4 hours ago, NorthernRyland said:

 

Immigration requires the letter from a Thai bank and yet the bank has no legal obligation. That's so typical of communication between Thai people and it goes all the way up the government levels too.

Why? Surely when someone is acquiring a product they would check that the product functions in the way required.

I am fairly certain that there are some Thai banks that have never had to provide a letter so why should there be an obligation to cater for a demand that doesn't exist.

The BBL did not refuse to provide a letter, appears they altered the requirements to do so. The real problem lies in how the change was introduced and I know from personal experience with my own bank notifications are not as good as they should be.

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

Why? Surely when someone is acquiring a product they would check that the product functions in the way required.

I am fairly certain that there are some Thai banks that have never had to provide a letter so why should there be an obligation to cater for a demand that doesn't exist.

The BBL did not refuse to provide a letter, appears they altered the requirements to do so. The real problem lies in how the change was introduced and I know from personal experience with my own bank notifications are not as good as they should be.

Unfortunately in some cases they ARE refusing to provide the letter.

 

Multiple reports of people who use monthly transfers to satisfy their extension requirement are being flat out turned away from some branches of Bangkok Bank, and being told that service is no longer offered.  Many have solved it by going to a different branch and getting the letter without issue. But the fact that any branch is just straight up refusing to provide something that is REQUIRED for the person to remain in Thailand is concerning.

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

Surely when someone is acquiring a product they would check that the product functions in the way required.

Perhaps not when the said letter has been provided for many years previously. 

This is about nonsense change of BBL policy (out of the blue) 

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

I am fairly certain that there are some Thai banks that have never had to provide a letter so why should there be an obligation to cater for a demand that doesn't exist.

Name them and in any event irrelevant. 

 

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

The BBL did not refuse to provide a letter, appears they altered the requirements to do so

Is that a joke? 

Seriously all of a sudden requiring folk to effectively have frozen account for perhaps up to 4 months. 

How did the guys on marriage extensions anticipate that nonsense. 

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

The real problem lies in how the change was introduced and I know from personal experience with my own bank notifications are not as good as they should be.

What are you on about. 

The change was introduced with zero notice. Equates to blindsided. 

 

11 hours ago, sandyf said:

It is not a question of interfering with immigration policy, there is no obligation on a bank to provide such a document it is only a matter of customer service.

So clearly you do not require Bank Letter for immigration purposes unlike the many thousands that do. 

 

Mental note: when I attend CW for my next extension I will point out to immigration that bank has no obligation to provide said letter. 

14 hours ago, BrandonJT said:

Unfortunately in some cases they ARE refusing to provide the letter.

 

Multiple reports of people who use monthly transfers to satisfy their extension requirement are being flat out turned away from some branches of Bangkok Bank, and being told that service is no longer offered.  Many have solved it by going to a different branch and getting the letter without issue. But the fact that any branch is just straight up refusing to provide something that is REQUIRED for the person to remain in Thailand is concerning.

This thread was posted some time back.

This year however, Bangkokbank told us that since 1 July, they require you to have the money in your account for 4 months (!!), before they can issue a letter that confirms proof of funds for various visas. And if you do not meet this 4 month requirement, they will lock the funds in your account for an additional 4 months, before you can access it; while giving you the right papers that you need for immigration (proof of funds for 2 months). Its not an immigration or visa requirement, but rather a banking requirement to deter money laundering and people using agents (that is what they told us).

https://www.reddit.com/r/Thailand/comments/1mb5tlc/bangkokbank_has_new_requirements_for_proof_of/

 

When the 30 days on my extension got extended my wife had to phone immigration to check when it would be available. She asked why the delay and was told it was down to investigating applications from   agents. Wouldn't surprise me if this spreads to other banks.

It is quite amazing that when someone struggles to fund health care the consensus is they can't afford to be in Thailand. When someone can't afford to keep  the 400K in the bank, it is everyone's fault but theirs.

 

On 9/12/2025 at 4:02 PM, johng said:

This stems from a case in Pattaya, bank staff  taken into custody for

"dubious activities"   now everyone reaps the results with harsh conditions.

Move funds to another bank/s.

actually it stems from the fact that the bank in question was the most used by agents getting "under the table bank acct docs" for visa or extension stamps. When the govt and BOT cracked down on mule accounts at the beginning of the year they started to change their involvement with agents. The 4 month freeze policy is their way of showing they are working with the BOT to eliminate mule and fake accounts. 

1 hour ago, Dan O said:

actually it stems from the fact that the bank in question was the most used by agents getting "under the table bank acct docs" for visa or extension stamps. When the govt and BOT cracked down on mule accounts at the beginning of the year they started to change their involvement with agents. The 4 month freeze policy is their way of showing they are working with the BOT to eliminate mule and fake accounts. 

