Retirement extension: Embassy Proof of Income not accepted

[Furryman]

I have a good friend here in Pattaya, an Australian gentleman, who has been here in Thailand for several years under a retirement visa. The other day he went in to get his annual extension, thinking things would follow the regular routine the proceedure had followed every year previously, but they threw him a pretty significant curveball.

He had his letter from the Australian Embassy verifying that his income meets the required standard, the same letter he has used every year previously, but the folks at the Jomtien immigration office are not accepting this letter as they had previously. They are asking for verification from a Thailand bank instead. This is causing a bit of a scramble for him as he had never been asked for the Thai bank information before, and does not have his money ‘seasoned’.

Is this some new change in policy that slipped in under the radar, or is someone showing off for the new bosses? I know a lot of folks from Australia and the USA have relied solely on the embassy income letters and don’t routinely season money in Thai banks. If this is a real policy change, this could catch a lot of people in a very awkward place.

[stevenl]

I would presume they just want to see he is transfering the money from abroad to Thailand, so no seasoning requirement. Sometimes they do ask for bankbook and/or ATM card.

[ubonjoe]

There has been no change to the rules.

They are probably asking for back up proof for the statutory declaration not 800k baht in the bank.

Having a Thai bank book showing regular transfers into the country or some other proof should be accepted.

He should go back and try to get a clarification of what they want.

[Jingthing]

There is absolutely no official requirement to transfer even one baht from abroad if using the income method!

Yes, they are not accepting the embassy letter.

Clearly they are looking for some kind of evidence that income stated is for real.

In the past, some offices have done a temporary ENFORCEMENT policy of needing to show some months of incoming transfers.

That never seemed to have stuck for long.

Again, nothing to do with official retirement extension rules.

Just the same old game of ever shifting enforcement policies, office to office, officer to officer, day by day.

If I were this applicant and the income IS for real, I would figure out a way to credibly document that income (such as documents from the paying entity).

If they are really looking for transfer proof to a Thai bank, yes, they should be more specific about exactly what they need.

I think there is a good chance they would accept another kind of credible evidence of the stated income.

[Furryman]

There has been no change to the rules.

They are probably asking for back up proof for the statutory declaration not 800k baht in the bank.

Having a Thai bank book showing regular transfers into the country or some other proof should be accepted.

He should go back and try to get a clarification of what they want.

He is telling me they want to see the bank account with 800k. No mention of any record of transfers. His Thai lady had a long convo with the officers at immigration and she speaks english quite well so I doubt this is a miscommunication.

[Jingthing]

There has been no change to the rules.

They are probably asking for back up proof for the statutory declaration not 800k baht in the bank.

Having a Thai bank book showing regular transfers into the country or some other proof should be accepted.

He should go back and try to get a clarification of what they want.

He is telling me they want to see the bank account with 800k. No mention of any record of transfers. His Thai lady had a long convo with the officers at immigration and she speaks english quite well so I doubt this is a miscommunication.

That doesn't sound right.

The possible methods have NOT changed.

Bank account only

Combo method

Income method only

Something is fishy about this report ... probably some kind of miscommunication OR a real problem with this specific application.

I don't for a second think this report indicates Jomtien or any office is no longer accepting income based applications.

There must be something about THIS application.

[Furryman]

There has been no change to the rules.

They are probably asking for back up proof for the statutory declaration not 800k baht in the bank.

Having a Thai bank book showing regular transfers into the country or some other proof should be accepted.

He should go back and try to get a clarification of what they want.

He is telling me they want to see the bank account with 800k. No mention of any record of transfers. His Thai lady had a long convo with the officers at immigration and she speaks english quite well so I doubt this is a miscommunication.

That doesn't sound right.

The possible methods have NOT changed.

Bank account only

Combo method

Income method only

Something is fishy about this report ... probably some kind of miscommunication OR a real problem with this specific application.

I don't for a second think this report indicates Jomtien or any office is no longer accepting income based applications.

There must be something about THIS application.

As I understand it, the letter from the embassy has always been accepted as proof of income. It's how he understood it too, and how it has always worked for him. That is why he had no other documents prepared. From how I understand what he is telling me, the proof of income has been rejected in his case and they only want to see money in the bank.

If he did get flagged for some sort of special scrutiny I cannot imagine why, as far as Pattaya expats go, he is a kindly and quite guy. Not any sort of trouble maker in any sense of the word.

I'll update as I learn more.

Edit: I am not suggesting that income based applications are being rejected at Jomtien, I am reporting that a previously accepted method for proof of income seems to have been rejected in this case.

[Jingthing]

OK, be clear these officers are POLICE and in many ways applicants are suspects.

They have the right and have always had the right to demand additional backup documentation for any claims made in an application.

They usually don't, but they have every right.

Our rights are more limited.

If they ask, we must cooperate.

Now what I find curious about this report is that they rejected the claim in the letter outright.

So I wonder why.
Why didn't they just ask for backup documentation for the income claimed in the letter?

That would be the more normal pushback in this situation where they are suspect a false claim.

We have established they aren't looking transfer to Thailand evidence and have rejected the income claim outright.

