Numbered Days For The Grandfather Rule?

[Lelipad]

The Immigration Offices continue to inform those who are renewing their marriage visas that from next year the grandfather rule:

- Either 40k monthly income

- Or 400k continuously laying in the Bank for 3 months before to apply for a renewal

- Or a combination of the two possibilities

will be dropped

the last news I heard was:

- 40k income

- AND 100K continuously laying in the Bank for 3 months before to apply for a renewal

What will be the fate of the retirement visa presently at 800k in Bank or 65k monthly income or a combination of the two options?

Many peoples can with sacrifice and effort meet the deposit in Bank rule but cant show a monthly income.

Regards

[lopburi3]

You heard this where, when, from who, at what immigration office(s)? This is the first report I have seen with this information so I wonder why others have not been reporting this: but you have, it seems, heard this from many people?

[Mumbo Jumbo]

Lop , you beat me to it .....

Mumbo

[Gary A]

I do see one major change coming for the retirement visas. This is ONLY my own experience and feelings. My last two visas I have used the income statement from the US Embassy. While getting my last visa it was mentioned that having 800,000 baht in a Thai bank would be better than the income statement because some people don't tell the truth about their income. The guy went through my bank book with his calculator. Thai immigration is VERY aware that the US Embassy doesn't actually verify your income.

I do intend to use the income statement again the next time. Since Citibank decided to charge a three percent fee for ATM transactions I have not been using the ATM card. That means that all my living expenses now come from wire transfers. Those transfers show in my Thai bank book and prove that my money is coming from the US. I hope that makes him feel more comfortable with the income statement.

[Lelipad]

You heard this where, when, from who, at what immigration office(s)? This is the first report I have seen with this information so I wonder why others have not been reporting this: but you have, it seems, heard this from many people?

I dont think it is the first time you get this information Lopburi3.

the first honk came from "click2cancel" on May 11, triggering an avalanche of 104 worried replies on 7 pages and ended only when Sunbelt declared that the grandfather is definitely a law and has not an expiring date.

then my self, Lelipad, have posted the same honk on June 8, receiving only 1 reply, from you Lopburi3 and I thank you for it and it was again a reassuring reply.

It seems the members of Thai Visa are not much interested in this important matter.

The Nong Khai Immigration Office has given precise information regarding the next year (or more probably on October 1 this same year) withdrawal of the grandfathering law to 2 (two) different and serious friends of mine:

to my friend from US on June 18 when he has renewed his visa

to my friend from UK yesterday June 22 by phone

regards

[chinthee]

I do see one major change coming for the retirement visas. This is ONLY my own experience and feelings. My last two visas I have used the income statement from the US Embassy. While getting my last visa it was mentioned that having 800,000 baht in a Thai bank would be better than the income statement because some people don't tell the truth about their income. The guy went through my bank book with his calculator. Thai immigration is VERY aware that the US Embassy doesn't actually verify your income.

I do intend to use the income statement again the next time. Since Citibank decided to charge a three percent fee for ATM transactions I have not been using the ATM card. That means that all my living expenses now come from wire transfers. Those transfers show in my Thai bank book and prove that my money is coming from the US. I hope that makes him feel more comfortable with the income statement.

You will have no problem if using a Thai bank savings book because the incoming int'l bank transfers are clearly noted. 3 months of that, combined with the embassy letter is fine.

[astral]

This query regarding marriage extensions has come up before and been quashed.

Unless National Police Order 606/2006 Section 7-17 subsection 6

has been changed, then anyone in the system before Oct 2006 is grandfathered on the 400K rule.

It is most likely that the immigration officer has misunderstood the regulations.

If there are problems I suggest you print the Thai version

and have your wife highlight the relevant section.

As for Retirement, well that is a different case.

As I understand it you need to prove an income of 65K a month, but there is NO requirement to remit the

money to Thailand. So I am not sure what the imm officer was doing with his calculator??

[Maestro]

The Nong Khai Immigration Office has given precise information regarding the next year (or more probably on October 1 this same year) withdrawal of the grandfathering law to 2 (two) different and serious friends of mine:

to my friend from US on June 18 when he has renewed his visa

to my friend from UK yesterday June 22 by phone

1. What you say is still only hearsay.

2. “Grandfathering” is not a term understood by Immigration officials. Therefore, it is impossible that an official could have said what your friends say he allegedly said.

