Hi everyone,

 

(fyi, member named "Why Me" suggested I should post my question here).

 

Has anyone heard of or used Integrity Legal firm in Bangkok? I learned about the firm on Youtube. 

 

I'm thinking of using them for various legal issues both in Thailand and US. I'm currently in Bangkok.

 

1hr consultation is 5,000 baht. I need them to help me strategize my legal affairs.

 

Please let me know if you had any experience using their service. 

 

Thank you in advance.

Absolute recommend.

I think I've seen those videos.  I find them rather banal - I don't really get what the point is of reading articles found online and then explaining them in legal sound speak, often without actually adding any new information.  YMMV

 

(Here's an example of some pseudo legal speak I've seen in far too many videos from lawyers:  It should be noted that generally speaking nothing I have said here should be construed as legal advice and the context of your issues may be be circumstantially dependent.  Furthermore, I may or may not be a lawyer but I am factually and substantially but irrelevantly, not your lawyer.)

 

Ok, so two serious things to comment that I hope you find helpful:

 

Foreign lawyers can NOT practice law in Thailand.

The profession is restricted to Thai citizens.  Lawyers can do other kinds of work, but not actually practice law.  Often times a non-Thai lawyer who has put out a shingle in Thailand will be the Managing Director of the firm but will have Thai lawyers do the actual legal work that they cannot legally do themselves.  That's not necessarily a negative, but it is something to keep in mind and could impact the cost of your legal representation.

 

Free consultations

I haven't had the need to use a lawyer in Thailand before, but I'm surprised to hear that he doesn't have a free initial consultation.  I don't mean a long meeting where you go over all the details, just something basic, like 30 minutes - the kind of meeting where you can present an overview of your situation so they can ask a couple of questions, see how they can help you, and get a rough idea of what their services might cost you.  It gives everyone the opportunity to meet each other and see if they are the right person to represent you.

 

Doing a quick search online I do see a number of firms in Bangkok do offer free legal consultations, and I would suggest you check around with several firms before you pay any attorney money to just for the privilege of sitting down in the chair opposite to them.

 

Good luck!

 

Edited December 17, 20205 yr by asiacurious

Due to the defamation laws here it would not be smart to write anything negative about any law firm... but based on what i have seen in their Youtube videos i would suggest to find somebody else.

*deleted*.

 

 

Edited May 31, 20233 yr by JensenZ

On 12/19/2020 at 11:57 AM, jackdd said:

Due to the defamation laws here it would not be smart to write anything negative about any law firm... but based on what i have seen in their Youtube videos i would suggest to find somebody else.

👍

On 12/18/2020 at 8:22 AM, asiacurious said:

Ok, so two serious things to comment that I hope you find helpful:

 

Foreign lawyers can NOT practice law in Thailand.

The profession is restricted to Thai citizens.  Lawyers can do other kinds of work, but not actually practice law.  Often times a non-Thai lawyer who has put out a shingle in Thailand will be the Managing Director of the firm but will have Thai lawyers do the actual legal work that they cannot legally do themselves.  That's not necessarily a negative, but it is something to keep in mind and could impact the cost of your legal representation. 

The owner Benjamin Hart who presents all of the firm's YouTube videos is a THAI CITIZEN, so he most certainly can practice law in Thailand!

1 hour ago, mstevens said:

The owner Benjamin Hart who presents all of the firm's YouTube videos is a THAI CITIZEN, so he most certainly can practice law in Thailand!

You're confused.

Yes he's a Thai citizen.

But note how he introduces his videos --

American attorney and managing director of his firm.

Nothing about being a Thai attorney.

Obviously there are Thai attorneys on his staff.

6 hours ago, mstevens said:

The owner Benjamin Hart who presents all of the firm's YouTube videos is a THAI CITIZEN, so he most certainly can practice law in Thailand!

