Confirm 800,000฿ in bank

[Jingthing]

16 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Correct, maybe they sign it in the gap shown

They do not.

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, LALes said:

I remember doing this last year and I don't think there is a receipt.  Its kind of a joke.  They look at your bankbook, hand it back to you and that's pretty much it.

I think I had printed out some info and they took that and threw it into a pile on the desk.

Its really a big nothing.

My opinion is that the reason for these orders is to increase compliance with the balance rules.

But if you know the balance rules and comply there is no reason at all that ignoring that order would be a problem at the next extension!

[NE1]

2 hours ago, rwill said:

I'm not in Pattaya.  But in Ratchaburi last year when I did my extension they asked me to come in with a bank letter on my next 90 day report.  This year when I did my extension they didn't say anything so I am not doing anything.

I did the same thing (Ratchaburi) , they asked me last time , so I complied , copy of updated bank book and bank letter , which they just looked at and returned them to me. This time it wasn't mentioned , so I like you I didn't bother.

[Jingthing]

DEFINITELY don't do it if not asked.

 

But I'm suggesting that people should not bother to do it even if asked.

[natway09]

I thought it was pretty obvious why they wanted to check & i do not blame them

[scubascuba3]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

They do not.

if i bother to do it, I'll get them to sign it

[EricTh]

So it is actually 90 days and not 3 months as wrongly informed in the past?

 

3 months can actually means more than 90 days due to the 31 days in a month.

Edited March 11, 2022 by EricTh

[skatewash]

16 minutes ago, natway09 said:

I thought it was pretty obvious why they wanted to check & i do not blame them

Nearly all the other immigration offices are content to wait for the applicant to apply for their new extension of stay and check their compliance with the requirements for their last extension at that point.  If they haven't complied they don't get their extension of stay approved.  Pattaya is one of the very few immigration offices to decide to both do that and additionally ask the applicant to attend the immigration office in person at additional times throughout the year. 

People can chose to satisfy their obligation to file 90 day reports by using the online application that immigration has provided for that purpose or to use the mail to file their 90 day reports.  Both of these avenues which are allowed by immigration offices have the effect of reducing the number of visits that applicants must make to the immigration office.  I think it's pretty obvious why in the time of covid that might not be such a bad idea.

Edited March 11, 2022 by skatewash

[scubascuba3]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

 

My opinion is that the reason for these orders is to increase compliance with the balance rules.

 

More likely to add red tape so some people move to using an agent, the 2 years i used an agent the 800k wasn't required

[Jingthing]

49 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

if i bother to do it, I'll get them to sign it

I think they keep that form.

[couchpotato]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

DEFINITELY don't do it if not asked.

 

But I'm suggesting that people should not bother to do it even if asked.

You are normally a stickler for rules etc, so now you are advocating guys go against immigration requirements, when they are specifically told to do so. Shame on you????

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, couchpotato said:

You are normally a stickler for rules etc, so now you are advocating guys go against immigration requirements, when they are specifically told to do so. Shame on you????

Because there is no evidence whatsoever that there is s consequence for not doing it.

There are serious consequences for not complying with the balance rules though.

Get the BIG difference?

I do.

[couchpotato]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Because there is no evidence whatsoever that there is s consequence for not doing it.

There are serious consequences for not complying with the balance rules though.

Get the BIG difference?

I do.

Nah, not a good enough comeback.   You are probably correct that there is no consequence, but you are still advocating disobedience.....So obviously you do not get the difference, but as Trink would say 'Enough said".

Have a good evening dear.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, couchpotato said:

Nah, not a good enough comeback.   You are probably correct that there is no consequence, but you are still advocating disobedience.....So obviously you do not get the difference, but as Trink would say 'Enough said".

Have a good evening dear.

If someone can provide evidence of a consequence I will change my opinion immediately.

 

I'm waiting

 

 

....

[skatewash]

5 minutes ago, couchpotato said:

You are normally a stickler for rules etc, so now you are advocating guys go against immigration requirements, when they are specifically told to do so. Shame on you????

My understanding is that he is advocating that people comply with the minimum balance rules when they apply for a new retirement extension, which is why one provides a 12-month bank statement.  Immigration can make the decision at that point whether the applicant has complied with those requirements or not and grant a new extension or not.  Many immigration offices do it exactly this way, although it seems that Pattaya is one office that additionally wants to see that minimum balance requirements are met at additional times during the year.  Tying it to filing 90-Day Reports compels people to make their 90-Day Reports in person, while to comply with the 90-Day Report requirements one is allowed to do so by using the online application or by mail.  There is nothing preventing the immigration office from checking that the applicant complied with minimum balance requirements at all times during the relevant period (which is the reason for the 12-month bank statement) when applicant requests another retirement extension.  The additional checking is not required by law (if it were all the immigration offices would be doing it) but is rather the policy of a particular office.  If there are no consequences for not following this policy then it doesn't seem unreasonable to me (especially in covid times) to attend immigration in person the fewest times required.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

If someone can provide evidence of a consequence I will change my opinion immediately.

 

I'm waiting

 

 

....

Remember balance checks are never mentioned in national immigration law. The balance rules are.

 

Again.

 

Get the difference?

