Just received this from Hull. Another door slams shut..

[baboon]

'Hello.

We have received your application for a non-immigrant O multiple entries visa. All multiple entries visas need to be approved by the Thai Embassy before we can issue them. We have to scan your application to them and they will come back to us via email with a decision.

If you are married to a Thai national as well as your marriage certificate and wife's ID card/passport the Embassy wish to see a copy of 3 months bank statements showing the equivalent to 800,000 Baht (£16,000 approx) or a monthly income of 65,000 (£1,400) Baht per month. Please note your name and address must be on the bank statements. If you can not provide this the longest visa we would be able to issue you is a triple entry tourist visa.

Please advise.'

Be warned.

[MadMac]

Wrong numbers, should be 400k/40k. What they mentioned is for retirement. Actually it's BS anyway, as this is only required for an extension of stay, but the consulates and embassies are free to decide on their own.

[OMGImInPattaya]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

[ubonjoe]

That is exactly the same wrong numbers that appear on the embassy website but it does not have the baht amount.

If you do a conversion to baht for income in pounds it comes out to over 69k.

I think I would reply back with numbers needed for an extension.

Edited September 13, 2013 by ubonjoe

[cardholder]

I see nothing wrong in having to evidence income for the category of visa required. A non-Imm 'O' is invariably a prelude to an extension and the criteria should not differ.

What IS interesting is that download "abb" Evidence required for visa category is no longer available, despite being referred to in

This appears on the London website:-

Category "O" with multiple entries

Pension earners or Applicants over 50 years of age, following document is required;

- Pension statement if the applicant is a pension earner, or
- Proof of income with a minimum of £1,400.00 per month or
- Thai Spouse visa with a copy of marriage certificate and passport or Thai ID of spouse and (3 months bank statement showing monthly income of more than
£1,400.00 or £16,500 annually for those who have been issue category O with multiple entries)

I would be interested to see if they qualify the 'pension statement' requirements because a friend sent pension statements'(to Hull) evidencing 28,000 Baht per month and was granted a Non Imm Ó

[moe666]

Welcome to the new world of no more poor people allowed unlimited entry, I guess they are tired of paying the hospital bills.

[moe666]

Wrong numbers, should be 400k/40k. What they mentioned is for retirement. Actually it's BS anyway, as this is only required for an extension of stay, but the consulates and embassies are free to decide on their own.

Since it is required for extension of stay why not make sure up front. This happened to a guy I met a couple of years ago in laos he applied for a 90 day non-o they requested to see his Thai bank statement with 800,000baht in it, no have ok then tourist visa for you. He was pisssed.

[terak]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

It is easy - married man not allowed out therefore 40k per month - single man allowed out therefore needs more 65k per month

Edited September 13, 2013 by terak

[ubonjoe]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

It is easy  - married man not allowed out therefore 40k per month - single man allowed out therefore needs more 65k per month  

The requirements for a person married to a Thai is based upon it being done for humanitarian reasons so they can be with there family.

Where as retirement is considered as a matter of choice not necessity. Also another point is that those doing it are not all single and can have their spouse with them as a dependent with no additional financial proof.

[OMGImInPattaya]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

It is easy - married man not allowed out therefore 40k per month - single man allowed out therefore needs more 65k per month

The requirements for a person married to a Thai is based upon it being done for humanitarian reasons so they can be with there family.

Where as retirement is considered as a matter of choice not necessity. Also another point is that those doing it are not all single and can have their spouse with them as a dependent with no additional financial proof.

That may be the case but just seems logically the higher funds amount would be required for supporting two or more people than for a single person. Also, a single person can more easily reduce his burn rate if necessary while a couple's or family's expenses are more fixed.

In any case, doesn't affect me personally...just always a funny quirk in the system.

[Time Traveller]

If you are not in Thailand and are applying for a visa to enter Thailand, how is it they expect you to already have money in a Thai bank account before you get the visa when Thai banks require you to go there to open it in person first?

Do Thai embassies really expect something that is impossible or are the people posting here incorrect?

[ubonjoe]

They also consider the fact that the wife being a Thai can work to help support the family.

