Absolutely No Change In Cm Immigration's Need For Additional Proof With U.s. "income Letters"

[cloudhopper]

I converted a marriage visa into the retirement version at the local office as soon as I turned 50. Lots less agro.

[CMNightRider]

...they just ask you how much you make a month and then ask you to raise your right hand and swear that what you have told them is the truth. Based on that you are issued your verification of income.

And one would be a FOOL to commit perjury (also known as false swearing or lying under oath) in front of a U.S. Federal Officer! That is how the U.S. got many, many people over the years who are sitting in prison now.

Wow really? What U.S. Federal Penitentiary do they send them too?

[Dante99]

Thanks for the update NancyL.

Two guys finished relieving their bladders and one was at the sink while the other headed for the door. The guy at the sink said "At Harvard they taught us to wash our hands after urinating." The other guy going through the door replied "At Southwest Junior High School they taught us not to piss on our hands."

[vagabond48]

Based on the wording of the Consulate letter, are we committing perjury if we don't put the exact monthly amount. My monthly income is more than what I declare. The letter does not include the words "at least" after "I affirm that I receive in the amount of".

If you receive $800 per month you can affirm that you receive $700, $701, $702 no problems, because you do receive that amount. What you cannot do is affirm that you receive $801 per month, that you do not receive.

Affirmations, oaths, declarations, statements, and statutory declarations can have different requirements for different laws (ie you cannot understate taxable income in the same way).

Makes cents. I was worried for awhile.

[mamborobert]

Thanks for the update NancyL.

Two guys finished relieving their bladders and one was at the sink while the other headed for the door. The guy at the sink said "At Harvard they taught us to wash our hands after urinating." The other guy going through the door replied "At Southwest Junior High School they taught us not to piss on our hands."

Subtle

[mesquite]

...they just ask you how much you make a month and then ask you to raise your right hand and swear that what you have told them is the truth. Based on that you are issued your verification of income.

And one would be a FOOL to commit perjury (also known as false swearing or lying under oath) in front of a U.S. Federal Officer! That is how the U.S. got many, many people over the years who are sitting in prison now.

Wow really? What U.S. Federal Penitentiary do they send them too?

Do a little legal research and you might be surprised. I'm sure each thought "What could go wrong?" before being confronted by law enforcement.

[PoodMaiDai]

I converted a marriage visa into the retirement version at the local office as soon as I turned 50. Lots less agro.

Which is the least hassle, a marriage visa or a retirement visa?

[hellodolly]

I wish to add again that the 'extension' for us from the U.S. comes only after the original application made in the States to Thai officials. In addition to police certified letter, and a medical statement, one must submit notarized statements from institutions demonstrating secure streams of income equaling or greater than the minimum at that time. My own went to Chicago with embossed official letter-heads. For all I know, officials confirm these applications; anyway, there's that risk at first - and they have, by the way, possession of your passport.

I suppose that if the minimum income requirement is increased, even upon us already here (possible in Thailand, perhaps?), another round of discussions will be upon us. For now, in my experiences, it's same-same.

You're describing the process of obtaining an O-A visa in one's home country and doing extensions here, using the "Income Letter" from the consulate. It is also possible to enter the country on 30-day visa exempt status, get an income letter, obtain a 90 day O visa for the purpose of retirement here in Chiang Mai and then extend the permission to stay for 12 months due to retirement during the last 30 days of that O visa, again using an income letter.

So, it's very possible to obtain what some people insist on calling a "retirement visa" without ever having to submit a police report or medical check, if it's all done here in Thailand.

Correct on the medical, police and income check plus a Notary saying I was who I said I was. When I got my original retirement in Vancouver Canada. I had to leave it with them for three days.

Last time I was in there about a month ago they had a over head TV monitor with the desks and what they did at each desk It said desk 5 and 6 retirement. Good enough for them good enough for me.

[hellodolly]

...they just ask you how much you make a month and then ask you to raise your right hand and swear that what you have told them is the truth. Based on that you are issued your verification of income.

