sub101uk Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Changes from 08/04/2011 You may remember the changes that were made last year to obtain a new " O " Class last year the requirements were :- a) To visit family living in Thailand Copy of Birth Certificate or Marriage Certificate showing relationship To undertake volunteer work for a registered charity Letter from registered charity c) To visit as a registered UK Pensioner To reside in Thailand Copy of house deeds or copy of rent/lease agreement d) Copies of bank statements showing receipt of pension payment Well it would seem they No Longer accept a " Copy of house deeds or Rent / Lease agreement " The new requirements as from 08/04/2011 are only :- Married to a Thai national Evidence required: Copy of marriage certificate (in English). or Visiting family working/living in Thailand Evidence required: Birth/Marriage Certificate to show relationship plus letter from relative confirming they are in Thailand together with copy of valid entry visa in their passport or copy of valid work permit. or Volunteer work Evidence required: Suitable letter from recognised charity. or Visiting Thailand as Pensioner Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing receipt of pension. or Visiting Thailand as retired person aged 50 years and over Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing income of minimum £900.00 per month. So for people like me over 50 I see no problem but I hate to think what the next changes will be . Cheers for now Sub101uk Songkhla This information came from the Thai Royal Consulate Hull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrel Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 "Visiting Thailand as retired person aged 50 years and over Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing income of minimum £900.00 per month. So for people like me over 50 I see no problem........" No problem if you happen to have an income. Personally I'm not bothered by this as I'm already here, already have my visa obtained from Birmingham just a few months ago (for which I provided no documentation at all), and will have an extension issued here based on having 800kB in the bank. But if I was applying now in the UK for a visa I wouldnt get it because although I have a lot of money in the bank I dont receive any sort of regular income. This is rather silly, given the amount of money I have. I suspect that many other people would also be in my position. Also rather silly in that the UK state pension (which is a suitable qualification for a visa) is only half of the GBP900/month required for people over 50 who dont receive a pension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tod Daniels Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 (edited) Perhaps the MODZ could edit or add to the title to this thread? This post is referring to the new guidelines which the Thai Consulate in HULL is using as criteria for securing a year long multi-entry Non-Immigrant Type-0 visa. The O/P only mentions Hull in the last line of the topic. I'd hate to see this post cause mass confusion or even worse mass hysteria . .. Maybe the Modz could edit the O/P to take out the GIANT spaces in the post too, Edited April 19, 2011 by tod-daniels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Heading changed to reflect this is Hull specific (actually has been reported in a number of threads) - as for text it is full of machine functions so pass on editing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESB7 Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Still no problem for genuine visitors and a dam_n lot easier than getting a visa to the UK for a Thai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotsira Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Still no problem for genuine visitors and a dam_n lot easier than getting a visa to the UK for a Thai That depends what you define a genuine visitor to be? Basically if your not married to a Thai you can only stay in Thailand long term if your over 50 but there are many that are still affluent enough to stay in Thailand that are under 50 but can no longer do so according to these changes. I retired and have been living in Thailand since i was 36yrs and have contributed vast amounts of my money towards the Thai economy, if this means early retirees can no longer stay in Thailand they will take their money elsewhere. So who loses out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SantiSuk Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Thailand probably can afford to lose out on people taking their less than £900 a month somewhere else, so I doubt this move is going to cause an outcry except amongst those affected. That said, it does appear that they have upped the ante quite astronomically* and that must be hugely upsetting for those younger people who have previously relied on capital, rather than employment earnings caught in the middle. Being older and married doesn't mean I am celebrating. Unless it is just a Hull abberation, it possibly signals a wider push to limit immigration to people with Thai family connections or those with significant financial backing. But in respect of the former, watch out for an increase in the financial income and capital requirements for those who are married (and those over 50) in the not too distant future too I would guess. Speculation of course. There is of course still the ED visa route isn't there? [*If you have significant assets but no income it should be possible to convert that into a qualifying income. (If you can't convert it into liquid assets then how are you going to create the cash to live from in th e first place?) Taking the UK as an example, longer term interest rates are say 4% and a requirement to generate an income of £900 a month (gross) implies £275,000 on deposit - but double that if you take account of inflation at say 4% also (which surely you must). This is astronomically more than the current THB 800,000 (£17,000) 'capital requirement'. Or am I missing something?] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotsira Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Thailand probably can afford to lose out on people taking their less than £900 a month somewhere else, so I doubt this move is going to cause an outcry except amongst those affected. I think you may have misunderstood the point in that £900 a month is just a figure put down by the Hull Consulate for a min requirement if over 50 retirees. Im referring to the under 50's who have the funds to retire early in life or wish to invest in Thailand and live here. They can no longer do so easily with a long term visa. Would that not be a loss towards the Thai economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Would that not be a loss towards the Thai economy? I presume you are having a laugh. 43 and no need to work anymore but new visa rules mean I can't spend the money I have over here. Mindless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimGant Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Hull has apparently fallen under additional Thai MFA scrutiny of late. Hull, like the other honorary consulates, lost the right to issue Non Immigrant O-A visas a few years back (even before the restriction on O-As with honorary consulates in the US). But they were allowed for years to use 'visiting a friend' as criteria -- certainly not a criteria at the official Thai consulates. Someone at MFA, in position to complain and do something, finally acted. Maybe homophobic -- since 'visiting a friend' certainly opened doors for those unable to marry. Anyway, scrub that, said MFA. So Hull tried the 'have a lease' route. Nope, said MFA -- that's not in our book either. Now being retirement eligible is also not in MFA's book. But they apparently recognize it should be -- since a Non Imm visa is a mandatory requirement for a retirement extension. And since Immigration is now stealing MFA's revenue by being able to issue in-country Non Imm visas -- might as well look the other way with the honoraries, or at least some of them. (But, apparently, the official consulates will still not issue Non Imm O visas for retirement eligible -- only O-A visas). Hull's "over 50 and 900 GBPs" is interesting, since 900 is closer to the 40k baht marriage extension requirement, not the 65k baht retirement extension. Guess Hull set the bar as low as they dared... Visiting Thailand as Pensioner. Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing receipt of pension. No age or amounts listed? Sounds like you could be 35, and have bought an immediate pay annuity, that could pay whatever.... Google on UK pensions. Wow. You could take many avenues to receive a "pension." Just depends on how Hull defines "pensioner." But their liberal instincts probably answers that question. Big, bad MFA is who I would worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 (edited) jimgant. Retired and pensioner is not the same thing. Edited April 19, 2011 by mrjohnno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimGant Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 jimgant. Retired and pensioner is not the same thing. What's your point? I retired from the Air Force at age 42, and began drawing a pension. I was both retired and a pensioner -- and seemingly would have qualified for a Non Imm O visa from Hull -- just on the virtue of receiving a pension. Quitting work at age 36 (and telling my friends I'm 'retired'), and taking my life savings and buying an annuity that pays me regular amounts -- regardless of how much -- seemingly would also qualify me for a Non Imm O visa from Hull. An annuity is a payment made to the recipient in monthly installments for a specific period of time, or for the life of the recipient. A pension is a retirement plan in which the benefits are paid as an annuity, so often in common vernacular, they are the same thing. Of course, it all depends on how Hull defines 'pensioner,' doesn't it? In the University of Cambridge, a pensioner is a student who is not a scholar or sizar and who pays for his or her tuition and commons. The term commoner may also be applied, especially at the University of Oxford. In the Thoroughbred breeding industry, a pensioner is a stallion that has been retired from stud duty due to declining fertility (usually related to age). Now, the latter definition seems familiar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropo Posted April 19, 2011 Share Posted April 19, 2011 Would that not be a loss towards the Thai economy? I presume you are having a laugh. 