But BOT and the Government have both come out pledging to stop the practice of freezing accounts.
It's not just Bangkok bank but all Thai banks freezing accounts affecting many Thai businesses, who are naturally up in arms about the whole situation.

On 9/12/2025 at 3:44 PM, chang50 said:

It's almost as if they are trying to push expats towards visa agents..

 

 

I know some folks avoid agents like the plague out of financial necessity but believe me, in the long run, you'd find they are a godsend 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Liquorice said:

But BOT and the Government have both come out pledging to stop the practice of freezing accounts.
It's not just Bangkok bank but all Thai banks freezing accounts affecting many Thai businesses, who are naturally up in arms about the whole situation.

I never said other banks were not taking action or freezing account. I was speaking to the policy about the 4 month locked accounts or no letter for the imm office requirements. No other bank is doing that. 

 

All banks have been locking accounts that match whatever criteria that indicates suspicious activity. 

8 minutes ago, In Full Agreement said:

 

 

I know some folks avoid agents like the plague out of financial necessity but believe me, in the long run, you'd find they are a godsend 

 

 

Until they aren't. It depends on what you use them for.  Creating fake bank accts and false paperwork to gain a stamp in your passport violates the imm regulations. different. Would be in trouble if caught and worse for you. 

 

If used to facilitate physical filing with real paperwork and bank accounts is different use.

1 minute ago, Dan O said:

I never said other banks were not taking action or freezing account. I was speaking to the policy about the 4 month locked accounts or no letter for the imm office requirements. No other bank is doing that. 

 

All banks have been locking accounts that match whatever criteria that indicates suspicious activity. 

 

 

Dan,     Banks all over planet will be tightening their policies so as to provide them and their respective governments more control over the general population.     It's just a matter of time.

 

 

 

 

Just now, In Full Agreement said:

 

 

Dan,     Banks all over planet will be tightening their policies so as to provide them and their respective governments more control over the general population.     It's just a matter of time.

 

 

 

 

What has that got to do with THIS discussion? That's a whole different conspiracy issue 

22 minutes ago, Dan O said:

All banks have been locking accounts that match whatever criteria that indicates suspicious activity. 

Well other than transferring occasional funds from the UK to my Thai bank account, then transactions to other Thai retailers or suppliers, such as Big C, Makro, Home Pro, Global, there are no transfers to other personal named bank accounts, but that didn't stop Bangkok Bank from threatening to freeze my account if I didn't supply additional ID to that they already held.

In particular, they requested more proof of my Immigration status as a Non Immigrant, a previous UK address, and evidence of marital status.

 

The point I specifically made to them was if they spent the time to look at the individual's banking history, that should immediately indicate if there are any suspicious transactions. Money launderers frequently move money between different private account to hide the origin of the money. Unfortunately, the policy of shoot first, ask questions later has been adopted.

1 minute ago, Liquorice said:

Well other than transferring occasional funds from the UK to my Thai bank account, then transactions to other Thai retailers or suppliers, such as Big C, Makro, Home Pro, Global, there are no transfers to other personal named bank accounts, but that didn't stop Bangkok Bank from threatening to freeze my account if I didn't supply additional ID to that they already held.

In particular, they requested more proof of my Immigration status as a Non Immigrant and a previous UK address.

 

The point I specifically made to them was if they spent the time to look at the individual's banking history, that should immediately indicate if there are any suspicious transactions. Money launderers frequently move money between different private account to hide the origin of the money. Unfortunately, the policy of shoot first, ask questions later has been adopted.

That bank has been going above and beyond the criteria laid out by BOT to help combat  mule and fake acctsvto help avoid their past history with agents. 

 

That said no bank is doing the scanning and initial inspection\locking of accounts individually one by one. So what seems to be logical may not translate here.

 

I had the same info issue with another bank and it turned out that my pp number on the bank didn't match my phone records as the account was several years older than the bank acct. A quick stop at the phone store and bank cleared it up in 1 day. Fortunately for me it was not that bank that been getting named here. 

27 minutes ago, Dan O said:

That bank has been going above and beyond the criteria laid out by BOT to help combat  mule and fake acctsvto help avoid their past history with agents. 

 

That said no bank is doing the scanning and initial inspection\locking of accounts individually one by one. So what seems to be logical may not translate here.

 

I had the same info issue with another bank and it turned out that my pp number on the bank didn't match my phone records as the account was several years older than the bank acct. A quick stop at the phone store and bank cleared it up in 1 day. Fortunately for me it was not that bank that been getting named here. 

