Notarized Letter From Us Embassy Stating Income

[jazzbo]

It seem like one of the factors -- at least maybe outside CW -- in granting various extensions of stay is becoming 'How well do they know you?' Do you show up for each 90-day report or just mail it in? ... maybe make a separate trip for re-entry permits? When you show up do they recognize you and ask 'how have you been' or some such? ...maybe a small office present at New Years?

[tropo]

maybe a small office present at New Years?

...which could easily be construed as a bribe. I won't be trying that one.

[theoldgit]

Has anyone ever had their income documents authenticated by their embassy, rather than just reviewed? And for those that do review your papertrail, just exactly what is the wording on the document your embassy signs-off on? Theoldgit, what does your UK document say? (I bet it says nothing about the validity of the papers reviewed.)

I cannot remember word for word, but it's something along the line that "we have seen evidence that theoldgit has an income of £XXX per year". To get the letter I have to show the staff at my embassy the original evidence of my income, which in my case, as a retired government employee, is the annual statement of my Civil Service Pension.

The actual requirement by the UK Embassy is:

We will also need to see a copy of your passport and, either bank statements for the previous 3 months, or the original evidence of your pension or income.

I will be going through the process again in a couple of weeks, so will have to see if there is any change.

Edited April 5, 2011 by theoldgit

[jazzbo]

from #152 ..which could easily be construed as a bribe. I won't be trying that one... not if delivered on a day when you have no business before the officials ... a case of Squidee snacks or some such I am sure would go a long way as a 'bribe'.

[Spaniel]

OK, as I promised, here is my retirement visa report. Went yesterday to the US consulate here in Bangkok and got the income letter. No documentation of income needed. This morning (5 April) went to Bangkok Immigration and applied for the retirement visa based on income. Submited the letter and was not asked for any proof of income. Also they didn't ask to see my Thai bank account. The only documets submitted were the application, income letter, passport and copies of the data page the old visa and the arrival card and 1 photo. Took about 15 min. This was my 11th renewal but dont know if that makes any difference.

[theoldgit]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

[jazzbo]

Post #155 Went yesterday to the US consulate here in Bangkok and got the income letter. No documentation of income needed.

... Which would be the same for any similar sworn statement affidavit at any US Embassy or Consulate worldwide as per US State Department procedures.

[jazzbo]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

In fact, the PO 777/2551(3) regulation does not even mention a Letter from the Embassy only that the applicant have 'must have evidence' of having a monthly income of no less than 65K baht.(T&G translation)

... however a Letter stating as such has become the accepted means of such evidence and each Country's

Embassy has determined their own basis for issuing such a Letter

The actual US Letter in no way states that the Letter is conforming to a specific requirement of Thai Immigration and that the Applicant for extension only requests that:

I am applying for a Thai visa/ an extension of a current Thai visa and any assistance you can provide in this request will be greatly appreciated.

Edited April 5, 2011 by jazzbo

[Langsuan Man]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

I seriously doubt if the poster would have gotten an extension without the letter, so how can you say it was a waste of time

Edited April 5, 2011 by Langsuan Man

[theoldgit]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

I seriously doubt if the poster would have gotten an extension without the letter, so how can you say it was a waste of time

Well if you took the trouble to read the complete thread it's pretty obvious, well it is to me anyway.

The Immigration Department want proof of income and require that an embassy provide evidence of such income, the Immigration Officer doubts the integrity of the letter, this is borne out from our American friends who say no evidence is required, so requires additional proof of such income, some of our American friends then provide such proof and their extension is granted. Whilst I agree that the posters would not be granted an extension without the letter from the embassy, surely you can see that the letter is not worth the paper it's written on and, as such, is a complete waste of time.

As I have said repeatedly the sooner the Immigration Department does away with this meaningless bit of paper, and accepts original proof of the required income the better - in my heart of hearts I know it's never going to happen.

[tropo]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

I seriously doubt if the poster would have gotten an extension without the letter, so how can you say it was a waste of time

Well if you took the trouble to read the complete thread it's pretty obvious, well it is to me anyway.

The Immigration Department want proof of income and require that an embassy provide evidence of such income, the Immigration Officer doubts the integrity of the letter, this is borne out from our American friends who say no evidence is required, so requires additional proof of such income, some of our American friends then provide such proof and their extension is granted. Whilst I agree that the posters would not be granted an extension without the letter from the embassy, surely you can see that the letter is not worth the paper it's written on and, as such, is a complete waste of time.

