Have Wife And Kids But Can’t Meet The Financial Requirements

[Daffy D]

Interesting amount of replies and opinions. My original post was really about splitting up families, I can’t see how throwing out the husband who is taking care of his family, though not perhaps in lavish style, is going to benefit the family. Who will take care of them? The state as far as I know will not provide support and if there is no extended family what will become of them?

As for my own case I am “fortunate” to be over 50 so take advantage of the 7.17(5) rule. As already mentioned by others my local immigration office doesn’t know about this rule so we have to travel to BKK once a year to get the extension. This in itself is an expense that we don’t need and would save a chunk of money for more important things if I could just go to the local office.

I have always used Sunbelt Asia to get the visa and they have always done a grand job. I know it is possible to do it yourself but as the whims of immigration officers change by the day using an agent avoids the possibility of being sent back because some piece of paper is not quite the right size.

Also the extension is not issued on the day; just your application is taken for consideration. You have to go back another time to get the actual stamp in your passport. The agent will do this for you and send your passport on to you.

The last time we had to go the nice lady from Sunbelt arranged for us to meet at Immigration at a reasonable hour but said she would get there early and take a ticket so by the time we arrived we only had to wait about half an hour before being seen. Great service.

[astral]

Interesting amount of replies and opinions. My original post was really about splitting up families, I can’t see how throwing out the husband who is taking care of his family, though not perhaps in lavish style, is going to benefit the family. Who will take care of them? The state as far as I know will not provide support and if there is no extended family what will become of them?

Immigration law and the officials are way above such mundane consideration.

Thanks for initiating an interesting discussion.

[coventry]

As for my own case I am “fortunate” to be over 50 so take advantage of the 7.17(5) rule. As already mentioned by others my local immigration office doesn’t know about this rule so we have to travel to BKK once a year to get the extension.

Isn't that defeatism ?

[Daffy D]

As for my own case I am “fortunate” to be over 50 so take advantage of the 7.17(5) rule. As already mentioned by others my local immigration office doesn’t know about this rule so we have to travel to BKK once a year to get the extension.

Isn't that defeatism ?

TIT all things are preordained

Defeatism does not exist.

[coventry]

As for my own case I am “fortunate” to be over 50 so take advantage of the 7.17(5) rule. As already mentioned by others my local immigration office doesn’t know about this rule so we have to travel to BKK once a year to get the extension.

I'd phone before you trek off to BKK for your next extention as I was told that BKK is turning people away if they don't live within their catchment area, due their workload. I believe someone posted that fact on this forum also. Hence the reason why I went to Korat.

That's not meant to be a critism just a word of caution.

Edited October 11, 2008 by coventry

[ludosiam]

It's interesting that noone had brought up the fact that families are regularly split up in places like the UK, US, Australia etc due to one member being deported for not meeting that country's visa requirements.

But I don't suppose that's important, because those people being deported from the west are black, brown or yellow, whereas we are white and should naturally get special treatment.

Bendix, is this a fact or your opinion? Every Thai I have met so far here in Thailand who had previously stayed in Germany with husband / wife has told me that staying there is made much easier than it is in Thailand for foreigners. Visa requirements for a foreign parter as per Ministry of Foreign Affairs: marriage certificate and German passport of partner. No income statements, no 90 reports, no annual extensions.

[ludosiam]

as for the question if they would throw you out: I had a friend with wife and kid here in Thailand, the school at which he was teaching was a bid slow with paperwork, he got permission to stay another 7 days and had been forced to leave the country. So yes, they will.

[torrenova]

A while ago there was an interesting comparison with the Philippines who are not so keep to spit up families on the basis of some arbitrary income level.

One thing which is nearly always overlooked for all kinds of finance based visas is whether the applicant has to pay rent or not. Surely a fairer way is to take this into consideration ? I mean, whilst you can live cheaply here (my house in Buriram is only 5k a month), somewhere like Pattaya costs much more and if one lives in one's own paid for accommodation then no rent is due.

No account is taken for kids either. I know my little girl costs far more than I imagined but the rules are just so inflexible. Just why it is 65k / 40k etc. is a mystery.

[dereklev]

If I had the money I would throw down the challenge to Sunbelt. "Okay you can get people extentions under rule 7.17(5)in BKK without a show of money, but come up to Korat and do the same. If you can I'll pay your fees. If you can't then walk away without". A no win no pay situation. I some how doubt, even if I had the money, they'd take up the challenge. But it's the only way forward in that we need someone out in the woods with a few balls.