And one would be a FOOL to commit perjury (also known as false swearing or lying under oath) in front of a U.S. Federal Officer! That is how the U.S. got many, many people over the years who are sitting in prison now.

Based on the wording of the Consulate letter, are we committing perjury if we don't put the exact monthly amount. My monthly income is more than what I declare. The letter does not include the words "at least" after "I affirm that I receive in the amount of".

True but really meaningless. I make more than enough but some of my money comes from the states and I just add the Canadian money which is more than ample. If I was to use the currency exchange I also would have more money than I declare.

[CMX]

Thanks, Nancy -

I had no idea that one could obtain an extension without the original application. Clearly Immigration should put a stop to such abuse. It represents a loophole in the system! It would be easy, I think, to just inspect each passport as it comes up for an annual renewal. If the original full non-imm permission is not there (or in an earlier passport copy, on file), obviously the applicant should be required to go through the 'Show and Tell' process in order to stay, rather than submitting a letter. After all, we're here to enrich the country through spending.

*Come to think of it, a more careful process could lead to more marriages, since only half the income is required to be banked or income!

And doubtless such a more thorough process is the works for next year, and we'll be rid of the riffraff. I think Malaysia requires more than 37,000 baht a month for their special 2nd home welcome visa, so 25K/month or 800,000 banked is a relatively low bar. Also, there won't be any more noisy threads about tipping, and chip and fish and burger threads will be tipped away from the views of Cheap Charlies. 'Kin hardly wait.

Edited October 26, 2012 by CMX

[Mapguy]

The differences in requirements and procedures when obtaining "in-country" as opposed to "home country" NI-O (longstay) visas are somewhat perplexing. There doesn't appear to be a ready explanation for them.

I would add that, in the case of a spouse, obtaining a dependent visa (tied to a "retirement" visa) can be demanding. I am familiar with one recent case in which a standard tourist visa could not be changed in country, in Bangkok (at Immigration HQ) or in Chiang Mai. It required returning to the home country, but it did not require a police check or a medical, just a properly certified and notarized marriage certificate as well as valid identification. (That can be a bit of a bother.) It was not required but it was appreciated (Consular officials keep copies) that the sponsor spouse provided financial proofs. Once all the documents were in hand, approval was a piece of cake.

Individual circumstances can make a difference, so I believe it is hard to generalize. Moral: Ask immigration officials first, not Thai Visa "experts" although it is helpful to have some idea what might happen!

Edited October 26, 2012 by Mapguy

[cloudhopper]

I converted a marriage visa into the retirement version at the local office as soon as I turned 50. Lots less agro.

Which is the least hassle, a marriage visa or a retirement visa?

Retirement - no home visits etc. and you get extentions in one appointment without waiting a month (or more) for approval from Central Command and Control Bangkok.

[NancyL]

Mapguy ----

Well, "Mr Justice" claimed that the "Head Guy" at CM Immigration had said that ALL Americans with Income Letters were going to be asked to show more proof of actual income and that just isn't true, Mapguy. So I don't think "Ask immigration officials first, not Thai Visa "experts" is really a good piece of advice. But, you don't ask visa questions on this forum, you go to the excellent Visa Forum here.

Incidentally, wasn't it you who first did a "cut and paste" of Mr, Justice's posting from the Visa section of this forum and stirred up all the trouble?

Edited October 26, 2012 by NancyL

[Semper]

I converted a marriage visa into the retirement version at the local office as soon as I turned 50. Lots less agro.

Which is the least hassle, a marriage visa or a retirement visa?

Retirement - no home visits etc. and you get extentions in one appointment without waiting a month (or more) for approval from Central Command and Control Bangkok.

And not to mention the hassle of changing the "visa" in case of a divorce.

[onthedarkside]

I converted a marriage visa into the retirement version at the local office as soon as I turned 50. Lots less agro.

Which is the least hassle, a marriage visa or a retirement visa?