As I have said repeatedly the sooner the Immigration Department does away with this meaningless bit of paper, and accepts original proof of the required income the better - in my heart of hearts I know it's never going to happen.

Strange logic. How can a paper which is required by the Immigration department be a complete waste of time? Obviously the Thai Immigration authorities weren't born yesterday and realise that not everyone is honest, even when making sworn statements.

They may even be doing it randomly and have instructions to do so. We can only guess as can never be certain about the inner workings of this mysterious department in a strange land.

[JimGant]

They may even be doing it randomly

....with randomness maybe influenced somewhat by whether you look like George Clooney, or Charles Manson.

Ok, posters. New checklist:

-- Haircut?

-- Clean shaven?

-- Collared shirt?

-- Showered and scented?

-- Tattoos?

-- Body piercings?

-- White, straight teeth?

I'm joking -- I think.....

[jazzbo]

Kuhn Git at #160 -- surely you can see that the letter is not worth the paper it's written on and, as such, is a complete waste of time... The Letter at least for the US is a sworn statement before a US Federal Official -- making any false statement can be charged as a felony... and any corroborating evidence requested by Thai IMM at time of extension is incidental and does not in and of itself constitute 'proof' ... that is just your assumption.

Can you imagine the lines if every such extension required the Thai IMM official to wade through supposed 'proof' as established by original documents?

[lbjcb]

The old Git is trying to make a good point of what some are making issue of, and claiming the letters from the usa are no good, and not sufficiant to meet consideration criteria.

How can anyone claim that such letters are improper and try to discredit the us embassies and officials sworn and knowing their diplomatic ties to Thailand.

Per the immigration web site, it does state in fact tha the proof of monthly income is proof by a certified letter from the applicant's Embassie within Thailand.

There is no statments made by, or written procedure that any Countrie's letter is less valid than any other.

Each individual Embassy has their criteria for issuing such letter. What happens between a Diplomatic representative of an Embassy and a person requesting a certified letter of income is "Confidential" and may vary from person to person.

To make a "BLANKET STATEMENT" that no one needs to provide proof is second, third, fourth hand information and Gossip.

I provide proof every time regardless if asked for it or not, and surely many others do also

The persons bringing attention to this, or questioning are ill informed and stirring up idle bar style gossip and speculation.

If they want to speak for themself's, it is their right, but not very wise to question Embassy poicies and relations with the Thai government and Immigration.

It is always good to know if their is a immigration policy change, but this type of policy or any inforcement thereof, is against even Thai laws.

I agree as another poster earlier stated that this is discrimination and bringing unwanted and unwarented, unsubstantiated attention and discrimination of rights and or opportunities to a certain nationality of persons.

Thank you old git for stating it so eloquently in your reply.

Edited April 5, 2011 by lbjcb

[jazzbo]

from #164 I provide proof every time regardless if asked for it or not, and surely many others do also ... If at the US Embassy you may just as well be showing any such 'proof' financial document to the street lamp ... they by regulation will not and cannot even look at it.

Edited April 5, 2011 by jazzbo

[lbjcb]

Jazzbo, As you earlier quoted the criteria for affirming and using documents in Thailand.

You are oh so correct.

The same applies for all other countries that the affirmation of all documents are true and correct according to the standard are not being met by any Embassie unless the person submiting such documents, has gone thru ALL the STEPS within their home country and their local Thai Embassy.

The paper trails can, and are made up by many. Seen it done ! The validity of many documents used is questionable at best,, regardless of the Embassy they are submitted to unless they meet the proof of acceptable Certified documents per proper procedures.

Would be a good idea to just load up local imigration offices with all the paperwork and hastle of substantiating it all.

Think they would be happy about that ? Doubt it

And what about all the other long stay visa's that have no income or bank requirements?

Kind of unfair to us old retired folks who worked our bunns off to get where we are.

Edited April 5, 2011 by lbjcb

[Jingthing]

To make a "BLANKET STATEMENT" that no one needs to provide proof is second, third, fourth hand information and Gossip.

Talking here about some specific embassy policies regarding showing proof for income letters.

No, it isn't gossip, it's FACT, regardless that some people might like to muddy that reality.

There is no diplomatic problem either. Thai immigration has always had every legal right to ask for additional documentation over and above their published rules, so if they choose to vary their enforcement policies to target specific nationalities based on factual information they have, they obviously also have that right.