3. The current rules regarding extensions of permission to stay are laid down in Royal Thai Police Order No. 606/2549 and remain valid until they are modified, abrogated or superseded by a new Royal Thai Police Order. Officials of the Nongkai Immigration office or of other Immigration offices are not members of the committee drafting these orders and therefore cannot possibly know when a new order will be issued and what its content will be.

4. There is one rule, rule No. 13, in Order 606/2549 that can be interpreted to mean that it will no longer be valid after 1 October 2007:

Provisional Section

13. Within 1 year from the enforcement date of this Order, for the case of the foreigner who has entered Thailand and has been granted to stay temporarily in the Kingdom of Thailand before this Order will be enforced and disqualifies to the criterions set forth on this Order, the Commander of the Immigration Bureau or the authorized officer shall be responsible to consider granting the permission, based on the necessity of the applicant, case by case.

This rule No. 13 does not apply to people who apply for extension for retirement, living with Thai wife, or for any of the reasons covered by rules 7 to 12.

--

Maestro

[Gary A]

This query regarding marriage extensions has come up before and been quashed.

Unless National Police Order 606/2006 Section 7-17 subsection 6

has been changed, then anyone in the system before Oct 2006 is grandfathered on the 400K rule.

It is most likely that the immigration officer has misunderstood the regulations.

If there are problems I suggest you print the Thai version

and have your wife highlight the relevant section.

As for Retirement, well that is a different case.

As I understand it you need to prove an income of 65K a month, but there is NO requirement to remit the

money to Thailand. So I am not sure what the imm officer was doing with his calculator??

I can tell you what he was doing with the calculator. He was adding up how much went through my bank account for the year. It was a LOT less than I spent because I was using my US ATM card. The past two years both immigration offices have had doubts about the letter from the US Embassy. Maybe I LOOK very poor?

[lopburi3]

I suspect they noticed the shortfall in previous review of bank book and this has made them question how you live with no income (or whatever the book shows) not knowing you were using the ATM card for direct access to cash. They never even check mine anymore but I still give them and they didn't even bother to convert the Embassy letter figure to baht this year.

[observer21]

I suspect they noticed the shortfall in previous review of bank book and this has made them question how you live with no income (or whatever the book shows) not knowing you were using the ATM card for direct access to cash. They never even check mine anymore but I still give them and they didn't even bother to convert the Embassy letter figure to baht this year.

Ok, so to keep it simple>  Ferang  - Thai wife - ferang/thai son:  arrive back in Thailnd

next week.  Wife and son have Thai passports.  Ferang (husband/father) has multiple O.

What is he required to do in order to stay inThailand withs his family - re visa.

Does he need to show 400k or does he need to show 400k plus 40k per month

[lopburi3]

Unless over age 50 the only option is 40k monthly family income if without leaving country. If he is willing to do border runs he can use the visa he has for 90 day stays.

He also has the options to work or study in order to receive extensions of stay (if they meet the criteria).

If son arrives as farang of school age there might also be the possibility of using the 500k bank deposit to accompany student for extension of stay. I expect Immigration might have a little heartburn using that method however.

[observer21]

Unless over age 50 the only option is 40k monthly family income if without leaving country. If he is willing to do border runs he can use the visa he has for 90 day stays.

He also has the options to work or study in order to receive extensions of stay (if they meet the criteria).

If son arrives as farang of school age there might also be the possibility of using the 500k bank deposit to accompany student for extension of stay. I expect Immigration might have a little heartburn using that method however.

Thanks Lop,  But what would one do after expiration of multiple O.  Where can a new one be obtained without having to go back to own country?

[lopburi3]

Singapore currently will issue a multi with proof of 400k in a bank account somewhere and normal marriage paperwork. There is one report that Penang is also adopting this procedure but no first person reports of that. KL has been known to provide even without any financial evidence.

[observer21]

Singapore currently will issue a multi with proof of 400k in a bank account somewhere and normal marriage paperwork. There is one report that Penang is also adopting this procedure but no first person reports of that. KL has been known to provide even without any financial evidence.

