They Just Doubled The Amount I Need In The Bank

[transam]

Then you have nooooooooooooooooooo problem. Wish l was in the same situation.

For me it was more a question of not knowing I was gambling anything, rather than not gambling more than I could afford to lose.

Yep, we seem to have suffered the same fate. Me, still look back and still scratch my head. Said here many times on this forum, l trust no one on this planet.

Met an Irish guy last year with the same thoughts as the OP but little did he know l knew what his lady was doing on the side and l could not say anything cos he trusted her with his life. Sorry if off topic now but stuff l have seen and at times tried to sort out really has affected my view on stuff.

[giddyup]

Then you have nooooooooooooooooooo problem. Wish l was in the same situation.

For me it was more a question of not knowing I was gambling anything, rather than not gambling more than I could afford to lose.

Geez! Everything in life is a gamble. Most people try and minimise risk as much as they can, but there are no absolutes.

[kartman]

Just back from the LOO after reading the topic heading glad everything is sorted out.

[Thailand]

They haven't doubled the amount you need, it's still 800,000 but as only half the money in the joint account belongs to you so you don't have enough.

Ye, I can see the logic in that. They let in slide because I actually had 1.56 mill in the account, 40,000 less than required. Tomorrow I'll open another account in my name only and transfer 800,000 into it from the joint account for Retirement visa purposes only. What gets up my nose is all the falang living here who don't have a satang in the bank who just pay the 20,000 every year to "borrow" the necessary amount for a day. The system stinks whichever way you cut it.

That will not work as the 3 month rule applies.Has for a few years now to the best of my knowledge?

[giddyup]

They haven't doubled the amount you need, it's still 800,000 but as only half the money in the joint account belongs to you so you don't have enough.

Ye, I can see the logic in that. They let in slide because I actually had 1.56 mill in the account, 40,000 less than required. Tomorrow I'll open another account in my name only and transfer 800,000 into it from the joint account for Retirement visa purposes only. What gets up my nose is all the falang living here who don't have a satang in the bank who just pay the 20,000 every year to "borrow" the necessary amount for a day. The system stinks whichever way you cut it.

That will not work as the 3 month rule applies.Has for a few years now to the best of my knowledge?

There are "companies" that specialise in obtaining Retirement visas specifically for people who don't have enough money in the bank. AFAIK if you use them you don't even have to front immigration,they do it all for you, and the 800,000 certainly isn't deposited to your account 3 months prior. I thought that was common knowledge, hence my remark "the system stinks".

Edited July 18, 2012 by giddyup

[Jingthing]

They haven't doubled the amount you need, it's still 800,000 but as only half the money in the joint account belongs to you so you don't have enough.

Ye, I can see the logic in that. They let in slide because I actually had 1.56 mill in the account, 40,000 less than required. Tomorrow I'll open another account in my name only and transfer 800,000 into it from the joint account for Retirement visa purposes only. What gets up my nose is all the falang living here who don't have a satang in the bank who just pay the 20,000 every year to "borrow" the necessary amount for a day. The system stinks whichever way you cut it.

That will not work as the 3 month rule applies.Has for a few years now to the best of my knowledge?

There are "companies" that specialise in obtaining Retirement visas specifically for people who don't have enough money in the bank. AFAIK if you use them you don't even have to front immigration,they do it all for you, and the 800,000 certainly isn't deposited to your account 3 months prior. I thought that was common knowledge, hence my remark "the system stinks".

That alleged activity is completely ILLEGAL and would reflect some rather serious corruption in the system. More about the Thai "visa fixing" companies and alleged corruption at immigration FACILITATING that than the applicants although all parties would be culpable. As nobody can possibly have the foggiest notion what portion of applicants actually use these alleged services, I think it is very over the top to imply that it is a large percentage. Personally, I would like to see such alleged illegal activities stopped but that is a matter for Thai law enforcement.

In Pattaya, I have seen at least one "visa fixing" company rather blatantly advertising some very dodgy kinds of services. I think applicants considering use of such services, understandably desperate as they may be, should be aware they would be participating in an illegal activity to use such services and the later consequences (such in the event of a "crackdown" at their immigration office) are unknown and possibly risky.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Jingthing

[giddyup]

No one suggested there was a "large percentage" so I don't know where you got that from. Of course it's illegal, as so many things are.

Edited July 18, 2012 by giddyup

[Jingthing]

No one suggested there was a "large percentage" so I don't know where you got that from.

Sorry but actually it was YOU who rather strongly implied you think this activity is done by a lot of people. Use of the word ALL gives the implication that you think it is A LOT of people.

Personally, I feel people should mind their own business and not get all upset about the "special breaks" some others may be obtaining ... illegally. At least those of us who follow the rules can sleep at night. I'm not sure how people who get visas through these dodgy methods can.

I don't think the entire system stinks. The alleged illegal corruption we are talking about (which concerns foreign applicants, visa fixing companies, and immigration itself) no doubt stinks. That is nothing like the ENTIRE SYSTEM.

Your words:

What gets up my nose is all the falang living here who don't have a satang in the bank who just pay the 20,000 every year to "borrow" the necessary amount for a day. The system stinks whichever way you cut it.