Not siding with immigration here. Just trying to keep this real.

Next ...

Edited April 5, 2011 by Jingthing

[Thanyaburi Mac]

The old Git is trying to make a good point of what some are making issue of, and claiming the letters from the usa are no good, and not sufficiant to meet consideration criteria.

How can anyone claim that such letters are improper and try to discredit the us embassies and officials sworn and knowing their diplomatic ties to Thailand.

Per the immigration web site, it does state in fact tha the proof of monthly income is proof by a certified letter from the applicant's Embassie within Thailand.

There is no statments made by, or written procedure that any Countrie's letter is less valid than any other.

Each individual Embassy has their criteria for issuing such letter. What happens between a Diplomatic representative of an Embassy and a person requesting a certified letter of income is "Confidential" and may vary from person to person.

To make a "BLANKET STATEMENT" that no one needs to provide proof is second, third, fourth hand information and Gossip.

I provide proof every time regardless if asked for it or not, and surely many others do also

The persons bringing attention to this, or questioning are ill informed and stirring up idle bar style gossip and speculation.

If they want to speak for themself's, it is their right, but not very wise to question Embassy poicies and relations with the Thai government and Immigration.

It is always good to know if their is a immigration policy change, but this type of policy or any inforcement thereof, is against even Thai laws.

I agree as another poster earlier stated that this is discrimination and bringing unwanted and unwarented, unsubstantiated attention and discrimination of rights and or opportunities to a certain nationality of persons.

Thank you old git for stating it so eloquently in your reply.

Some lots of years ago I worked at the U.S. Embassy here, got to talking to one of the ConOffs one day, I asked about the letters, particularly the one "verifying place of residence." He said they'd written a number of times to the MFA suggesting that this requirement (I'd asked in reference to registering a vehicle) be dropped since all the Embassy does is verify that the person signing the document is indeed the person signing the documents.

That's all a notarial service does, it's not a verification of the the info in the document.

Mac

[jazzbo]

As per Mac's statement, any public or financial document that would genuinely have to be certified by the US Embassy in Bangkok would have to originate with the document source in the USA, then go through the Thai Embassy in Washington, then the MoFA in Bangkok, and arrive at the US Embassy in Bangkok without the document EVER touching your formerly nicotine-stained fingers.

.. and the above is only a summary of what is required

Edited April 6, 2011 by jazzbo

[Tod Daniels]

As an aside to this mind-wobbling, err boggling, yet mildly interesting thread:

I accompanied yet another acquaintance to Changwattana this week to secure a yearly extension of stay based on retirement. He was from the USA and used the "income document" from the US Embassy here in Bangkok as proof. In fact he had NO (as in ZERO) other proof of income with him at the time. Having read every post on this thread with 'bated breath' before I went and even though Ive accompanied many, many people thru the process; I was a teensy bit apprehensive of the possible outcomes.

The extension of stay went as "smooth as silk". We were out of the area where you get this type of extension a scant 10 minutes after sitting down in front of the Immigrations Officer. All she did was use a calculator to convert the US Dollars to Thai Baht and note the figure on the paper like they always do.

As we were leaving, I took the time to ask the officer who does the last step in the process; initials the stamps on your documents, the one in your passport and who sits at the little desk in the back right corner, IN Thai; if the document from the US Embassy was sufficient proof for adequate funds?

Now for the most part, Thais are pretty good at not telegraphing emotion on their face. Really though, she looked at me like I was totally crazy and relied; "The document comes stamped from YOUR embassy! Why would you think it wouldn't be okay?"

That was my experience out there this week. If it happens to run counter to your experience well, sorry 'bout that. ..

Edited April 6, 2011 by tod-daniels

[theoldgit]

An interesting report back Tod, thank you.

There seems to be no consistency whatsoever in dealing with Thai officials, I suppose we really shouldn't be surprised.

[nongkhai]

" ... The extension of stay went as "smooth as silk". We were out of the area where you get this type of extension a scant 10 minutes after sitting down in front of the Immigrations Officer. All she did was use a calculator to convert the US Dollars to Thai Baht and note the figure on the paper like they always do ... "

For what it's worth, my experience with 3 years of applying/receiving 12 month extensions is exactly the same as the poster above. Regarding the income: The (Canadian) Embassy letter was all that was required. No other questions asked about the income, including no need for Thai bang book or copies thereof.

(Hua Hin Immigration Office).