The point being Dan, the banks are concentrating their efforts on confirming/updating the ID of account holders, which is quite feasible considering many of the identified scammers used fake/false ID, facilitated by corrupt bank staff.

Whereas, a quick check of the transaction history of individual account holders would have probably identified if there were any suspicious transactions and lessened the threat of freezing accounts.

 

I received an email from a friend yesterday who's in the UK until November.
He has two accounts with Kasikorn and attempted to make a transfer to his wife's Kasikorn account from both his Kasikorn accounts only to find his transfer were blocked. He suspects his accounts have been frozen for some obscure reason.
Spent a day trying to contact his bank branch, and their helpline desk, but after several rings it automatically disconnected the call.

Forced to make a transfer from his UK bank to his wife's account.

Unless he is able to contact Kasikorn to establish the issue, there isn't much else he can do until he returns to Thailand.

 

Edit: Rather surprisingly though, as a test, he was able to transfer funds into both of those accounts through Wise.
That suggests it's only outgoing transactions that are being blocked.

3 hours ago, Liquorice said:

The point being Dan, the banks are concentrating their efforts on confirming/updating the ID of account holders, which is quite feasible considering many of the identified scammers used fake/false ID, facilitated by corrupt bank staff.

Whereas, a quick check of the transaction history of individual account holders would have probably identified if there were any suspicious transactions and lessened the threat of freezing accounts.

 

I received an email from a friend yesterday who's in the UK until November.
He has two accounts with Kasikorn and attempted to make a transfer to his wife's Kasikorn account from both his Kasikorn accounts only to find his transfer were blocked. He suspects his accounts have been frozen for some obscure reason.
Spent a day trying to contact his bank branch, and their helpline desk, but after several rings it automatically disconnected the call.

Forced to make a transfer from his UK bank to his wife's account.

Unless he is able to contact Kasikorn to establish the issue, there isn't much else he can do until he returns to Thailand.

 

Edit: Rather surprisingly though, as a test, he was able to transfer funds into both of those accounts through Wise.
That suggests it's only outgoing transactions that are being blocked.

I'm well aware of the situation, the cause behind it and what the banks have been trying to do. I had my krungsri acct locked, only inside bank could be used, because the pp number was never updated on the acct. At and phone app were not functional. Fixed in 1 day after visit to phone shop and update acct info.  All banks will handle it differently. 

 

With that said the number of accounts being tagged and reviewed prohibits them giving personal review on every acct as the first step and to expect that isn't realistic. 

8 hours ago, Dan O said:

actually it stems from the fact that the bank in question was the most used by agents getting "under the table bank acct docs" for visa or extension stamps. When the govt and BOT cracked down on mule accounts at the beginning of the year they started to change their involvement with agents. The 4 month freeze policy is their way of showing they are working with the BOT to eliminate mule and fake accounts. 

You're correct in that they are doing it to SHOW they are being strict.  But that's all it is, a big show.

 

The branches in Pattaya are under a microscope, so they've really drummed up the acting to make it look like they're tough.  Meanwhile the agents in Pattaya simply put their customers on buses to go to different Bangkok Bank branches in Bangkok that aren't making a big production out of it.  Agents are still alive and well, and it's business as usual, including with Bangkok Bank.  They need to stop causing grief to everyone, as the only ones getting punished by this are the ones doing it on their own, legit.  This isn't affecting agents.

On 9/17/2025 at 11:13 AM, Satcommlee said:

You can thank the Visa Agents who facilitate fraudulent Retirement Extension applications for those who can't really afford to be here.

 

Rubbish, at around 400 k baht a pop, they're simply low-hanging fruit and it's just collateral damage. The ones you really need to thank for this collosal banking knee jerk are the shady bank branch managers that allowed mainly Chinese to illegally open accounts so they could launder their illegally earned billions.

32 minutes ago, BrandonJT said:

You're correct in that they are doing it to SHOW they are being strict.  But that's all it is, a big show.

 

The branches in Pattaya are under a microscope, so they've really drummed up the acting to make it look like they're tough.  Meanwhile the agents in Pattaya simply put their customers on buses to go to different Bangkok Bank branches in Bangkok that aren't making a big production out of it.  Agents are still alive and well, and it's business as usual, including with Bangkok Bank.  They need to stop causing grief to everyone, as the only ones getting punished by this are the ones doing it on their own, legit.  This isn't affecting agents.

Thats not really working like that and the availability to use other branches has been closing. It is affecting agents as well.

 

If you doing things legit it should be fairly simple to provide whatever missing info is required to unlock your account, unless you're out of the country and can't go to a bank branch. There will certainly always be exceptions.