In order to be licensed to represent clients in court, a Thai lawyer needs to pass both written and oral exams. These exams are only given in the Thai language. This presents a high bar (pun intended) for anyone learning the Thai language as an adult. Very few foreigners working in the legal profession here manage this. I suspect that if Ben had passed these exams and been licensed in Thailand, he'd mention it in his videos.

I see his videos on occasion and so far, I haven't heard him spout any nonsense. Depending on one's subject matter expertise, his observations may or may not be useful. Most important for expats residing in Thailand or thinking of moving, he does seem to stay on top of relevant developments in the news, and he is, after all, in a position to pull it all together, so to speak.

Highly recommend.

I have paid for and received excellent legal advice. I will call on him again if needed.

I wish I could have an opinion, but that is not possible. Unfortunately, I can't say more for legal reasons.

Definitely wouldn't get near him, as he'd try to convince me to cancel my LTR and get a non-O retirement...

13 hours ago, Peter Crow said:

Definitely wouldn't get near him, as he'd try to convince me to cancel my LTR and get a non-O retirement...

I'm curious WHY you think he would do that.

31 minutes ago, Caldera said:

I'm curious WHY you think he would do that.

Go through his videos, where he repeats, ad nauseam, that the LTR is $hit. He even says it is illegal...

16 hours ago, Peter Crow said:

Go through his videos, where he repeats, ad nauseam, that the LTR is $hit. He even says it is illegal...

I have not spotted that. I am skeptical that he has claimed LTR is illegal, as LTR has a Royal Decree supporting it and has a few years of implementation in the Visa being used in practice. In the early days of the LTR it was less clear how one could obtain a Work Permit if one had an LTR, and I speculate (with my having never read Mr.Hart's comment that you claim) possibly in those early days he may have puzzled over the legal process. But today the process is more clear, so I doubt that is his view today. ... or do you recall him claiming some other aspect (than work permits) of the LTR visa being nebulous in regards to legality? ... I confess, I am from Missouri in regards to your memory there.

Note I type the above - where I do agree with those who are not fans of his videos. I am also not a fan of his videos. I am very very NOT a fan. But I also believe in free speech and I am happy that Thailand allows such videos, as long as information is not inappropriate. I am simply skeptical in regards to what you claim is his position on LTR visa.

.

Edited June 1Jun 1 by oldcpu

On 6/1/2026 at 3:15 PM, oldcpu said:

I have not spotted that. I am skeptical that he has claimed LTR is illegal, as LTR has a Royal Decree supporting it and has a few years of implementation in the Visa being used in practice. In the early days of the LTR it was less clear how one could obtain a Work Permit if one had an LTR, and I speculate (with my having never read Mr.Hart's comment that you claim) possibly in those early days he may have puzzled over the legal process. But today the process is more clear, so I doubt that is his view today. ... or do you recall him claiming some other aspect (than work permits) of the LTR visa being nebulous in regards to legality? ... I confess, I am from Missouri in regards to your memory there.

Note I type the above - where I do agree with those who are not fans of his videos. I am also not a fan of his videos. I am very very NOT a fan. But I also believe in free speech and I am happy that Thailand allows such videos, as long as information is not inappropriate. I am simply skeptical in regards to what you claim is his position on LTR visa.

.

Here is his most recent LTR induced bowel movement: "Then we've got the LTR where it seems to just be sort of being done on an ad hoc basis and I have still never understood where BOI seems to get the authority to override the Immigration Act of 1979 and say you don't have to do 90-day reporting."

https://www.legal.co.th/resources/visa-immigration-law/thailand-immigration-law/alert-stricter-criteria-full-range-visas-issued-thailand/

You should also enjoy this one:

https://www.legal.co.th/resources/corporate-and-tax-advisory/thailand-tax-law/thailand-tax-remitting-foreign-income-where-rubber-hits-road/

Edited June 2Jun 2 by Peter Crow

As referenced above he clearly seems to have an issue with the LTR visa.

I ,personally, have never found anything of much use in any of his videos, i may have watched 5/6 of them, so I tend toward the negative, in my impression of the firm.

