Are agents still operating or has Big Joke wiped them out

[bkk6060]

15 hours ago, smedly said:

90 day report 200baht

extension if you tick all the boxes 3-4k baht

Who is your agent, your mother in law?

Based upon your follow up comment you claim an agent will take care of everything for approx. 1000 b agent fee??

I challenge you to name the agent as I believe your low price quote is totally absurd.

[Spidey]

2 hours ago, balo said:

Please do not talk about agents as they are some sort of criminals , they are not .  You can borrow 800k from a friend or borrow from an agent , it doesn't really matter.   It's the immigration officer at charge who will decide if you will get an extension or not.  If the agent is well connected and can show evidence of the transfer of 800k into the customers bankbook , everyone are satisfied.  

 

All very true, but you don't say why the IO would ignore the fact that the 800k hasn't been in an account for 3 months. 

Maybe it's because the agent is well connected to the IOs wallet. All of this is completely illegal, of course, but we'll ignore that fact as TiT!

[tropo]

On 11/11/2018 at 5:36 PM, JLCrab said:

Whatever you might do, if someone gets an extension of stay based upon having 800K baht in a Thai bank account for 3 months prior to applying for an extension who has never had 800K baht in a Thai bank account for 3 months prior to applying for an extension, that is not perfectly legal.

Seriously? You're harping on about what is "perfectly legal" in Thailand? There's no such thing... as if you had to be reminded in a country where the military seized power and where there's been no elected government for 4.5 years already. This is the "wild west" where anything goes. Just get on with your business and never mind anyone else's. I find people on threads such as these pushing the moralistic "what's right and what's wrong" angle a little irritating.

[smedly]

2 hours ago, bkk6060 said:

Who is your agent, your mother in law?

Based upon your follow up comment you claim an agent will take care of everything for approx. 1000 b agent fee??

I challenge you to name the agent as I believe your low price quote is totally absurd.

if you bothered to read you would realise that the quote is for someone who has the money in their bank and is properly seasoned or is using the income method or both, in other words they meet all the legal requirements and could do the extension themselves

 

no brown envelopes or backhanders required

[smedly]

4 hours ago, balo said:

Please do not talk about agents as they are some sort of criminals , they are not .  You can borrow 800k from a friend or borrow from an agent , it doesn't really matter.   It's the immigration officer at charge who will decide if you will get an extension or not.  If the agent is well connected and can show evidence of the transfer of 800k into the customers bankbook , everyone are satisfied.  

 

if you have a trusted friend who is willing to lend you 800kbaht for 3 months then that is of course your business

 

also note that in some cases I have heard IO's asking why there is no other activity on their bank accounts - like what they are spending month to month in order to live here

[JackThompson]

11 hours ago, Acharn said:

Anyway, this is much like the requirement after the 1997 financial crisis that we had to submit copies of our bank books, plus obtain a letter from the bank certifying how much money we had transferred into our accounts during the past year.

Thanks for sharing this.  I was not aware there was a precedent for this type of bank-letter being used at immigration.  That is somewhat encouraging - in that it might allow for annual-extensions based on income using an "average monthly" amount vs "deposit every month" formula. 

 

No guarantees, of course - all 100% speculation until we get something official.

[JackThompson]

10 hours ago, Maestro said:

I see this differently. The applicant for an extension of stay pays an agent a fee to handle the application. The applicant signs the application form and probably has to accompany the agent to the immigration office to show his face for identification purposes, but the money to pay for the application fee is handed over to the immigration official by the agent.

That happens too, of course.  But if that were all that happened, I doubt they would have many customers.

 

6 hours ago, balo said:

Please do not talk about agents as they are some sort of criminals , they are not .  You can borrow 800k from a friend or borrow from an agent , it doesn't really matter.   It's the immigration officer at charge who will decide if you will get an extension or not.  If the agent is well connected and can show evidence of the transfer of 800k into the customers bankbook , everyone are satisfied.  