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, skatewash said:

My understanding is that he is advocating that people comply with the minimum balance rules when they apply for a new retirement extension, which is why one provides a 12-month bank statement.  Immigration can make the decision at that point whether the applicant has complied with those requirements or not and grant a new extension or not.  Many immigration offices do it exactly this way, although it seems that Pattaya is one office that additionally wants to see that minimum balance requirements are met at additional times during the year.  Tying it to filing 90-Day Reports compels people to make their 90-Day Reports in person, while to comply with the 90-Day Report requirements one is allowed to do so by using the online application or by mail.  There is nothing preventing the immigration office from checking that the applicant complied with minimum balance requirements at all times during the relevant period (which is the reason for the 12-month bank statement) when applicant requests another retirement extension.  The additional checking is not required by law (if it were all the immigration offices would be doing it) but is rather the policy of a particular office.  If there are no consequences for not following this policy then it doesn't seem unreasonable to me (especially in covid times) to attend immigration in person the fewest times required.

It is NOT tied to 90 day address reports!.Totally separate.

[skatewash]

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

It is NOT tied to 90 day address reports!.Totally separate.

I was relying on the OP's statement:
 

Quote

For my initial 90-day report after extending my one-year visa, Pattaya Immigration wants proof of continued funds in bank.

I don't use the Pattaya immigration office so I don't know what their policy is exactly.  The OP seemed to think it was tied to the 90-Day Report.

 

[Jingthing]

Also to mention there are established fines for failure to do 90 day address reports.

 

There are no established fines for skipping a balance check.

 

Let's imagine someone being not in balance compliance at the time of an asked for balance check

 

As if they're going to show up  That would be crazy.

 

Such a person would have the rest of the year to either leave Thailand or find an agent fixer for the next extension.

Edited March 11, 2022 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, skatewash said:

I was relying on the OP's statement:
 

I don't use the Pattaya immigration office so I don't know what their policy is exactly.  The OP seemed to think it was tied to the 90-Day Report.

 

Understood.

He was wrong.

[LALes]

Well, I did the show the money on Tuesday.  Went to Jomtien at 4pm and walked right in.  Went over to Window 8 and handed the girl my passport, my bankbook and the letter.  She told me to make copies of necessary pages in both and come back.  I did.  I came back  handed in all my stuff.  They checked the figures and handed me back my passport and bankbook.  They kept the form and copies.  Done.  Total cost 12 baht.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, LALes said:

Well, I did the show the money on Tuesday.  Went to Jomtien at 4pm and walked right in.  Went over to Window 8 and handed the girl my passport, my bankbook and the letter.  She told me to make copies of necessary pages in both and come back.  I did.  I came back  handed in all my stuff.  They checked the figures and handed me back my passport and bankbook.  They kept the form and copies.  Done.  Total cost 12 baht.

As previously noted you get no receipt. 

[mtls2005]

On 3/11/2022 at 3:35 PM, PaulDee said:

I'll update my passbook with a deposit and hope that suffices.

You can just stick in the passbook update machine and do a Balance Forward. No need to deposit or withdraw funds.

[skatewash]

4 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

You can just stick in the passbook update machine and do a Balance Forward. No need to deposit or withdraw funds.

Works for Bangkok bank, doesn't for Krungsri Bank.

[LALes]

I'm using a Bangkok Bank Dollar account for immigration purposes.  You can't use the machine for that.

[Dazkkk]

For my “Retirement Visa” I put

Baht 800.000 into my Thai bank on a months long visit when I set up the account in Hua Hin.
Went back to UK, then returned 3 months later on a simple 30 day visa which I then changed 3 weeks later to a “Retirement Visa” showed money in bank with updated bank book. The bank gave me a letter when I got book updated without me even asking for one. 
I occasionally took money out then put more money in to keep account seasoned, but never let it show less that 800K for more than a few days and always made sure it had 800K 3 months before renewing visa. 
All 90 day reports were done by post and every year renew visa in BKK.

The wife’s family (all 6 with Thai passports)  come to UK regularly on 6 month family visas and wife and son both have dual citizenship (Thai/British) and travel there with no problems at all. 
Covid travel restrictions and requirements in both countries are changing by the day, so you shouldn’t have any problems.
Good Luck.  

 

[Resident Alien]

On 3/11/2022 at 8:54 AM, whiteman said:

I also take out 1000k on the same day

1000k is one million. A bit much I would say.

You could withdraw or deposit 100 thb if you want, more than enough.

[OJAS]

12 hours ago, Dazkkk said:

Went back to UK, then returned 3 months later on a simple 30 day visa which I then changed 3 weeks later to a “Retirement Visa” showed money in bank with updated bank book.

There appear to have been 3 different types of "visa" involved in your case:-

 

(1) An initial 30-day visa-exempt entry into Thailand

(2) Conversion of this visa-exempt entry into a non-O visa at your local immigration office (the only one of the 3 which is actually a real genuine McCoy visa, incidentally)

(3) Before the permission to stay granted under the non-O conversion expired an annual extension of stay for retirement

 

[JimmyJ]

On 3/11/2022 at 5:32 PM, scubascuba3 said:

I was at Jomtien today, they just want to see passport and updated passbook, i was surprised they are still asking for it

Why did they ask you to show those?

Was that for filing a 1st 90 Day Report?

Or were you going in for another reason?

[scubascuba3]

Just now, JimmyJ said:

Why did they ask you to show those?

Was that for filing a 1st 90 Day Report?

Or were you going in for another reason?

this is a different 90 day check, this is the 90 day financial check after the extension was granted, meant to be done every year, hit and miss whether they ask