I have got an extension under 7.17(5) at Korat Immigration for the past 2 years.

They told me I was the first to apply at their office for this extension.

The first year was very difficult as the officer in charge was very awkard and obstructive. I had gone prepared with all documentation for an extension based on marriage, to be on the safe side, so I was able to show money in the bank. Then the OIC allowed the application to be sent to BKK. 7 days later they phoned me to come and pick up my extension. I had Sebastien from Isaan Lawyers with me and that probably helped a lot.

The second year they told me that as I was married I had to revert to the marriage extension as 7.17(5) was only available to unmarried fathers over 50. I questioned this as a married friend of mine had obtained an extension under 7.17(5) a couple of days earlier in BKK. They kindly phoned BKK and said the decision had been challenged and overturned so now indeed I could get my extension under 7.17(5). I was asked for copies of my bank book and I provided bank statements from the UK showing my ATM withdrawals in Thailand. The officer dealing with me said he wasn't looking for cash in the bank but just proof that I was spending money in Thailand that came from overseas. 7 days later they phoned me to come and pick up my extension.

My next renewal is in March 2009 and I fully expect that some obstacles will be raised but that ultimately I will walk away with another extension under 7.17(5).

Edited October 12, 2008 by Maestro
Reduced quoted text. No need to quote the entire, lengthy post with multiple nested quotes - Maestro

[jamesthefirst]

This is just a thought. If you are married to Thai and have a kid or two or three but can't come up with the required amount of money to show for your visa would they really refuse you so you have to leave the country?

The attitude behind this seems to be that if you don't have what they consider sufficient monies then you can't support your family. How would refusing to let you stay be better for your family?

You are obviously taking care of your family but just can't show what THEY consider an adequate amount of cash. If you are forced to leave then you have to try and support two homes, yours and the wifes, which would not be possible.

Would they really make you abandon your wife and kids?

Apart from the emotional tragedy for your wife and more so for the kids, are there not some human rights issue here?

Yes, for sure human rights are being violated massively with current Thai visa laws.

[Maestro]

I have got an extension under 7.17(5) at Korat Immigration for the past 2 years.

They told me I was the first to apply at their office for this extension.

...I had Sebastien from Isaan Lawyers with me and that probably helped a lot....

So now we know it is not Thai laws and regulations at fault, ie a "violation of human rights", but some immigration officers who obviously have not been trained well on the implementation of the rules for extension of stay.

Clearly, this is what must have gone wrong. New rules took effect in October 2006. The chiefs of immigration offices are summoned to Bangkok for a half-day or perhaps even a three-day workshop. Not wanting to look stupid, nobody asks questions when they don't understand something. No or insufficient written guidelines are handed out. The participants are not tested on their comprehension at the end of the workshop. The chiefs return to their provincial offices and instruct their staff based on what they remember from the workshop. That's why we have different offices using the same rule differently.

--

Maestro

[farangmal]

It's interesting that noone had brought up the fact that families are regularly split up in places like the UK, US, Australia etc due to one member being deported for not meeting that country's visa requirements.

But I don't suppose that's important, because those people being deported from the west are black, brown or yellow, whereas we are white and should naturally get special treatment.

Absolute <deleted>.

There is no way they would deport a Thai Woman who had kids to a British man in the Uk. If the couple were still living together.

Thais give little regard to Foreigners. That's one of the downsides about the Country.

IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY GET OUT. SIMPLE AS.

[coventry]

If I had the money I would throw down the challenge to Sunbelt. "Okay you can get people extentions under rule 7.17(5)in BKK without a show of money, but come up to Korat and do the same. If you can I'll pay your fees. If you can't then walk away without". A no win no pay situation. I some how doubt, even if I had the money, they'd take up the challenge. But it's the only way forward in that we need someone out in the woods with a few balls.

I have got an extension under 7.17(5) at Korat Immigration for the past 2 years.

They told me I was the first to apply at their office for this extension.

The first year was very difficult as the officer in charge was very awkard and obstructive. I had gone prepared with all documentation for an extension based on marriage, to be on the safe side, so I was able to show money in the bank. Then the OIC allowed the application to be sent to BKK. 7 days later they phoned me to come and pick up my extension. I had Sebastien from Isaan Lawyers with me and that probably helped a lot.