The Canadian Embassy requires the proof of income rather than just taking your word for it (as I believe the US Embassy does).

Edited April 6, 2011 by nongkhai

[jazzbo]

from post #172 The Canadian Embassy requires the proof of income rather than just taking your word for it (as I believe the US Embassy does).

I would suggest as regards the US Embassy the above is a mis-characterization. The US Embassy takes no position one way or the other as to the veracity of your affirmation of income: only that you provided such statement under penalty of providing false information to a US Government official which could be a felony.

Also -- as per Tod's post -- I think the IMM official's biggest determining factor is simple: Body Language.

[theoldgit]

As a matter of interest the UK Embassy now charge 2315 Baht for this letter, a tad more than the car battery I bought last week

[lbjcb]

As per Mac's statement, any public or financial document that would genuinely have to be certified by the US Embassy in Bangkok would have to originate with the document source in the USA, then go through the Thai Embassy in Washington, then the MoFA in Bangkok, and arrive at the US Embassy in Bangkok without the document EVER touching your formerly nicotine-stained fingers.

.. and the above is only a summary of what is required

This applies to the true validity of any source of income documents used to suport real, verified income to any Embassy.

All the paper in the world can be shown to support income. But in the end, all any Embassy is doing is notorising a person't claim of income. It is not in fact verified by any Embassy.

For it to be verified, all documents supplied have to originate and go thru the long process of verification from your home country to be accepted in Thailand.

This is most likely why immigration here really only needs an Embassy letter Notorised as proof of income.

They can always ask for a non certified paper trail to support your letter if they really want or need to.

But this does not guaraantee the validity of the income. the Embassy letter meets Thai immigration's requirement per their own web site and all information published about it in English and in Thai.

Edited April 6, 2011 by lbjcb

[JimGant]

The Canadian Embassy requires the proof of income rather than just taking your word for it (as I believe the US Embassy does).

What does your income affidavit say? Anything about having looked at applicable documents? Certainly nothing about "verification" since no one in the chain is asking for Consular Legalization (Thailand doesn't accept Apostilles). Do they stamp your income paper trail with anything, like "seen at embassy" (which is what NZ does)?

Thanks.

[BuckarooBanzai]

Have you ever watched the show "Lie To Me". It is one of my favorites! Have you ever heard of profiling? Every insurance company in the world uses it but some governments are not permitted to use the phrase. I would hazard to guess, however, that every immigration officer in the world that is worth their salt will judge people on what they see [aka "profiling"]. Some individuals will be asked for proof and some will not.

[phuketrichard]

So the letter from the US Embassy seems to be a complete waste of time.

I seriously doubt if the poster would have gotten an extension without the letter, so how can you say it was a waste of time

Well if you took the trouble to read the complete thread it's pretty obvious, well it is to me anyway.

The Immigration Department want proof of income and require that an embassy provide evidence of such income, the Immigration Officer doubts the integrity of the letter, this is borne out from our American friends who say no evidence is required, so requires additional proof of such income, some of our American friends then provide such proof and their extension is granted. Whilst I agree that the posters would not be granted an extension without the letter from the embassy, surely you can see that the letter is not worth the paper it's written on and, as such, is a complete waste of time.

As I have said repeatedly the sooner the Immigration Department does away with this meaningless bit of paper, and accepts original proof of the required income the better - in my heart of hearts I know it's never going to happen.

OK, as I promised, here is my retirement visa report. Went yesterday to the US consulate here in Bangkok and got the income letter. No documentation of income needed. This morning (5 April) went to Bangkok Immigration and applied for the retirement visa based on income. Submited the letter and was not asked for any proof of income. Also they didn't ask to see my Thai bank account. The only documets submitted were the application, income letter, passport and copies of the data page the old visa and the arrival card and 1 photo. Took about 15 min. This was my 11th renewal but dont know if that makes any difference.

what about this do u NOT UNDERSTAND!!! he got the letter from the US Embassy and immigration asked for nothing else.

MY god, get real

Edited April 7, 2011 by phuketrichard

[theoldgit]

what abvout thi sdo u NOT UNDERSTAND!!! he got the letter form the mebassy and immigration aksed for nothing else.

MY god, get real

I'm sure you understand what on earth you are talking about, or have the kids been playing with your keyboard again?

[rijb]

Got my Non-0 extension in Mae Sai today. No problems with my income verification from the US Consulate in Chiang Mai.