[crazykopite]

I see nothing wrong in having to evidence income for the category of visa required. A non-Imm 'O' is invariably a prelude to an extension and the criteria should not differ.

What IS interesting is that download "abb" Evidence required for visa category is no longer available, despite being referred to in

This appears on the London website:-

Category "O" with multiple entries

Pension earners or Applicants over 50 years of age, following document is required;

- Pension statement if the applicant is a pension earner, or

- Proof of income with a minimum of £1,400.00 per month or

- Thai Spouse visa with a copy of marriage certificate and passport or Thai ID of spouse and (3 months bank statement showing monthly income of more than

£1,400.00 or £16,500 annually for those who have been issue category O with multiple entries)

I would be interested to see if they qualify the 'pension statement' requirements because a friend sent pension statements'(to Hull) evidencing 28,000 Baht per month and was granted a Non Imm Ó

If you are married to a Thai the pension income required is far less I am a Falang married to a Falang living in the Kingdom I have to have either 800,000 in the bank or a pension of 65,000 baht per month or it can be made up of the two If I was married to a Thai I would have to have 400,000 in the bank or 40,000 per month which I have never understood as friends who are married to Thais are always moaning at the huge amounts there wives spend !!!!!!!!!

[Madgee]

If you are not in Thailand and are applying for a visa to enter Thailand, how is it they expect you to already have money in a Thai bank account before you get the visa when Thai banks require you to go there to open it in person first?

Do Thai embassies really expect something that is impossible or are the people posting here incorrect?

Sorry if I sound pedantic but the OP makes no mention of his finances having to be in a Thai bank account.

He is applying for an 'O' visa outside of Thailand, not an extension of stay.

From my own experience of applying for a non imm 'O' visa (albeit in China) I was asked for proof of funds (equivalent to 800,000baht) in any bank for over 3 months, the bank statement must have both the address of the bank and applicant. This was 4 months ago.

Maybe they are now being more strict in the UK about issuing visas under the non imm 'O' category?

[Suradit69]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

It is easy - married man not allowed out therefore 40k per month - single man allowed out therefore needs more 65k per month

The requirements for a person married to a Thai is based upon it being done for humanitarian reasons so they can be with there family.

Where as retirement is considered as a matter of choice not necessity. Also another point is that those doing it are not all single and can have their spouse with them as a dependent with no additional financial proof.

That may be the case but just seems logically the higher funds amount would be required for supporting two or more people than for a single person. Also, a single person can more easily reduce his burn rate if necessary while a couple's or family's expenses are more fixed.

In any case, doesn't affect me personally...just always a funny quirk in the system.

"That may be the case but just seems logically the higher funds amount ..."

Because you don't see the logic doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Quite often there's little attempt to apply thinking by farang who assume they are the custodians of universal logic.

The amounts set are not designed to ensure you have a comfy existence. They want people staying here who have money to spend and who will be able to meet expenses such as medical bills rather than be a burden for hospitals and police to cope with. They are allowing a concession in those requirements for foreigners who are providing support to a Thai wife and possibly children. As Ubonjoe said the lesser amount is meant to be a humanitarian gesture not their assessment of your lifestyle choices or what will keep you supplied with beer.

[sms747]

Still far easier than a Thai getting a short Visitor visa for the UK, no complaints,

[phitsanulokjohn]

They just can't help it, they just love to continually move the goalposts to suit themselves of course,but

If you can't stand the heat, then stay in a more fair but bitterly cold country.The choice is yours,no good complaining about something you have no power over.

[NoshowJones]

Wrong numbers, should be 400k/40k. What they mentioned is for retirement. Actually it's BS anyway, as this is only required for an extension of stay, but the consulates and embassies are free to decide on their own.

Yes, unfortunately that is true. No wonder things get so confusing for non Thais. Yes, Thailand should make their immigration rules as they see fit, but to allow different Consulates and Embassys the freedom to make their own rules is nonsense. But it will never change. TIT.

[Thormaturge]

This is Thailand and still people are looking for logic in official statements.