Edited July 18, 2012 by Jingthing

[giddyup]

No one suggested there was a "large percentage" so I don't know where you got that from.

Sorry but actually it was YOU who rather strongly implied you think this activity is done by a lot of people. Use of the word ALL gives the implication that you think it is A LOT of people.

Your words:

What gets up my nose is all the falang living here who don't have a satang in the bank who just pay the 20,000 every year to "borrow" the necessary amount for a day. The system stinks whichever way you cut it.

Not at all, that's your interpretation, not mine. All could mean two. Anyway, without splitting hairs, my point was that the "system" allows these kind of practices to operate, and it kind of stretches credibility to think it's unknowingly.

Edited July 18, 2012 by giddyup

[kokesaat]

" had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank."

What's the difference between a joint account and a single-owner account where someone else can deposit and withdraw with just her ID? Personally, I'd like to do the same with my Siam Commercial Bank retirement (fixed) account. Having been married for 38 years, I've no fear of my wife ripping me off.......I'd prefer to make my passing as easy for her as possible. I have a will, but if she can dispense with the formalities of tapping into my account when I die, then I'd prefer she have the ability to do so.

[giddyup]

" had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank."

What's the difference between a joint account and a single-owner account where someone else can deposit and withdraw with just her ID? Personally, I'd like to do the same with my Siam Commercial Bank retirement (fixed) account. Having been married for 38 years, I've no fear of my wife ripping me off.......I'd prefer to make my passing as easy for her as possible. I have a will, but if she can dispense with the formalities of tapping into my account when I die, then I'd prefer she have the ability to do so.

Good question.

[TommoPhysicist]

" had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank."

What's the difference between a joint account and a single-owner account where someone else can deposit and withdraw with just her ID? Personally, I'd like to do the same with my Siam Commercial Bank retirement (fixed) account. Having been married for 38 years, I've no fear of my wife ripping me off.......I'd prefer to make my passing as easy for her as possible. I have a will, but if she can dispense with the formalities of tapping into my account when I die, then I'd prefer she have the ability to do so.

It still wouldn't help her, Joint or Sole account gets frozen until probate after death.

You would have to put the money in an account in her sole name ..... which would give you the same problem if she died.

Edited July 18, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[Feeld]

" had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank."

What's the difference between a joint account and a single-owner account where someone else can deposit and withdraw with just her ID? Personally, I'd like to do the same with my Siam Commercial Bank retirement (fixed) account. Having been married for 38 years, I've no fear of my wife ripping me off.......I'd prefer to make my passing as easy for her as possible. I have a will, but if she can dispense with the formalities of tapping into my account when I die, then I'd prefer she have the ability to do so.

It still wouldn't help her, Joint or Sole account gets frozen until probate after death.

You would have to put the money in an account in her sole name ..... which would give you the same problem if she died.

Can you explain which agency or body in Thailand would freeze an account under those circumstances and how would they know when to start their work, I mean, who would actually alert them? It seems to me that the process might involve a number of different groups, the Police, the Embassy, the local government perhaps but the Banks!

[harryfrompattaya]

My wife and I used to have a joint account for my marriage/retirement extension. When immigration changed the rules had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank.

To those who tell me its stupid to let my wife have access to my accounts...Its nothing to do with you.

Agree with you 100%. Sure there are plenty of stories of guys getting ripped off and no one seems to believe (or wants to) that you can have a loving, trusting partnership with a Thai woman the same as a falang woman. I know a few guys that have been burned badly in their own country as well.

You GF is great and loves you so much put even more money in the Joint Account show us how great you are.

[TommoPhysicist]

no one seems to believe (or wants to) that you can have a loving, trusting partnership with a Thai woman the same as a falang woman.

Trusting the farang woman didn't work out so well for me, so I think I'll give the trusting a Thai woman a miss, if it's OK with you. But I'm OK with the loving relationship.

Edited July 18, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[ThaidDown]

" had her name taken off the account but had her name added for full signing privileges ie she can deposit and withdraw with just her id even though its an account in my name only. This is at Bangkok Bank."

What's the difference between a joint account and a single-owner account where someone else can deposit and withdraw with just her ID? Personally, I'd like to do the same with my Siam Commercial Bank retirement (fixed) account. Having been married for 38 years, I've no fear of my wife ripping me off.......I'd prefer to make my passing as easy for her as possible. I have a will, but if she can dispense with the formalities of tapping into my account when I die, then I'd prefer she have the ability to do so.

The difference is that the 'account name' at the front of the passbook only shows one name (mine) and is therefore acceptable to immigration for extension purposes. In practical terms there is, of course, no difference.

congrats on the 38 years,

[daxbr]

All I can say is I do not appreciate this unnecessarily alarmist title.

[rizla]

The bank account has to be in your name only, that is standerd policy.

If you have an income, you can use the combined income method to get an extension of stay. When using the combined method, no need of seasoning the money.

Please advise the OP and others that when using the combo method, it states no seasoning ( but some offices/officers require it seasoned for three months every year) thanks..regards

[lopburi3]

Several posts removed - do not make personal attack on others. This thread was about OP misunderstanding of rules - there has not been any increase in retirement bank account requirements and it is not about who has the more trusting relationship. As points have been answered and title is misleading this thread is closed.