Sure, as long as the agent-loans are for 3-months - perfectly legal, and no issue with "waiving seasoning."  That is not what is reported, though.  What is reported are loans for less than 24-hours.

 

In addition to bypassing the financials this way, agents are often needed to get 100% honest-applications processed at an office.  Non-O stamps are the most common case of this - either with "new unpublished rules" or even outright denial the service even exists (reported at some offices).  As well, Jomtien's family-desk will often block annual-extension apps (some report even 60-day extensions) if you rent your residence - unless you pay an agent.

 

Also, I have not yet heard of a problem with TM-30s or of any immigration "home visits" for agent-submitted applications.  This may have happened - but not reported, that I've read.

[OJAS]

22 hours ago, rott said:

That is what I was banging on about OJAS.

I was indeed, very well aware of the similar USA & Aussie Embassy decisions, thank you very much, rott.

 

But I fail to see how these are relevant to my comment about the British Embassy which was in response to one made about the Thai Embassy in London.

[balo]

8 hours ago, smedly said:

also note that in some cases I have heard IO's asking why there is no other activity on their bank accounts - like what they are spending month to month in order to live here

No activity in one bank account doesn't mean there are no activity in others . I would being with me bank books from my foreign bank account together with my Thai bank accounts to show my transfers.  

 

 

[smedly]

19 minutes ago, balo said:

No activity in one bank account doesn't mean there are no activity in others . I would being with me bank books from my foreign bank account together with my Thai bank accounts to show my transfers.  

 

 

You are a model for all expat retirees to follow - well done

[balo]

And what is that supposed to mean , I am just suggesting what I would do if being asked about account activity . 

[rott]

1 hour ago, OJAS said:

I was indeed, very well aware of the similar USA & Aussie Embassy decisions, thank you very much, rott.

 

But I fail to see how these are relevant to my comment about the British Embassy which was in response to one made about the Thai Embassy in London.

Because you appeared to be blaming the whole income letter problem on the British Embassy, please re-read your post.

Edited November 13, 2018 by rott

[Spidey]

17 minutes ago, rott said:

Because you appeared to be blaming the whole income letter problem on the British Embassy, please re-read your post.

No one else is to blame.

[luckyluke]

5 minutes ago, rott said:

The problem emanating from Thai Immigration.

And 3 embassies reacted in a radical way.

 

The others  apply the unresponsive approach.

 

Time will tell what will happen to the nationals of those embassies using an income letter issued in 2019.

[rott]

7 minutes ago, Spidey said:

No one else is to blame.

Quite Righty. ThaI Immigration nowhere at fault.

 

Brits also to blame for the actions of USA and Australian embassies.

 

Perfidious Albion again.

[onera1961]

1 hour ago, rott said:

Quite Righty. ThaI Immigration nowhere at fault.

If all embassies would have stopped embassy letter, may be it was TIs fault. But other embassies are gladly issuing them. Irony is that the people that needs embassy letters from these three embassies are the most vocal about the ethical and moral issues against people using agents' help. My guess is TI must have caught a few people with embassy letters from these embassies when asked about proof of income. They may have fumbled, showed some ineligible and easily faked documents, etc from their home country and some body may have screamed stat dec ????. But we would never know the whole story. At least I personally know one guy who has been lying for decades in his embassy letter. The poor guy does not even have money to hire an agent. 

Edited November 13, 2018 by onera1961

[smedly]

58 minutes ago, onera1961 said:

If all embassies would have stopped embassy letter, may be it was TIs fault. But other embassies are gladly issuing them. Irony is that the people that needs embassy letters from these three embassies are the most vocal about the ethical and moral issues against people using agents' help. My guess is TI must have caught a few people with embassy letters from these embassies when asked about proof of income. They may have fumbled, showed some ineligible and easily faked documents, etc from their home country and some body may have screamed stat dec ????. But we would never know the whole story. At least I personally know one guy who has been lying for decades in his embassy letter. The poor guy does not even have money to hire an agent. 

the US and AUS were saying no change to their service right up to shortly before the US Embassy announcement, then we had the Aussies stating - ha, no problem with our lot and a few days later- bang, both predicted by me

 

I fully expect more to follow

[rott]

1 hour ago, smedly said:

the US and AUS were saying no change to their service right up to shortly before the US Embassy announcement, then we had the Aussies stating - ha, no problem with our lot and a few days later- bang, both predicted by me

 

I fully expect more to follow

We will probably know nothingdefinite till the New Year.