As already stated ....... retirement is so much easier and instant. Marriage requires mucho paperwork and time. Yes, less money or income need be show. That's the only upside.

[justmaybe]

I'm going to be cancelling an appointment in November I can't use. If anyone needs it, pm me and we can coordinate. I don't live on this site so no offence if it takes me a few days to get back.

Apropos of that, it's silly to pay someone to do the leg work, but my window in December is limited and I would prefer not to rise at 5am to join the queue. Can a service "cut the problem"?

[Mapguy]

Mapguy ----

Well, "Mr Justice" claimed that the "Head Guy" at CM Immigration had said that ALL Americans with Income Letters were going to be asked to show more proof of actual income and that just isn't true, Mapguy. So I don't think "Ask immigration officials first, not Thai Visa "experts" is really a good piece of advice. But, you don't ask visa questions on this forum, you go to the excellent Visa Forum here.

Incidentally, wasn't it you who first did a "cut and paste" of Mr, Justice's posting from the Visa section of this forum and stirred up all the trouble?

My goodness, NancyL. That sounds a bit huffy!!

Actually, my opinion of "MrJustice" is that he is an ass. I wouldn't quote him, as you have, but I recall vaguely that his post (or posts; can't remember) was worth a segue to a broader point or two. As I recall (without looking), I usually try to point out in such instances that immigration officers have great latitude in what they can ask for to verify this and that. Given the way so many expatriates cheat, or try to cheat, the "system," it is probably a good thing!

There are various possible explanations for misunderstanding or difficulty.

One is simply language, often not in its literal sense but in usage. Reading a newspaper or a street sign is one thing (Wish I could do it a lot better! Understanding more complex, especially contextually-bound usage is another. Grasping idiom or other cultural differences in context is yet a different matter. I really appreciate the patience and tolerant nature of Thai people I meet and work with.

About immigration matters, the "Western" legalistic approach is not completely helpful although Thai statute and judicial law are very similar in structure to Western law, aside from the Napoleonic law. Although I personally have not found many discontinuities in Thai immigration laws, which I believe have been quite consistent over a number of years, I do realize that immigration officials have discretionary authority Perhaps too many native English-speaking farang who come from legalistic cultures don't quite "get it." And they probably don't "get it" back home either. You better believe that Western countries provide immigration officials with a lot more discretion than naive Westerners apparently suppose! And they use it --- sometimes when they are suspicious and sometimes when they are just annoyed.

That might have been the case with MrJustice. All in all , can you really imagine working all day in that sweat shop of an immigration office where (much contrary to Thai custom) so many foreigners seem to have forgotten to take a shower?! As well, of course, I pointed out facetiously, they discovered that MrJustice is a lawyer and gave him the "treatment." Judging from his original post, as I recall it, no wonder that might have been apparent so quickly!

Before I forget, I think you are right to point to the TV visa forum. What's his name? Mario something. He is really very helpful --- but I know, for fact, that is not true all the time --- and that is not a criticism of his extraordinary attention to detail.

I will close by sticking to my original point: Ask an immigration official. But "my bad!!" BETTER, depending, have patience to ask two or three. However, the key one had better be the one who has all the official stamps! And that is true just about anywhere you travel or chose to live!

Well, it is late! Have to cruise TV a bit, then get some sleep. Cheers!

Edited October 26, 2012 by Mapguy

[Dante99]

I will close by sticking to my original point: Ask an immigration official. But "my bad!!" BETTER, depending, have patience to ask two or three.

Depends on what you are asking about. Asking an immigration officer about what you need to do or not to do to get the documents/stamps you want is correct of course. Asking an immigration officer what the laws or rules are, why they have requested that you do something, why they did something for someone else but will not do it for you, why it is different than in the past or any similar questions is really not appropriate. It usually suggests to them that you think they are not doing their job properly and thus is confrontational.

This forum is great for learning the experience of others at immigration but is not so useful regarding discussions of rules or laws.