Again, I have to wonder ... what is it about this income claim that made them react so dramatically?

Now IF this income claim is valid if this was me I would collect evidence to back that up and go back with that evidence. It would be IMPOSSIBLE now to season 800K baht for three months for this time frame even if he has the money.

QUESTION: Does the Australian embassy require evidence to support the income claim in the letter, or not?
Some embassies do, some don't. Thai immigration knows which is which for major countries anyway.

If the Aussie embassy does require evidence, this is even a weirder report.

[lungbing]

OP, you say the letter was "the same letter he had used every year previously".

It might be different in Jomtien, but up here they immigration ask for a new letter every year.

[Jingthing]

OP, you say the letter was "the same letter he had used every year previously".

It might be different in Jomtien, but up here they immigration ask for a new letter every year.

That's a good point!

If it wasn't a fresh enough letter, it wouldn't be accepted.

That would certainly solve any mystery!

I assumed it was fresh enough letter.

If that was the only problem, the assumed response from immigration would be: GO GET a fresh letter!

If so, there is the solution. Almost too easy ...

[Furryman]

OP, you say the letter was "the same letter he had used every year previously".

It might be different in Jomtien, but up here they immigration ask for a new letter every year.

It is a new letter he got from the Aus Embassy just days before.

Aus does not require any documentation, same as the US embassy.

Perhaps rejected is too strong a word. Not accepted perhaps? A distinction without a difference IMO. Either way, he had never been asked for further bank information before, and getting it assembled in the course of a few days is quite a scramble. Money in the bank will certainly not be seasoned, this seems to be the detail he is most worried about,

So I guess the point of this is, again, what was accepted as proof before is, in this case at least, not being accepted as proof now.

[Jingthing]

This is still very weird.

It is impossible now to get a seasoned 800K ... too late!

It might be impossible to show recent transfers if he didn't do the recent transfers.

Again there is no official rule that any are needed, but they can ask.

But they would normally warn about an enforcement change like that.
I still say ... if this income is real ... get some DOCUMENTATION about it.

Is it a pension?

Get something from the pension paying authority.

It seems to me armed with that and some major kowtow action, he might make it through.

If this income isn't real or if it's inflated, well, then he needs to start over ... with a different method.

Maybe this is too personal a question ... but was the income claimed based on a usual source like PENSION or something else?

[umbanda]

Unfortunately...this is possible. Happens with me 4 years ago between different Immigration offices and between different officers. Even if they notice that they are wrong..I am afraid that foreigners are not in good position in getting a review of the rules.....I hope something will be in writing showing the official rules when we have to extend our visas, to have in hand to clarify any confusion.

Just 2 weeks ago I was appliying for driver license and the officer was rejecting the application because she didn't know that in the US dates, month are first not days....She didn't liked at all when I tryed to teach her about the difference with the Thai way...Finally, and after "consultations" with others, she understood and had to agree with me..but loosing face it is a shame that Thai people do not deal well of...

[Mobi]

OP, you say the letter was "the same letter he had used every year previously".

It might be different in Jomtien, but up here they immigration ask for a new letter every year.

It is a new letter he got from the Aus Embassy just days before.

Aus does not require any documentation, same as the US embassy.

Perhaps rejected is too strong a word. Not accepted perhaps? A distinction without a difference IMO. Either way, he had never been asked for further bank information before, and getting it assembled in the course of a few days is quite a scramble. Money in the bank will certainly not be seasoned, this seems to be the detail he is most worried about,

So I guess the point of this is, again, what was accepted as proof before is, in this case at least, not being accepted as proof now.

Maybe therein lies the reason.... maybe the officer has become aware of the fact that income letters can be obtained from certain embassies without backup documentation and this has provoked the request for additional bank information...

Certainly the British embassy require backup documentation to support the income letter, but who knows to what extent this is scrutinised.

We are continually advised that immigration reads these threads, so maybe they have spotted the loopholes and are trying to plug them.

The OP would do well to try and clarify exactly what is required and the reasons.

[Jingthing]

But the OP says only an 800k application will be accepted in this case. Not the same at all as asking for evidence of income!

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Furryman]

No new word from my Aus friend, but another friend of mine, an American, just went in for his first retirement visa today, changed it from the tourist visa he came in on, and they accepted the US embassy letter no questions asked. No fuss, no muss.

I guess my Aus friend maybe is flagged for greater scrutiny for some reason or another. Like I said, I'll update when I know more.

[Jingthing]

Yes it sounds specific about his application. Still a mystery. Best of luck.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Kaoboi Bebobp]

The Canadian embassy requires a proof letter from the source of my pension money. It is then specifically stated in the embassy letter to immigration that the information therein is based on a company letter. I just renewed my retirement extension a couple of weeks ago at Jomtien. Had no issues.

Americans are not required to prove anything at their embassy. However, I think Americans, because of America's relationship with Thailand, get an easier road. But it could just be, as others pointed out, that immigration knows an Aussie embassy income letter is not based on proof and is getting sticky about that.

[Smokin Joe]

Same thing happened to me about four years ago at Jomtien. They wouldn't accept the US. embassy letter without a bank letter ALSO.