Thanks again Lop,  I Think the visa run with multiple O would be my prefered method - but things

can change in 15 months

[Sunny Valentine]

2. “Grandfathering” is not a term understood by Immigration officials. Therefore, it is impossible that an official could have said what your friends say he allegedly said.

Proud words. Maybe they could be altered to:

Police regulations, Immigration rules and other written laws concerning Visas are terms not understood by Immigration officials. Therefore it is impossible that a Visa can be granted based on the applicant following any of these rules.

When I renewed my One Year O Extension earlier this Year, I came with proof of income according to the rules (lots of photocopies, including 3 month tax payment. I was turned down, and being told they want to see a full Year of employment. (I had only 6 month). But I got extended after showing them a bank book with over 400000 Baht, most of the money was paid in only a few days before the 2nd application. The morale for me was: Don't follow their rules. They don't care about them.

Sunny

PS: Have been told at application that the Bank Book way won't happen next Year, too. (Pattaya Immigration). That made me believe this Grandfathering is not a temporary, but a written down permanent law thing. Which as can be read here, turned out to be true.

[Maestro]

...One Year O Extension earlier this Year, I came with proof of income according to the rules...(including 3 month tax payment. I was turned down, and being told they want to see a full Year of employment...But I got extended after showing them a bank book with over 400000 Baht

Did you read the rules? According to which rule did you apply for extension this year? Rule 7.17(6), to live with Thai wife? If so, where does it say anything about “3 month tax payment”?

If last year you extended your stay based on 400k in the bank and this year you extended based on income, then you cannot next year revert to extending based on 400k. This is one case where you lose “grandfather” status through your own choice.

--

Maestro

[gzu88bv]

If last year you extended your stay based on 400k in the bank and this year you extended based on income, then you cannot next year revert to extending based on 400k. This is one case where you lose “grandfather” status through your own choice.

Maestro

Maestro, would you please clarify for my little brain

1. last year he extended on 400k in bank

2. this year he reverted and extended on Income

When you say that next year 400k bank option is not possible, do you mean that one can revert once and then in the future you have to stick to your chosen option all the time? In other words one would have to plan well in advance his best option for future extension.

[astral]

1. last year he extended on 400k in bank

2. this year he reverted and extended on Income

When you say that next year 400k bank option is not possible, do you mean that one can revert once and then in the future you have to stick to your chosen option all the time? In other words one would have to plan well in advance his best option for future extension.

The police Order says

except for aliens who entered the Kingdom before this Order came into force and

granted a permit to stay in the Kingdom. If the alien does not have the minimum income

above, he shall have an account deposit in Thailand in the name of either party or both of not

less than Baht 400,000. Proof of account deposit for the previous 3 months is required.

This is from the Immigration English Translation.

Now the way I read that, is that if you were in the system before Oct 2006 you still have the

400K option, even if you had changed to income along the way..

My Thai is not good enough to argue the point with the Immigration Officer, but a lawyer may

be able to, if you are having problems.

[lopburi3]

That should be the interpretation I believe but I also suspect most officers will be out to limit the number that remain in grandfather status so it may not be as easy as it sounds and a lawyer might be advisable if there is a problem encountered.

We have report that a person who changed to retirement, at request of immigration, was not allowed to return to 400k marriage even with the officer trying his best (I believe) to do so.

[Phil Conners]

You heard this where, when, from who, at what immigration office(s)? This is the first report I have seen with this information so I wonder why others have not been reporting this: but you have, it seems, heard this from many people?

I was told the same when extending my non-O (marriage) visa earlier this week in Pattaya (Jomtien): Although I have for years used 400K in the bank as the basis for extension we must next year show income of 40K/month. I politely suggested I had heard that was not the rule elsewhere and the Ms Captain in charge of non-O (marriage) looked very surprised and said these were the rules she had received from her superior.

Perhaps someone with the prerequisite skills could highlight the part of the Thai law that supports this. Then perhaps some good soul could hand it over to the Ms Captain and convince her of the errors in her way? (not me, I'm not going to be the one to make her lose face!)

Edited June 24, 2007 by Phil Conners

[lopburi3]

The OP said:

40k income

- AND 100K continuously laying in the Bank for 3 months before to apply for a renewal

I have not seen anyone else post this and still have not seen anyone else post it so wonder how many people have been told this. Did Jomtien mention 100k bank balance as being part of the "new" requirement?