The second year they told me that as I was married I had to revert to the marriage extension as 7.17(5) was only available to unmarried fathers over 50. I questioned this as a married friend of mine had obtained an extension under 7.17(5) a couple of days earlier in BKK. They kindly phoned BKK and said the decision had been challenged and overturned so now indeed I could get my extension under 7.17(5). I was asked for copies of my bank book and I provided bank statements from the UK showing my ATM withdrawals in Thailand. The officer dealing with me said he wasn't looking for cash in the bank but just proof that I was spending money in Thailand that came from overseas. 7 days later they phoned me to come and pick up my extension.

My next renewal is in March 2009 and I fully expect that some obstacles will be raised but that ultimately I will walk away with another extension under 7.17(5).

Like you Dereklev they threw in the "you are married" obstruction. I also argued and they backed down. I showed money, 200,000+ Baht. I was told they wont issue it me next year. The officer indicated that the rules will be changed. But on the grandfather thing I would think that that once one has it it continues even if the rules are changed.

[macduff]

It's interesting that noone had brought up the fact that families are regularly split up in places like the UK, US, Australia etc due to one member being deported for not meeting that country's visa requirements.

But I don't suppose that's important, because those people being deported from the west are black, brown or yellow, whereas we are white and should naturally get special treatment.

Absolute <deleted>.

There is no way they would deport a Thai Woman who had kids to a British man in the Uk. If the couple were still living together.

Thais give little regard to Foreigners. That's one of the downsides about the Country.

IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY GET OUT. SIMPLE AS.

I hope your right on that score. I may have issues with my wifes visa this november for flr. I too have a child also that i dont want to lose

[bina]

There is no way they would deport a Thai Woman who had kids to a British man in the Uk

then the uk must be a utopia/

here, if u dont have the right amount of money (like a deposit/or a monthly salary that u can prove for the past 6 onths, plus proof of residency), and if they feel like being ornery, then here, your wife/husband can have visa revoked/and or not issued/renewed; having kids is not a factor although they always say 'keeping families united' is a policy, and they are pretty lenient, it does happen to quite a few cases and they DO deport, in a very not nice way too (not counting the "national security" cases... my thai husband's visa is coming up or renewal /review and proof of work from BOTH of us (seems an arbitrary condition cause previous time they didnt ask about his work) plus many other things and the ost exiting statement on their request form is : we reserve the right to add/change/request additional information according to circumstances...."... but this isnt america...

so i guess we are like thailand..second world attitude to immigration

bina and anon

israel

[ludosiam]

Maestro, I think you hit the nail right on the head! Anyway, it can't be a violation of human rights, we're aliens

[Daffy D]

Again many points of view and interesting observations.

The attitude “If you cant’ afford to stay get out” is valid if the decision to reside in LOS was taken on a whim. In my case, and I think I am not alone in this the decision was not taken lightly and the visa regulations in force at the time taken into account.

Unfortunately as we all know the visa regulations were changed and this has resulted in the current uncertainty. I paid out money on my wife’s family, bought things for them and paid off the loan on the family house after the father died. They now have some security and my wife and family have at least a home to go if I should be thrown out.

At the time I would make regular runs to Penang and get a 1 year marriage visa only having to show my marriage certificate. This suited us fine and worked well. So when they changed the regulations and monies had to be shown I could not qualify. Having invested my money in the wife’s family did not count towards my financial credibility.

Those who have built lavish houses and started businesses bought cars and generally invested millions in this country know this does not count for squat if you can’t show the 400K at the time of visa renewal.

The point about other countries are no better may be true in some instances but I doubt the UK would break up a family that had the necessary visas nor would they change the rules to effect existing visa holders and deport the family supporter because he would not qualify under the new regulations.

I am sure also that should a husband be deported from the UK for whatever reason the state would be obligated to provide for the remaining wife and children, they would not have to resort to begging. I don’t recall ever having seen a member of any foreign ethnic group begging on the streets of London, though I have seen a few of Farangs.

If my little girl has to resort to selling flowers at midnight to the tourists in the bars of Phuket at least she will have an edge on the competition because she looks so cute can speak English.