[hml367]

Mapguy ----

Well, "Mr Justice" claimed that the "Head Guy" at CM Immigration had said that ALL Americans with Income Letters were going to be asked to show more proof of actual income and that just isn't true, Mapguy. So I don't think "Ask immigration officials first, not Thai Visa "experts" is really a good piece of advice. But, you don't ask visa questions on this forum, you go to the excellent Visa Forum here.

Incidentally, wasn't it you who first did a "cut and paste" of Mr, Justice's posting from the Visa section of this forum and stirred up all the trouble?

So if someone read the person's post, they would think that they were going to be asked to show more proof of actual income? That is what was in the thread.

(I am joking!)

MSPain

[Mrjustice]

Ok, NancyL so now I am "Pig-Headed" (you didn't say "Fear Mongerer"; but some other Poster on prior Posting Topic already did.)

I'm also an "Ass" according to Mapguy. An ignorant "Newbie" according to someone else. Others: "Bad Attitude";

Smell Bad?; Poor Appearance; a "Liar"; confused about requirements between original Non-O Visa and Ext. of Stay (there are none, except diff. form!);

sniffed out that I was a "Lawyer" and should receive special treatment (no I didn't tell them); and too many other names I was called that I lost track.

First, I wonder where the Moderators have been with all this name-calling/Flaming?

Guess it's ok apparently, when the person flamed holds a different opinion than them.

Oh, but the Moderators immediately "Closed" my new Topic Post with Title about new policy change by CM Immig.; apparently because it ran contrary to their belief/opinion. Amazingly 'fair and neutral'. Of course, they have not (and no doubt will not) do same with this new Topic by NancyL. But, won't be surprised if they delete my Post here, because it not only (again) runs contrary to their opinion, but God-forgive, also criticizes their lack of 'fairness and neutrality'.

Second, all of a sudden one new Poster "NancyL" (husband) supposedly has a different experience than I, and that means I am "dead wrong". Don't think so.

Wonder what makes NancyL so credible -- at least I provided my background and qualifications in a prior Post (after being attacked, of course). Indeed, I seem to

recall that when NancyL first replied to my Post to advise of her Hubby's upcoming Appointment at CM Immig., she claimed it was scheduled for this past Tues. -- an official Holiday when Immig. would be closed. She only corrected/edited this "misinformation", when another Poster pointed this out. Very credible! LOL.

In FACT there are other (long-time) TV Members that have posted same experience as I (most recently earlier this month, "MESQUITE" and "BB1955"); not to mention many other TV members, including a Poster above, who have said they have been 'warned' about change in policy is 'coming' too.

Third, all I did or tried to do was pass along my very recent experience and impressions, and what I was uniformly and expressly told all the way thru the Chain of Command,

from initial Immig. Officer, to Sgt. Major, to Captain, and ultimately the head Inspector of the CM Immig. Office. If there is any 'misinformation', it did NOT come from me -- it

came from the CM Immig. folks. All I did was report accurately what happened to me and what I was told. And, did so with the best of intentions, to forewarn any of the

Ex Pat Retirement folks here who apply for original Non-O and/or Ext./Renewal of Stay, that if you intend on relying on US Consulate Income Affidavit, you are likely to be

asked for additional proof of PENSION Income (they also expressly advised only Pension Income would satisfy).

Sorry, if this runs contrary to the (vocal) majority of TV Posters beliefs or PAST experience. You can take the warning and be prepared; or stick your head in the sand

and foolishly ignore the warning. I certainly could care less about the true "Pig-Heads" that I have encountered on this Forum, and not-so-secretly hope you get your heads

handed to you at Immig. next time you go. But for the 'silent' minority? (perhaps majority), or new Retirement applicants like we were, hopefully you will avoid getting 'jammed up'

as we ALMOST were because we relied on the real 'mis-information' on this Forum -- that the Income Affidavit is (almost) always accepted at face value without more.

