorry, you missed it, but to blame someone else is really just wrong.  The slightest bit of research on your own would have provided you with very clear details about what is required.

[checkered flag]

19 hours ago, Pib said:

If Thailand "really" wanted to create a vehicle for a person to do a quick border hop in light of COVID, it seems they could set down with a neighboring country like Myanmar, Laos and/or Cambodia and setup a "turnstile. COVID controlled" type border hop.  Heck, even charge some higher reasonable fee to cover the possible higher costs to the govt to implement this special border hop program.

 

Check out of Thailand....walk a few steps to check-in and then check-out of the neighboring country...walk a few steps to check back into Thailand.  All done in a COVID controlled environment.  This could also be used by the neighboring country for people who need to do a border hop.  Be of a benefit to both countries.  

 

And of course Thailand could really do a similar thing all within Thailand/at a local immigration office/no need to leave Thailand if they really wanted to.   However, doing such calls into question the true need to follow current, long established immigration rules/laws which means they will probably not bend the rules/laws too much and only for a short while like how the govt is currently bending their immigration rules/laws for a limited time frame.  

The border hops were not controlled by the local immigration office, while those doing legitimate extension had to do everything by the book. It wasn't hard IMO, but everything had to be done. I found that asking the IO politely they would be very specific and helpful. If the legitimate way requires proof of financials, those avoiding the financials by doing in and outs, must be viewed as circumventing the system. 

Now with the borders closed the in and out crowd needs to face the IO who can see all in their computers and your passport. Its no wonder that they stick strictly to the rules and are less than pleased. 

[checkered flag]

1 hour ago, SammyJ said:

But this requirement is so widely discussed and listed in so many places that discuss the "retirement" visa and the 800,000 baht, did you not look on the Immigration website, an embassy or consulate website, or any of many hundreds, if not thousands, of other places, this information is clearly displayed.  Sorry, you missed it, but to blame someone else is really just wrong.  The slightest bit of research on your own would have provided you with very clear details about what is required.

I agree. The three month after rule has been in place for over a year. Initially, it was thought that they would only check when you renewed, but some offices put a stamp in your passport to bring an updated bank book at your 90 day report. However initially, many felt they wouldn't check. 

The rule was quite clear and those who dipped into the 800K are getting burned. 

No reason to complain about anyone other that yourself. 

[JimGant]

1 hour ago, SammyJ said:

The slightest bit of research on your own would have provided you with very clear details about what is required.

Jesus H Christ, lay off the poor guy. He simply made the mistake of believing Chiang Khan's checklist was accurate and COMPLETE. Are we supposed to double check every Thai government edict for its accuracy? In light of this case, it might be a good idea -- and I'm sure Onrai will in the future.

 

Now, is there anyone out there who tried to renew their OA retirement extension and didn't know they needed Thai insurance? Please report in so that members can smirk and feel good about calling you stupid.

[Peter Denis]

2 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Jesus H Christ, lay off the poor guy. He simply made the mistake of believing Chiang Khan's checklist was accurate and COMPLETE. Are we supposed to double check every Thai government edict for its accuracy? In light of this case, it might be a good idea -- and I'm sure Onrai will in the future.

 

Now, is there anyone out there who tried to renew their OA retirement extension and didn't know they needed Thai insurance? Please report in so that members can smirk and feel good about calling you stupid.

Thanks very much for that post, you beat me to it!  I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Some of these de-grader posts on the Forum really make me cringe.

If a post is in no way helpful for the IO or the wider TVF community, but only made to provide the poster with a sense of (false) superiority by 'rubbing it in', that's just sad (and that's also the liking such posts get from me). 

[checkered flag]

21 minutes ago, JimGant said:

Jesus H Christ, lay off the poor guy. He simply made the mistake of believing Chiang Khan's checklist was accurate and COMPLETE. Are we supposed to double check every Thai government edict for its accuracy? In light of this case, it might be a good idea -- and I'm sure Onrai will in the future.

 

Now, is there anyone out there who tried to renew their OA retirement extension and didn't know they needed Thai insurance? Please report in so that members can smirk and feel good about calling you stupid.

He posted a complaint about the TI office in Chiang Khan, who was only doing his/her job. It's real easy to complain about others, but your responsible for your own actions. Dipping into the 800K is dangerous and he should have know better.

Don't blame the TI officer but accept your responsibility. 

[Onrai]

27 minutes ago, JimGant said:

checklist was accurate and COMPLETE. Are we supposed to double check every Thai government edict for its accuracy? In light of this case, it might be a good idea -- and I'm sure Onrai will in the future.

 

Now, is there anyone out there who tried to renew their OA retirement extension and didn't know they needed Thai insurance? Please report in so that members can smirk and feel good about calling you stupid

Please read the the sign at the Phuket Immigration office. The immigration screening officer pointed it out to every single person to read, myself included. Unfortunately the sign is inaccurate and nowhere does it specify the 800k 2months before, 3 months after requirement.