In the middle of August  I presented to Phrae Immigration to renew my retirement visa( which was due on the 26th of September). After filling out the paperwork, complying with the local requirements, photo's around my house, map of the area and evidence of my overseas assets the staff presented my passport to the O.I.C. of Phrae immigration for signature... he refused to sign! He said he would not sign until I showed a letter from my embassy showing proof of income! His staff pointed out that my embassy did not give letters anymore and there was nothing wrong! He still refused to sign, saying that he only recognised 800 thousand in the bank and continued to ignore repeated statements from his staff and other staff from immigration officers in the area!

 

The upshot is; the Phrae office had to over stamp my new visa's as "void" refund my money and suggest "tongue in cheek" that I use a nominated "agent"! Chiang Wattana said they could not help and if I had a complaint then I could bring it to the head of Immigration in Phrae (the man who started the problem)

 

As I couldn't renew my visa in Phrae nor would Chiang Wattana allow me to renew my visa there I was forced to leave the country...any advice would be appreciated!

Sounds like a classic case of corruption and you have the proof in your passport.

 

Report it to the national anti corruption authorities - 'NACC Thailand' is their name.

 

That cancelled visa in your passport is evidence of his malfeasance.

 

19 hours ago, foureyes10 said:

He said he would not sign until I showed a letter from my embassy showing proof of income!

 

19 hours ago, foureyes10 said:

He still refused to sign, saying that he only recognised 800 thousand in the bank . . .

Which one was it?

Shady immigration staff, get 800k in the bank, kick off again on return

So you had an updated bank book showing a minimum of 65k per month for the previous 12 month coming into Thailand as a foreign transfer?

Something not right with this story.

 

OP, what are your previous experiences with Phrae immigration office. 

 

What does this mean in your OP..

 

".....and evidence of my overseas assets..…."

3 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Something not right with this story.

 

OP, what are your previous experiences with Phrae immigration office. 

 

What does this mean in your OP..

 

".....and evidence of my overseas assets..…."

Ever the conspiracy theorist - lol

This story stinks... there is something missing from your submission to the IO... but let's bash the IO because they are corrupt and nasty people... 55555

9 minutes ago, PJ71 said:

Ever the conspiracy theorist - lol

OP joined yesterday.

Zero posts.

Was in forum 4 hours ago and no contribution to thread.

 

OP referenced his embassy does not provide "income letter" 

Stated was at immigration to "renew his extension" 

Implies has done extensions previously.

More details required. 

 

I think there are a few offices which, were you to relocate to their serving area, refuse to issue a new permission to stay for retirement/income on an existing visa/permission to stay, on the 65,000 monthly foreign-sourced remittance. They only allow the 800,000 method.

 

I think Samut Prakan is one such "picky" office?

 

One needs to do a lot research before moving IMO. In hindsight the OP would have been better served had they renewed their permission to stay at CW (their previous serving office) just before moving to a new province. Then you have nearly a year to sort out the new office's requirements.

 

I also think the OP had a permission to stay until 26 Sep 2023, so I am unclear why they were forced to leave prior to that date? (I think the new stamp was made by the initial IO, payment made, then a senior officer rejected the application and that stamp was red-lined and the 1,900 baht returned.) I might have pursued some other options, including the agent recommendation rather than giving up and leaving?

 

I think the OP now needs to top up their account to 800,000, return on 30-day Tourist Visa Exemption, transition to a 90-day Non-O, then begin extending that "new" visa.

 

Assuming that the OP was applying for a further one year permission to stay for the purposes of retirement, the thing that stood out ,for me, was the quote "and evidence of my overseas assets" . This does not satisfy the financial requirements for the extension so unless bank deposit of 800K or transfers to Thailand bank account of 65k/month was shown then the boss was correct not to sign.

 

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, terryq said:

Assuming that the OP was applying for a further one year permission to stay for the purposes of retirement, the thing that stood out ,for me, was the quote "and evidence of my overseas assets" . This does not satisfy the financial requirements for the extension so unless bank deposit of 800K or transfers to Thailand bank account of 65k/month was shown then the boss was correct not to sign.

 

 

 

 

I inferred, perhaps mistakenly, that they had a an existing permission to stay issued at CW last September (2022) via the monthly qualifying foreign transfer method.

 

CW has strict requirements re: acceptable documentation showing the twelve (12) monthly qualifying foreign transfers (passbook copies, shows as FTT, credit advice receipts/summary letter, etc.). So if they had those for CW I assume they used the same for this process at Phrae Imm?

 

Maybe the OP needs to clarify the exact details?

 

 

I don’t understand your post. You said he wanted a letter showing proof of income, then wanted to see 800k in a Thai bank.

 

Which of those do you have?

2 hours ago, JimTripper said:

I don’t understand your post. You said he wanted a letter showing proof of income, then wanted to see 800k in a Thai bank.

 

Which of those do you have?

My understanding of his initial post is that (i) his embassy does not do income letters; (ii) he has proof of income from transferring 65,000 baht per month into his Thai bank account; and (iii) he does not have 800,000 baht in his account. Most officials felt this qualified him for the extension, but the boss disagreed.

 

There is one aspect of his story that I do not find credible: that the senior official's subordinates were arguing with his decision. Thai officials do not do that. The rest could be true.

3 hours ago, BritTim said:

My understanding of his initial post is that (i) his embassy does not do income letters; (ii) he has proof of income from transferring 65,000 baht per month into his Thai bank account; and (iii) he does not have 800,000 baht in his account. Most officials felt this qualified him for the extension, but the boss disagreed.

 

There is one aspect of his story that I do not find credible: that the senior official's subordinates were arguing with his decision. Thai officials do not do that. The rest could be true.

They sure would not do it in a public space where everyone could hear it (loss of face). How did the op know what they were saying?