43 and no need to work anymore but new visa rules mean I can't spend the money I have over here. Mindless. There seems to be a lot of very wealthy young people commenting on this thread. Even if they let young people with "vast quantities" of cash (as one member put it) stay on some type of visa, they would have to have some way to check up on the source of these vast piles of money. That would seem the sensible thing to do for any country entertaining these young guns with more money than they know what to do with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SantiSuk Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Thailand probably can afford to lose out on people taking their less than £900 a month somewhere else, so I doubt this move is going to cause an outcry except amongst those affected. I think you may have misunderstood the point in that £900 a month is just a figure put down by the Hull Consulate for a min requirement if over 50 retirees. Im referring to the under 50's who have the funds to retire early in life or wish to invest in Thailand and live here. They can no longer do so easily with a long term visa. Would that not be a loss towards the Thai economy? You are right - I missed the point. It's still a worrying pointer for the racking up of financial limits in general on long term visas. Also a nice little entrepreneurial opportunity for someone to open up a marriage of convenience agency. These work illicitly and well in the West (reportedly) and maybe they will now be creeping into Thailand. There are loads of divorced Issan girls in their thirties and forties who would be happy to sell their allegiance to a marriage on paper for say a one-off 50,000 baht payment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 What's your point? I retired from the Air Force at age 42, and began drawing a pension. I was both retired and a pensioner From OP Visiting Thailand as Pensioner Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing receipt of pension. or Visiting Thailand as retired person aged 50 years and over Evidence required: Copy of bank statement showing income of minimum £900.00 per month. I do admit the latter is rather odd so I have emailed Hull for clarification and if yearly income is acceptable. If it is then one could simply open a business (UK) and transfer a large chunk of moiney into said business. Once a year as shareholder you are allowed to take mmoney out of the business tax free and since the business is not actually trading and has no staff, the paperwork would be minimal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Brix Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 I just learned of this Hull situation and clearly it is not good for many people who relied on this friendly consulate. I am sorry to hear about it. I wonder what triggered it in the 1st place. Anyone find an alternative? Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotsira Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Would that not be a loss towards the Thai economy? I presume you are having a laugh. 43 and no need to work anymore but new visa rules mean I can't spend the money I have over here. Mindless. There seems to be a lot of very wealthy young people commenting on this thread. Even if they let young people with "vast quantities" of cash (as one member put it) stay on some type of visa, they would have to have some way to check up on the source of these vast piles of money. That would seem the sensible thing to do for any country entertaining these young guns with more money than they know what to do with. It's nice to read that some consider being in your 40's as young as i can see myself not so young anymore. As for retiring early in life, well i would advise anyone who can do so to do just that. As the old 'cliche' says "Is it better to work for a living ? or live just to work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESB7 Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Still no problem for genuine visitors and a dam_n lot easier than getting a visa to the UK for a Thai That depends what you define a genuine visitor to be? Basically if your not married to a Thai you can only stay in Thailand long term if your over 50 but there are many that are still affluent enough to stay in Thailand that are under 50 but can no longer do so according to these changes. I retired and have been living in Thailand since i was 36yrs and have contributed vast amounts of my money towards the Thai economy, if this means early retirees can no longer stay in Thailand they will take their money elsewhere. So who loses out? Invest 10million Baht, you dont need to be married or over 50... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 (edited) There seems to be a lot of very wealthy young people commenting on this thread. Even if they let young people with "vast quantities" of cash (as one member put it) stay on some type of visa, they would have to have some way to check up on the source of these vast piles of money. That would seem the sensible thing to do for any country entertaining these young guns with more money than they know what to do with. If you include me as one of these young people than thank you very much, not been called that for quite some time. It doesn't need to be "vast quantities" of savings, it just needs to be enough. I for one don't see the point of working beyond that. I now spend my time with internet charity work for a number of groups dealing with people who cannot cope. desperate and cannot function. Also for an American support group for battered wives. So far from having more money than I know what to do with, I'm doing something which helps others and I get a great deal of enjoyment out of. Edited April 20, 2011 by mrjohnno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotsira Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Anyone find an alternative? Good luck At the moment it's looking like a choice of either getting married to a Thai national or enrolling for a study coarse and going for an Education Visa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabC Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... To some of us it could well be the be all and end all. I am 46, have property here and have been living with my same sex partner here for 10 years now. I work out of Thailand for approx 6 months a year but in 6 week trips. What avenues are open to me legally??