Is this happening outside of Bangkok and Pattaya? Friend in Ubon got the letter the other day with no problem and the money had only been in his account for 2 months. I bet you could go to a bank far from expats areas in Bangkok and not be asked to sign anything.

2 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Friend in Ubon got the letter the other day with no problem and the money had only been in his account for 2 months

Which bank? The concern is BBL

Just now, DrJack54 said:

Which bank? The concern is BBL

Sorry, It was BBL.

 

1 hour ago, atpeace said:

Sorry, It was BBL.

 

Ta. 

However your suggestion when you stated... 

"I bet you could go to a bank far from expats areas in Bangkok and not be asked to sign anything." 

 

That won't be an option as you apply for annual extension at immigration office where you live. 

51 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

Ta. 

However your suggestion when you stated... 

"I bet you could go to a bank far from expats areas in Bangkok and not be asked to sign anything." 

 

That won't be an option as you apply for annual extension at immigration office where you live. 

I was using Bangkok as an example. If you live in Bangkok or any area with loads of expats,  it might be a good idea to go to a BBL in a  part of town with no expats. 

 

I honestly don't know how BBL is implementing this policy.  I just know at the Bank in Ubon I was at had no signs and wasn't freezing funds.  How many confirmed cases outside of Pattaya?  

 

It would be obvious which banks were in cahoots with visa agents if an audit was done.  Making   it hard for those agents to use those specific banks for their in and out transactions would be a a short term solution.

 

Above is just a guess and I could care less if others use agents.  

27 minutes ago, atpeace said:

I was using Bangkok as an example. If you live in Bangkok or any area with loads of expats,  it might be a good idea to go to a BBL in a  part of town with no expats. 

 

I honestly don't know how BBL is implementing this policy.  I just know at the Bank in Ubon I was at had no signs and wasn't freezing funds.  How many confirmed cases outside of Pattaya?  

 

It would be obvious which banks were in cahoots with visa agents if an audit was done.  Making   it hard for those agents to use those specific banks for their in and out transactions would be a a short term solution.

 

Above is just a guess and I could care less if others use agents.  

Multiple confirmed cases, from Chiang Rai all the way down to southern Thailand.

32 minutes ago, atpeace said:

Above is just a guess and I could care less if others use agents.  

Thanks for that.. Not

Recent BBL nonsense has zero to do with use of agents for extension retirement. 

 

8 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

Thanks for that.. Not

Recent BBL nonsense has zero to do with use of agents for extension retirement. 

 

So they are posting notices that funds will be frozen if the funds have not been the account for five months to stop money laundering. Hmm, interesting approach 🙂 Just possibly - keeping an open mind - someone might conclude that they want to stop agents from doing things that raise red flags and look dubious.  

 

Like I mentioned before, I could care less if someone uses an agent but thinking agents had no impact on this new policy is foolish IMO.

1 hour ago, atpeace said:

So they are posting notices that funds will be frozen if the funds have not been the account for five months to stop money laundering. Hmm, interesting approach 🙂 Just possibly - keeping an open mind - someone might conclude that they want to stop agents from doing things that raise red flags and look dubious.  

 

Like I mentioned before, I could care less if someone uses an agent but thinking agents had no impact on this new policy is foolish IMO.

What's the point of the policy if it's not having any effect on agents, and only punishing people trying to do it themselves? It's still business as usual for agents. They can get the bank letter without any issues. They just had to increase the amount of the payment to the bank, and therefore raise the price for the people using the agent.

3 minutes ago, BrandonJT said:

What's the point of the policy if it's not having any effect on agents, and only punishing people trying to do it themselves? It's still business as usual for agents. They can get the bank letter without any issues. They just had to increase the amount of the payment to the bank, and therefore raise the price for the people using the agent.

Then it is an unsuccessful attempt in your opinion.  I honestly don't know how easy it is to circumvent the policy.  It seems that many are concerned and I assumed that it was not as easy as paying a few thousand baht more. 

 

I'm far from the righteous type that seems to enjoy insulting those that use agents.  I would consider an agent if there wasn't any risk of future issues.  For 15k I could just drop off my passport and pick it up a few days later.  That is well worth 15k and in the end I would earn more than 15k in interest by keeping the money out of Thailand.

On 9/19/2025 at 7:15 AM, atpeace said:

So they are posting notices that funds will be frozen if the funds have not been the account for five months to stop money laundering. Hmm, interesting approach 🙂 Just possibly - keeping an open mind - someone might conclude that they want to stop agents from doing things that raise red flags and look dubious.  

 

Like I mentioned before, I could care less if someone uses an agent but thinking agents had no impact on this new policy is foolish IMO.

Indeed. Those that wish to sail close to the wind would be well advised to check the weather forecast.