[Heng]

The attitude behind this seems to be that if you don’t have what they consider sufficient monies then you can’t support your family. How would refusing to let you stay be better for your family?

It's not better for your family, but surely that's no reason to lower the bar across the board.

[culicine]

IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY GET OUT. SIMPLE AS.

Perhaps its more fair to say "you don't meet our financial requirements". I'm 40 and have been here 8 years. I'm married with a child. If I stay until retirement age, and decide on the marriage )-visa, there is no way I'll need 40K a month, if I live up country. 20K would do as we will already own a house (well, my wife that is). It would seem the immigration should take 'assets' into account, as this significantly cuts down living costs. Perhaps some new retirees here will spend 60K a month; hence that requirement. As a family we would struggle to spend that much, even with paying of a house and car. Perhaps they think souch high requirements will "encourage" use to spend it all...they sure don't know much about long term farangs do they?

[manjara]

IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO STAY GET OUT. SIMPLE AS.

Perhaps its more fair to say "you don't meet our financial requirements". I'm 40 and have been here 8 years. I'm married with a child. If I stay until retirement age, and decide on the marriage )-visa, there is no way I'll need 40K a month, if I live up country. 20K would do as we will already own a house (well, my wife that is). It would seem the immigration should take 'assets' into account, as this significantly cuts down living costs. Perhaps some new retirees here will spend 60K a month; hence that requirement. As a family we would struggle to spend that much, even with paying of a house and car. Perhaps they think souch high requirements will "encourage" use to spend it all...they sure don't know much about long term farangs do they?

Actually, I agree with you on this, 20k in the country when you already have a house is definitely sufficient for a comfortable life. When I am living in the north the only things we really spend money on are buying more land, supporting the local school and temple and buying things for the family (pumps, fridges, washing machines etc). My wife's family come around every day with food and once every 3 days or so we go into the market and buy about 1500 worth of produce (my wife's sisters generally do the cooking of this! and it's supplemented from the farms plus hunting - moo bah etc). So, food is around 12k (and that feeds a lot more than just my family), electric is maybe 1k if we have the aircon on, phone and internet about 2k, petrol is about 2k and the rest is probably khanom!

I don't plan to live on 20k/month, but I have no doubt that you could. Mind you, on that level of income, you would never be able to take the family back to Europe on holiday!

PS. I have 3 kids, my wife has 5 sisters and they have 10 offspring between them.

[torrenova]

I have always thought accommodation should be taken into consideration but only condos where it is in the westerner's name. Perhaps houses under his control but not houses in Thai names.

I am also staying in the country, outside Buriram and I have to disagree with this "we can like on 20k" idea.Thinking purely about food and bills then yes, it is possible but it is not possible with kids of school age nor does it include money for replacemnt items, big ticket items and the like. Where is nedical insurance in this 20k ? I guess it is not included.

[tijnebijn]

Interesting discussion indeed in this thread . But there is one ' rumour ' which was mentioned

a while ago on thaivisa what I read .

It was one member , forgot which one , who said that he heard rumours in the backyard

that immigration is busy to make PR more easy for foreigners married with thai woman , especially

when they also have children . They have a lot of difficulties with foreigners who's wifes run away

and the foreigner left on themselves taking care of the family , and that its almost impossible

to achieve that because of visa extensions difficulties and work prohibits .

I heard the same rumour from a friend of my wife's , whose brother got an officer ranking .

She told him that a good friend of hers ( me ) got to do so many for just to stay with his family .

He responded saying that there is already something in the pipe , but that they were still working on it

and that it is waiting for I guess Royal approval . And that they were very serieus on it to get it passed .

So that rumour is seconded by me , maybe its not a rumour after all .

Would that be something !

[abdulrahman]

Would that be something !

A sweet dream,methinks.

[Daffy D]

That really would be a step in the right direction, hope something comes of it.

Though the amount of money available to each family is important (more is better) I don't think anyone can put forward a convincing argument that throwing out the husband is going to be of any benefit to the family.

There is the general feeling that Thailand just wants the rich tourists to come for a couple of weeks Holiday spend lots of money than go back home. Fair enough good for the national economy, but I would argue that even the cheapest Charlie's among us will spend more over a year living here than the flash tourist on a short vacation.

In addition to which our money is going directly to the people mostly in the rural areas not just sloshing around the money troughs of Phuket and Pattaya.