This change so what is rumor today may turn out to be true or false later but it helps none of use to put too much faith in them. Some have been told they would have to use 40k and other have been told they could continue 400k. The law seems to support the continued use. Will they change the law? Don't believe anyone knows for sure.

[Sunny Valentine]

...One Year O Extension earlier this Year, I came with proof of income according to the rules...(including 3 month tax payment. I was turned down, and being told they want to see a full Year of employment...But I got extended after showing them a bank book with over 400000 Baht

Did you read the rules? According to which rule did you apply for extension this year? Rule 7.17(6), to live with Thai wife? If so, where does it say anything about “3 month tax payment”?

If last year you extended your stay based on 400k in the bank and this year you extended based on income, then you cannot next year revert to extending based on 400k. This is one case where you lose “grandfather” status through your own choice.

--

Maestro

THe three month tax payment were posted here as a requisite for extension based on own income. This was also confirmed by my Lawyer. Where in the rules you cited does it say 1 Year?

And Sunbelt has confirmed to me earlier in a post here that you can still fall back to 400 k once you obtained an extension on income, given you are in the grandfathered group.

Actually I fail to see any past requirements concerning your income in the Police Rules. Yes, they might worry, that I lose my job, but hey, I could lose my money in the bank too, by spending silly amounts too soon, or by getting betrayed by the ATM system here, among other possibilities.

Does anyone know if you have a chance on extension on living with Thai wife If you show them a work contract (and WP) starting the day you apply for extension?

Sunny

[Phil Conners]

The OP said:

40k income

- AND 100K continuously laying in the Bank for 3 months before to apply for a renewal

I have not seen anyone else post this and still have not seen anyone else post it so wonder how many people have been told this. Did Jomtien mention 100k bank balance as being part of the "new" requirement?

Jomtien did not mention anything about a 100K balance requirement, just 40K confirmed monthly income.

[RalphUK]

4. There is one rule, rule No. 13, in Order 606/2549 that can be interpreted to mean that it will no longer be valid after 1 October 2007:

Provisional Section

13. Within 1 year from the enforcement date of this Order, for the case of the foreigner who has entered Thailand and has been granted to stay temporarily in the Kingdom of Thailand before this Order will be enforced and disqualifies to the criterions set forth on this Order, the Commander of the Immigration Bureau or the authorized officer shall be responsible to consider granting the permission, based on the necessity of the applicant, case by case.

This rule No. 13 does not apply to people who apply for extension for retirement, living with Thai wife, or for any of the reasons covered by rules 7 to 12.

--

Maestro

It is possible, I suppose, that a senior immigration offical has misunderstood Rule 13. He wrongly believes it applies to the 400k for marriage exception and this misinterpretation has filtered down to the lower ranks. Thais are not reknowned for questioning their superiors.

[astral]

I was told the same when extending my non-O (marriage) visa earlier this week in Pattaya (Jomtien): Although I have for years used 400K in the bank as the basis for extension we must next year show income of 40K/month. I politely suggested I had heard that was not the rule elsewhere and the Ms Captain in charge of non-O (marriage) looked very surprised and said these were the rules she had received from her superior.

Perhaps someone with the prerequisite skills could highlight the part of the Thai law that supports this. Then perhaps some good soul could hand it over to the Ms Captain and convince her of the errors in her way? (not me, I'm not going to be the one to make her lose face!)

This is the link to the Thai version

I suggest you get Mrs Connors to highlight Section 7-17 subsection 6

which covers the matter.

[Maestro]

Where in the rules you cited does it say 1 Year?

This question is about evidence of income for an application of extension of stay to live with Thai wife.