[Hedghog]

But it is oh so easy.

If you have the funds for an extension of stay.

Tough if you haven't.

After all if you are only a tourist,a tourist visa is readily available.

Things will only get more difficult,for those people who don't have the prerequisite funds for a legitimate long stay visa,or extension of such.

Thailand has a very low financial requirement,for retirees, compared with many other desirable countries.

I'm all right jack.

Sent from my GT-P7500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[ttthailand]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

I believe the thinking is that the wife should also be able to produce an income, Thus two incomes . Could be wrong but why would the government think a woman is not able to do anything.... Should be working doing something. I think most ladies in Bangkok will make around 300,000 + baht a year plus have benefits. That is pay plus year end bonus which is sometimes 6 months pay or more. Not all girls are poor farmers.

[asiamint]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

There is a big difference, i'm sure if you think hard enough you could understand.

[wolf5370]

Seems appropriate to me; never understood the disparity in funds required between a married man's visa/visa extension and a single man's. If anything, it should be the reverse.

It's good to see in any case that Thai embassies and consulates are not handing out visas like candy to children at Easter.

It is easy - married man not allowed out therefore 40k per month - single man allowed out therefore needs more 65k per month

The requirements for a person married to a Thai is based upon it being done for humanitarian reasons so they can be with there family.

Where as retirement is considered as a matter of choice not necessity. Also another point is that those doing it are not all single and can have their spouse with them as a dependent with no additional financial proof.

That may be the case but just seems logically the higher funds amount would be required for supporting two or more people than for a single person. Also, a single person can more easily reduce his burn rate if necessary while a couple's or family's expenses are more fixed.

In any case, doesn't affect me personally...just always a funny quirk in the system.

This is married to a Thai, not just married - therefore, you only need to support yourself as your wife/husband can get a job in Thailand unrestricted and earn a living wage for herself. As a non-retirement Non-Imm O holder you can also work (with a WP) and earn locally - a retiree is not allowed to do this, so is solely locked to income from their home/pensions. This is the logic and it makes sense to me.

[overherebc]

Wolf5370

Reired people can work legally with WP issued on their visa/extension provided it is not overstamp

'No work allowed'

[kimamey]

Wrong numbers, should be 400k/40k. What they mentioned is for retirement. Actually it's BS anyway, as this is only required for an extension of stay, but the consulates and embassies are free to decide on their own.

If you think is BS......go back to your country.

The usual go back to your own country rubbish.

As these figures are for a visa based on marriage then leaving may not be so simple. For instance I have a mother in law and a step daughter to consider. I have one sister in law who has a small piece of land in the middle of ours where she has a house which would make it difficult if we tried to sell.

I do think some of the figures seem a bit odd. For instance I know an English guy who is a teacher and gets 35000 baht a month so he wouldn't qualify but I assume because he must be on a non imm 'B' it's OK. I think one of the biggest problems is the fact that the embassies and consulates don't appear to know the rules and make them up as they go along. I remember a couple of years ago before I married I emailed the Thai embassy in London with 3 questions and they eventually replied to one. A lot of the information is different between the embassy and consulates and some I knew at the time was incorrect. Hopefully it's changed now but I doubt it.

[terak]

Wolf5370

Reired people can work legally with WP issued on their visa/extension provided it is not overstamp

'No work allowed'

Persons on a retirement extension CANNOT work - define retirement

[Lite Beer]

Any one with a Visa or Extension of stay based on Retirement is highly unlikely to be issued a Work Permit.

[TheSpade]

I think most ladies in Bangkok will make around 300,000 + baht a year plus have benefits. That is pay plus year end bonus which is sometimes 6 months pay or more. Not all girls are poor farmers

No not all farmers but even girls with OK jobs aren't usually making 25,000B per month so unlikely they'll make 300k a year.

10-20k seems normal among everyone I know doing a wide range of jobs from nursing to office worker to IT to major events organiser and everything in between.

[Lite Beer]

I notice that the Non Imm guidelines on their website have been removed.

So it looks like something has changed.

[Lite Beer]

An inflammatory post has been removed along with the reply to it.