I had about 300k in the bank and got the bank latter and went back and got the extension with no problem. There was no set amount ever mentioned that they wanted but they wanted the bank letter for what I did have.

[Jingthing]

Yes I remember that from the past. But sorry this report is totally different. This report is a total rejection of an income method attempt with a demand for a 800k full bank method. OR ... there's been a major miscommunication. Good chance of that.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Suradit69]

Presumably there was some sort of interview or interchange that took place before they announced he needed to use the money in the bank method, not just a matter of handing it back to him without any questions being asked.

If they asked if he had any proof of income amounts and sources or asked for banking info to show he was bringing in some money regularly and he said he had none of either, it could have been a matter of OK you need Baht 800,000 in the bank.

When I go in I bring along supporting documents for the amount claimed on the US embassy affidavit and I bring along photocopies of the bank book and manager's letter simply because I want all outcomes prepared for and I don't want to try to start to arrange that documentation as my extension expiration is rapidly approaching.

It seems if you claim the income there should be some way of showing backup for the amount you state. In some cases in may be difficult, but for Americans a Social Security income letter is easily obtained and I would think pension providers must send out some paperwork from time to time, etc.

Maybe therein lies the reason.... maybe the officer has become aware of the fact that income letters can be obtained from certain embassies without backup documentation and this has provoked the request for additional bank information...

Certainly the British embassy require backup documentation to support the income letter, but who knows to what extent this is scrutinised.

We are continually advised that immigration reads these threads, so maybe they have spotted the loopholes and are trying to plug them.

The OP would do well to try and clarify exactly what is required and the reasons.

"Maybe therein lies the reason.... maybe the officer has become aware of the fact that income letters can be obtained from certain embassies without backup documentation and this has provoked the request for additional bank information..."

Immigrations is well aware of what different embassies require when obtaining the letter/affidavit. It isn't a closely guarded secret, they aren't as clueless as some farang seem to think they are and the fact that the British embassy works on the assumption that its citizens would lie if not forced to prove what they are claiming as their monthly income is hardly a sterling (pun intended) endorsement for their embassy or the letter applicants.

[Jingthing]

Well, I totally agree immigration is well aware and has been for MANY YEARS that some embassies don't require documentation to get the letter (and presumably which embassies for major countries).

It is also not at all new that immigration has the right to demand additional documentation beyond the letter on a case by case basis (so best to be prepared and also not to LIE to your embassy).

As far as what exactly happened with this case to provoke a complete rejection of his income based application (if indeed that is really what happened), at this point, we're just guessing.

[DogNo1]

When I got my first retirement extension, I showed immigration several months worth of bank statements proving that the amount of income that I claimed on my affidavit from the American Embassy was being deposited in my American bank accounts on a monthly basis. They were satisfied and haven't asked for any proof since. I always take 4 months of the most recent statements in case they ask for them. I don't think that proof of transfers to a Thai bank are required. They just want proof that you do, in fact, have the retirement income that you claim.

[madpat]

Furryman,

You do not have to show 800K in the bank you must show a combined amount of 800k from savings and income i.e pension or earnings

[Jingthing]

Furryman,

You do not have to show 800K in the bank you must show a combined amount of 800k from savings and income i.e pension or earnings

Normally, that is the combo method. A perfectly valid method, commonly used.

HOWEVER, this report is about a specific PROBLEM CASE.

Immigration does NOT accept the income letter from this applicant in any way and demands an application using bank account ONLY. Presumably he has income over 800K in the letter so bringing the combo method up in this case is irrelevant anyway. Anyway, for the combo method to work, immigration must accept the income part of the combo (in the embassy letter). But this poster is telling us immigration does not accept this letter as a valid letter for application purposes.

The topic here is a specific case with a specific problem along with a mystery about why this man's income letter was rejected. We need more information about that to begin to understand more about this mystery.

[rizla]

Slightly off topic.....what boils me is that they wont accept the part and part method unless the monies are seasoned for 3 months...

[paz]

Slightly off topic.....what boils me is that they wont accept the part and part method unless the monies are seasoned for 3 months...

Apparently there is a new rules, dated aug 13th, invisible to public eyes, that dictates that.

[Jingthing]

Slightly off topic.....what boils me is that they wont accept the part and part method unless the monies are seasoned for 3 months...

Did the policy change at Jomtien about that?

As far as I know Jomtien does not require money seasoning for the bank account portion when using the COMBO method.

Again, has that changed at Jomtien? Any reports? We've heard reports from Bankok I think, but I don't recall news like that from Jomtien.

[Jingthing]

Slightly off topic.....what boils me is that they wont accept the part and part method unless the monies are seasoned for 3 months...

Apparently there is a new rules, dated aug 13th, invisible to public eyes, that dictates that.

I wouldn't assume Jomtien is following that until there are actual reports to that effect.

[INV]

Slightly off topic.....what boils me is that they wont accept the part and part method unless the monies are seasoned for 3 months...

Apparently there is a new rules, dated aug 13th, invisible to public eyes, that dictates that.

Paz do you have any link or more information about this?I mean they have now secret rules? So people going there and not knowing this will have big issues if this is true.