I am not sure that i can recall him saying that the LTR visa was "illegal" however i do recall one video in which he seemed to suggest that the LTR , as it was constituted, In his opinion, ran contrary to to certain principals of Thai law, (is that the same thing as being illegal?)

{Edit yes it was as per the comment from Peter Crow, above, which quoted his reference to the BOI/LTR overriding the 90 day reporting requirement}

I was going through the LTR application myself at the time, so i passed along the comments to the law firm i was using , (a somewhat larger and more established firm than his). The response i received back, from my lawyer, suggested I should just ignore the content of his video.

Edited June 2Jun 2 by wordchild

15 hours ago, Peter Crow said:

Here is his most recent LTR induced bowel movement: "Then we've got the LTR where it seems to just be sort of being done on an ad hoc basis and I have still never understood where BOI seems to get the authority to override the Immigration Act of 1979 and say you don't have to do 90-day reporting."

https://www.legal.co.th/resources/visa-immigration-law/thailand-immigration-law/alert-stricter-criteria-full-range-visas-issued-thailand/

Thanks for those links.

First I note these words of his in that first link:

"Then we've got the LTR where it seems to just be sort of being done on an ad hoc basis and I have still never understood where BOI seems to get the authority to override the Immigration Act of 1979 and say you don't have to do 90-day reporting. I also don't understand where BOI got the ability to grant work authorization unilaterally. I thought all that had to go through Labour Ministry. Yes, there's the One-Stop System that involves both Immigration and Labour but exactly, again BOI is specifically mentioned in the Immigration Act of '79 as being able to issue visas, but the presumption there is that they are issuing visas associated with ongoing business in Thailand, not visas in and of themselves for people to just sort of come in."

If I read the above correctly, his issue is with the LTR visa holders not doing 90-day reporting where the LTR visa grants a modification from 90-days to instead one year. This is not a hidden perk thou. Its out very very clearly in the open for all to see, clearly and distinctly advertised as an LTR visa perk, so if there was a legal issue, one would think 'the powers that be' would put an end to such. The fact that the 1-year reporting still exists suggests to me there is more to this than what he notes.

Reference his 'work permit' comment, ... others who know more about that need to chime in, but I had thought while the LTR can allow granting of a Work Permit, ... that regardless, the labour department was still involved in providing the work permit to those same foreigners. But I don't know. Others with an LTR and a associated work permit would need to chime in here.

He also puts a caveat on his comment, noting BoI is specifically mentioned in the Immigration Act of '79 as being able to issue visas .. (where 'issue' is his words, not mine). Then he makes a 'presumption'. Are 'presumption's" written law? Given the openness here of BoI advertising the 1-year reporting, I think that quote of his might be considered by some as a bit of a deliberate attention grabbing speculative statement by him.

15 hours ago, Peter Crow said:

You should also enjoy this one:

https://www.legal.co.th/resources/corporate-and-tax-advisory/thailand-tax-law/thailand-tax-remitting-foreign-income-where-rubber-hits-road/

This second link simply goes into taxation status of LTR Visa categories that are tax exempt remitted income to Thailand.

This IMHO is much more clear for LTR visa holders favour, than the 90-day vs 1-year reporting puzzlement of his, as there is a Royal Decree clearly stating the tax exemption for some LTR categories. He has possibly not examined the associated Royal Decree??, or perhaps he has reason in his own mind to think Royal Decrees do not form part of the implementation? or interpretation of Thai law? His statements here puzzle me.

Anyway, IMHO at worst he seems to criticisize what he believes (in his view) is an adhoc implementation aspect to the LTR, but I do not believe, as noted, he has gone so far to claim the LTR visa is illegal.

Further, IMHO, BoI are trying their very best, for Thailand, to attract mobile capital of what they consider to be wealthy foreigners, ... for those foreigners to come to Thailand, and spend some of their foreign capital in Thailand. I assume he does not have an issue with that.

Edited June 3Jun 3 by oldcpu