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotsira Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... To some of us it could well be the be all and end all. I am 46, have property here and have been living with my same sex partner here for 10 years now. I work out of Thailand for approx 6 months a year but in 6 week trips. What avenues are open to me legally??? Depends how long you stay in Thailand at any given time between your working trips. If it's under 90 days you only need a tourist visa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabC Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... To some of us it could well be the be all and end all. I am 46, have property here and have been living with my same sex partner here for 10 years now. I work out of Thailand for approx 6 months a year but in 6 week trips. What avenues are open to me legally??? Depends how long you stay in Thailand at any given time between your working trips. If it's under 90 days you only need a tourist visa. Sorry 2 questions then: 1. I thought tourist visas were only good for 60 days? 2. I have heard that there are issues with the number of tourist visas you could get? It will also be a pain in the ass to have to wait around outside Thailand for a tourist visa every time I want to return home. I will maybe look at a triple entry 6 month tourist visa that Hull mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... To some of us it could well be the be all and end all. I am 46, have property here and have been living with my same sex partner here for 10 years now. I work out of Thailand for approx 6 months a year but in 6 week trips. What avenues are open to me legally??? I guess there is no same sex marriage in Thailand? It would be interesting know what would happen if you both visited a country where same sex marriage IS allowed and got married. As another poster said you should be fine using another method but it is wrong that you should need to do this. Someone, perhaps you, said earlier in the thread, it does have a smell of homophobia. I hope enough people kick up a stink over this that the government are forced to act. If it gets enough news coverage the government are not going to be happy to be seen as being homophobic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lite Beer Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 a triple entry will get you nine months with extensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 A tourist visa 60 day entry can be extended 30 days. Are you working in an isolated or war zone? If not you might be able to obtain the visa sometime during your six week work period. When there is clear indication of being outside Thailand (that you are not using tourist visa to work) most people do not have a problem obtaining them. There is no set rule on how many you may have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 (edited) Not a big problem for retirement extension seekers over 50 who qualify on bank account monies. You can do a change of visa status from tourist or even a 30 day stamp IN Thailand. Or get a single entry O in a neighboring country and do your extension in Thailand. Hull ain't the be all end all ... To some of us it could well be the be all and end all. I am 46, have property here and have been living with my same sex partner here for 10 years now. I work out of Thailand for approx 6 months a year but in 6 week trips. What avenues are open to me legally??? I guess there is no same sex marriage in Thailand? It would be interesting know what would happen if you both visited a country where same sex marriage IS allowed and got married. As another poster said you should be fine using another method but it is wrong that you should need to do this. Someone, perhaps you, said earlier in the thread, it does have a smell of homophobia. I hope enough people kick up a stink over this that the government are forced to act. If it gets enough news coverage the government are not going to be happy to be seen as being homophobic. Thailand doesn't recognize same sex marriage performed in any country for immigration purposes. The issue of same sex marriage and immigration rights for their foreign spouses is an issue for Thai gays to promote for, or not, as they choose. Don't hold your breath! Edited April 20, 2011 by Jingthing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjohnno Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Sorry 2 questions then: 1. I thought tourist visas were only good for 60 days? 2. I have heard that there are issues with the number of tourist visas you could get? It will also be a pain in the ass to have to wait around outside Thailand for a tourist visa every time I want to return home. I will maybe look at a triple entry 6 month tourist visa that Hull mention. 1. 60 days then apply for 30 day extension 2. Doesn't seem to be a problem getting two back to back 60 days so with extensions you have 180 days. If you leave to go working for 6 weeks then reapply for a 60 day I can't see it being a problem. Other posters with more knowledge will no doubt add to this question or point out I am wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabC Posted April 20, 2011 Share Posted April 20, 2011 Guess I could always marry my partners widowed mother and then adopt him as my son............... Or are there legal reasons I could not adopt someone 8 years my junior as a son Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now