Oh, and lest I forget to mention (again), we were eventually granted our Retirement Non-O with the express approval of the head Inspector -- and if any of you think that

would have happened if I had actually done anything improper let alone 'offended" any of the Officers, then you are not only ignorant you are fools.

Edited October 27, 2012 by Mrjustice

[mamborobert]

Ok, NancyL so now I am "Pig-Headed" (you didn't say "Fear Mongerer"; but some other Poster on prior Posting Topic already did.)

I'm also an "Ass" according to Mapguy. An igorant "Newbie" according to someone else. Others: "Bad Attitude";

Smell Bad?; Poor Appearance; a "Liar"; confused about requirements between original Non-O Visa and Ext. of Stay (there are none, except diff. form!);

sniffed out that I was a "Lawyer" and should receive special treatment (no I didn't tell them); and too many other names I was called that I lost track.

First, I wonder where the Moderators have been with all this name-calling/Flaming? Seems ok apparently, when the person flamed holds a different opinion than them.

Second, all of a sudden one new Poster "NancyL" (husband) supposedly has a different experience than I, and that means I am "dead wrong". Don't think so.

Wonder what makes NancyL so credible -- at least I provided my background and qualifications in a prior Post (after being attacked, of course). Indeed, I seem to

recall that when NancyL first replied to my Post to advise of her Hubby's upcoming Appointment at CM Immig., she claimed it was scheduled for this past Tues. --

an official Holiday when Immig. would be closed. She only corrected/edited this "misinformation", when another Poster pointed this out. Very credible! LOL.

In FACT there are other Posters have posted same experience as I (most recently "MESQUITE" and "BB1955"); not to mention many other TV members, including a Poster above, who have said they have been 'warned' about change in policy is 'coming' too.

Third, all I did or tried to do was pass along my very recent experience and impressions, and what I was uniformly and expressly told all the way thru the Chain of Command,

from initial Immig. Officer, to Sgt. Major, to Captain, and ultimately the head Inspector of the CM Immig. Office. If there is any 'misinformation', it did NOT come from me -- it

came from the CM Immig. folks. All I did was report accurately what happened to me and what I was told. And, did so with the best of intentions, to forewarn any of the

Ex Pat Retirment folks here who apply for original Non-O and/or Ext./Renewal of Stay, that if you intend on relying on US Consulate Income Affidavit, you are likely to be

asked for additional proof of PENSION Income (they also expressly advised only Pension Income would satisfy).

Sorry, if this runs contrary to the (vocal) majority of TV Posters beliefs or PAST experience. You can take the warning and be prepared; or stick your head in the sand

and foolishly ignore the warning. I certainly could care less about the true "Pig-Heads" that I have encountered on this Forum, and not-so-secretly hope you get your heads

handed to you at Immig. next time you go. But for the 'silent' minority? (perhaps majority), or new Retirement applicants like we were, hopefully you will avoid getting 'jammed up'

as we ALMOST were because we relied on the real 'mis-information' on this Forum, that the Income Affidavit is (almost) always accepted at face value without more.

Oh, and lest I forget to mention (again), we were eventually granted our Retirement Non-O with the express approval of the head Inspector -- and if any of you think that

would have happened if I had actually done anything imrpoper let alone 'offended" any of the Offices, then you are not only ignorant you are fools.

Proverbs 26:11

[hml367]

Mrjustice,

The requirements for evidence of what income is required seem to be different, as I tried to point out. The amount of the income may be the same - the evidence required is not the same. This is important for someone trying to meet the requirements when applying for a visa, trying to convert a visa, or applying for an extension of permission to stay. The affidavit from the U.S. Consulate will not meet the "required" documentation to get a visa. The affidavit does meet the requirements when applying for an extension to stay.

Seems like an important point to me.

MSPain

[Tywais]

We have feedback and experiences reported on this matter by various members. Probably best to see what future reports by members on the issue will be rather then continuing a contested and heated topic as this. Thanks to members for your information and experiences.

//Closed//