Stickman Is Wrong

[paulfr]

Stickman, recently back from his rest, posted this a week ago ...

Following on from the new rule from the Immigration Department that anyone wishing to apply for a retirement visa must have 800,000 baht in the bank for THREE MONTHS PRIOR TO APPLYING FOR THE VISA, the same applies for marriage visas. In the case of the marriage visa only 400,000 baht need be present, but the three month ruling where the balance cannot drop below the level of 400,000 baht, is the same.

This is incorrect I believe.

I thought money in the bank was dropped for proving income > 40K baht/month.

Not sure about retirement and the 800K baht.

Anyone know for sure ??

[lopburi3]

It is correct for those allowed to continue using the 400k option. But to date it has not been enforced - some are being told that this will be the case next year and others are being told there will be no next year without change to 40k so it remains to be seen if the three month rule is required or not for family extensions.

For retirement it is in effect for all new applications but for those with previous extensions allowances are still being made for the fact that many do not know of the new rules so they are told to do so next time.

[Huw]

Stickman, recently back from his rest, posted this a week ago ...

Following on from the new rule from the Immigration Department that anyone wishing to apply for a retirement visa must have 800,000 baht in the bank for THREE MONTHS PRIOR TO APPLYING FOR THE VISA, the same applies for marriage visas. In the case of the marriage visa only 400,000 baht need be present, but the three month ruling where the balance cannot drop below the level of 400,000 baht, is the same.

This is incorrect I believe.

I thought money in the bank was dropped for proving income > 40K baht/month.

Not sure about retirement and the 800K baht.

Anyone know for sure ??

Last year I renewed for the 2nd time. The only thing I needed was a bank book showing a balance of 800,000. I will be doing it again this year, hopefully it hasnt changed. If it has I am back to Aussie.

Huw

[Luckydog]

Immigration in Jomtien told me they didn't care about the 3 month rule.......for Retireds.

Edited April 30, 2007 by Luckydog

[Badbanker]

It seems to me that as a powerful friend of mine at Bangkok Bank once said he could give a Visa Credit card to a buffalo.

I do believe that the same is true about Thai embassies and Immigration. We are dealing with individual fiefdoms here and frankly they can and do anything they want. If they want to give you a multiple "O" for one year or an extension based on something not in the books and there has been grease or not they will do it! If they want to.

I have a friend who is Thai of Indian extraction who spends his time at immigration in Suan Plu. He is very well known and he can and does get amazing things done for anyone prepared to pay 10 or 20 k baht!

That this sort of thing is available, shows that the law is not the law and as we all know TIT!

BB

[farangconnection]

I think this applies to first timers only. Maestro will probably cut me to pieces and insult me again if I'm wrong, but that's his way. Incidently, the info I was given WAS wrong, when I made it quite clear that I only wanted info from those who DEFINATELY knew.

I went to Immigration and was informed that I technically did not have to have money in the bank renewing a visa on the strength of a work permit. However , the nice gentleman did inform me that if I did have the money in the bank, (which I did) it would make things a whole lot easier if I just applied for a marriage extension, and then went and renewed my work permit. This of course was the answer I was looking for in the first place.

[lopburi3]

Your question was:

I have a work permit, also I am on a one year marriage visa extension. What do I apply for this time around. Surely you don't need 400,000 in the bank if you are a legitimate worker

The answers I see gave you the correct information - the marriage extension requires continued use of 400k or 40k monthly family income. You later stated an income of 25k so you would not qualify for marriage or employment extension on that alone.

[Sunny Valentine]

In February I was turned down at Pattaya Immigration on the grounds of extending my 1 Year Marriage Visa based on 50000 WP income. I could only show them 4 or 5 month paid tax, they wanted a full Year. (Working since October last Year). Made an application on 400000 in Bank then (although most of the money was there only a week or so before, and did not come from abroad) and was granted the extension after 30 Days.

Who ever says we should follow the rules has no clue. There are no rules, and if there are any, Immigration does not care. They do what they like, and expect us to catch up with whatever they want.

I do not believe they want us out, it rather looks like thy don't have the Intellect to stipulate rules that make sense and can be enforced. Like Beavis and Butthead, sitting on a couch in front of the TV, empty Beer cans everywhere, and shouting "Huh Huh, Farang! Huh Huh". "Ha Ha Ha Farang!"

Sunny

[lampard10]

Your question was:

I have a work permit, also I am on a one year marriage visa extension. What do I apply for this time around. Surely you don't need 400,000 in the bank if you are a legitimate worker

The answers I see gave you the correct information - the marriage extension requires continued use of 400k or 40k monthly family income. You later stated an income of 25k so you would not qualify for marriage or employment extension on that alone.

In actual fact Lopburi, as you yourself pointed out, the question I asked was " What do I apply for this time around?" I did not get an answer to this question. I put this to the official, and he said it would be easier for everyone if I applied for a marriage visa. Maestro could quite easily have told me that, if in fact he did know, without insulting my intelligence. As it is, I have reread the answers myself, and now realise they were referring to a household income, something which I had not previously heard of. For this I aplogise profusely. So basically what you are implying, is that all the unmarried school teachers roaming about the countryside, earning around 25,000-30,000 a month, are doing it illegally, with no chance of getting a visa or work permit, unless they have 400,000 in the bank. In that case, why work. And most of the teachers I have come across, haven't had two satang to rub together.

[lopburi3]

The 40k income requirement is only for extension of stay under the new family provisions. It has nothing to do with other categories or work permits and surly has absolutely nothing to do with 400k in a bank account (that was only used for the old support Thai wife extensions of stay).

For business/employment there are work permit rules and extension of stay rules. For extension of stay there is a scale of income required by nationality. But there are also exemptions such as reporters and teachers.

If you have a work permit on a valid visa entry you are legal - you do not have to extend your stay on a yearly basis to be here in a legal status.

[lampard10]

The 40k income requirement is only for extension of stay under the new family provisions. It has nothing to do with other categories or work permits and surly has absolutely nothing to do with 400k in a bank account (that was only used for the old support Thai wife extensions of stay).

For business/employment there are work permit rules and extension of stay rules. For extension of stay there is a scale of income required by nationality. But there are also exemptions such as reporters and teachers.

If you have a work permit on a valid visa entry you are legal - you do not have to extend your stay on a yearly basis to be here in a legal status.

Now that is something I did not know. In fact there are thousands of things I do not know. Thank you for taking the time to enlighten me a little. I guess my biggest problem is, being a Pub manager, I hear about 7,578 different versions of the visa rule on a daily basis.

[shoewah]

There is a new writer for stickman weekly column, the writer calls himself stick mark. The writing style and his attitude is clearly different from old stickman. He mimics the original stickman style but he's not as good.

Possibly Stickman sold the website.

[paulfr]

There is a new writer for stickman weekly column, the writer calls himself stick mark. The writing style and his attitude is clearly different from old stickman. He mimics the original stickman style but he's not as good.

Possibly Stickman sold the website.

I don't think so.

Stickman is a friend of a friend of mine and he says Stick was

finally ready to put some personal problems behind him and

get back in the saddle.