If you are looking for “1 year” in the English translation of the text under rule 7.17(6) of Police Order 606/2549, you are quite right that it is not there. The Thai original has this text:

(๖) กรณีสมรสกับหญิงไทย ฝ่ายใดฝ่าย

หนึ่ง หรือทั้งสองฝ่ายรวมกันต้องมีรายได้

เฉลี่ยทั้งปี ไม่น้อยกว่าเดือนละ ๔๐,๐๐๐

บาท เว้นแต่คนต่างด้าวนั้น ได้เดินทาง

เข้ามาในราชอาณาจักรก่อนที่คำสั่งนี้

มีผลใช้บังคับ และได้รับอนุญาตให้อยู่ใน

ราชอาณาจักรกรณีสมรสกับหญิงไทย

ต่อเนื่องตลอดมา หากไม่มีรายได้ตามที่

กำหนดข้างต้น ก็ต้องมีเงินฝากธนาคาร

ในประเทศไทย ในนามคนหนึ่งคนใดหรือ

ทั้งสองคน ไม่น้อยกว่า ๔๐๐,๐๐๐ บาท

โดยแสดงบัญชีเงินฝากย้อนหลัง ๓ เดือน

There are two English translations of the relevant part:

Sunbelt’s translation:

“In case of the applicant who is married to a Thai wife, one of them or both of them need to have the total annual income that is averaged out not less than 40,000 Baht per month.”

Immigration’s translation:

“In the case of an alien married to a Thai woman, any party or both must have a total income of not less than Baht 40,000 per month”

I do not know which of the two translations is more accurate, nor does it really matter: only the Thai original is relevant. Personally, I am inclined to believe that Sunbelt’s translation is the more accurate one.

Disclaimer: I am not a mathematician and therefore am not qualified to tell you how to calculate “annual income that is averaged out not less than 40,000 Baht per month” or “total income of not less than Baht 40,000 per month”. With my admittedly limited knowledge of mathematics I believe that in the first case I would need to know the income for at least 12 months, in the second case I wouldn’t know where to start because the period is not specified. That’s where I would refer back to the original.

It is true that there have been several reports saying that where an application for extension was based on the Thai wife’s income, Immigration was satisfied with evidence of tax-paid income for the preceding three months. However, in neither of the two English translations can I see anything to stop an Immigration officer from asking for income evidence over a longer period, and I do not know what the original Thai text says because I cannot read Thai.

--

Maestro

[Maestro]

And Sunbelt has confirmed to me earlier in a post here that you can still fall back to 400 k once you obtained an extension on income, given you are in the grandfathered group.

If Sunbelt said that – and I have no reason to doubt you – and knowing that Sunbelt is a stickler for facts, I am confident that he based it on information received from a senior Immigration official, probably at the Suan Phlu office in Bangkok. Frankly, I also believe that this should be the correct interpretation and for anyone directly affected by it after 1 October 2007 I sincerely hope that the immigration officer dealing with his application will also see it this way.

--

Maestro

[razor]

Where is Sunbelt

2007-05-15

In case of the applicant who is married to a Thai wife, one of them or both of them need to have the total annual income that is averaged out not less than 40,000 Baht per month. Except for the case that the said foreign national has entered Thailand before this Order is enforced and the foreign national has been permitted to stay in the Kingdom by the result of having married to a Thai wife, then if the applicant does not have the said income, then, the latest 3 months records of the account book of any Bank in Thailand with the account name of either or both parties need to have the amount of money not less than 400,000 Baht.

The Chief of Immigration in Bangkok, this morning has confirmed this will still be the case after October 1st 2007, the 400K in the bank will still be one of the options for those that had the extension of stay before Oct 1st 2006.

www.sunbeltasiagroup.com

found at ... http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?s=...t&p=1304034

just ... Dejavu

[jellykookabanj]

What worries me is the wacky and totally inconsistent applications of the rules are made depending on where you apply or the officer you deal with.

Earlier this year i went to Kapchung (south of Surin in isaan) to request extension of my single entry O. Stupidly I had not researched enough and didn't have the required paperwork from the GB embassy to prove 40K per month income.

OK, i smiled and admitted I had been stupid and pleaded for an extension to allow me to travel to Bangkok to obtain said paperwork.

The officer refused any extension and told me to go back to GB and start process again.

He finished the conversation by stating that if I had been able to show a Baht 1.200.000 balance in my bank account then I wiuldn't have even needed the embassy letter.

I was slightly shaken by the arbitrary figure and asked him to show me where it stated that amount in the rules and he shouted that the rules were interpreted by him and he would decide the amount, not me.

I was then ignored until I left the office.