I never knew or guessed that the BE were approving unverified information. Just shows what goes on.

[JackThompson]

14 minutes ago, rott said:

We will probably know nothingdefinite till the New Year.

I never knew or guessed that the BE were approving unverified information. Just shows what goes on.

I am not sure if any embassy is contacting all sources of declared-income and verifying amounts match those provided by the applicant.  Maybe some are - if they only allow govt-pensions to be cited, or something.  For most people, that would only get them "part way" to 65K/mo, but could help with a combo-application.  This would be no help at all for most younger (50 to 60+) applicants.

 

In cases of many forms of income, it would simply be impossible to do independent verification - auditing private businesses, contacting renters of homes and then visiting to make sure they are "really renting there" (not just friends of the applicant doing a favor on the phone), checking property-records to ensure the applicant really owns the home(s) he claims to be renting (but what if a sublet on a lease?), and so on.

[Acharn]

On 11/12/2018 at 9:34 PM, Spidey said:

They accept the affidavit now. No sign that they aren't going to accept it in the future. The problem is that your embassy refuses to issue them. The problem is to get the embassies to rescind their decision. TI want the letter.

Well, the way I read the story was that the Embassies are stopping issuing the affidavits because they have been informed by Thai Immigration that they will no longer accept the affidavits as they are now, but must include verification that the affidavits are, in fact, true. Since there's no practical that the governments can do that, the embassies are not going to issue affidavits that the Thai government will not accept. Believe me, at $50 a crack, the American embassy would not just arbitrarily stop selling us the service. Nobody seems to know for sure when the Thai cut-off date was, since I believe they have not issued a public announcement of the change they are making. I no longer live in Bangkok, but I've watched the evolution of Thai Immigration policies for 36 years now, Obviously, since I have no friends in the highest command level of Immigration I might easily be wrong, but at this point the only thing I know is that the American Consulate has announced that they will not be issuing the affidavits afte  January 1.

[tropo]

 

On 11/13/2018 at 2:53 PM, luckyluke said:

And 3 embassies reacted in a radical way.

 

The others  apply the unresponsive approach.

 

Time will tell what will happen to the nationals of those embassies using an income letter issued in 2019.

I see the Canadian Embassy is still issuing them up to at least February according to their online booking schedule. They only allow bookings up till 3 months in advance.... yet some people claim they have been informed by Immigration "chiefs" that they will no longer accept them from Jan 1. Why did I check on Canada? Well, an "official" at the Jomtien office told me that Canada joined the other embassies in discontinuing their service. Who can you believe? Everyone is confused, even the TI officers.

[SheungWan]

On 11/13/2018 at 4:39 PM, onera1961 said:

If all embassies would have stopped embassy letter, may be it was TIs fault. But other embassies are gladly issuing them. Irony is that the people that needs embassy letters from these three embassies are the most vocal about the ethical and moral issues against people using agents' help. My guess is TI must have caught a few people with embassy letters from these embassies when asked about proof of income. They may have fumbled, showed some ineligible and easily faked documents, etc from their home country and some body may have screamed stat dec ????. But we would never know the whole story. At least I personally know one guy who has been lying for decades in his embassy letter. The poor guy does not even have money to hire an agent. 

The reason why some of those who are currently using embassy letters are so vehemently against employing agents is far more prosaic. They are fundamentally upset at having their fee go up from 1900 baht to around 15000 baht. The moral outrage is somewhat for show and also there is a gamble that if the agents can be shut down, then something will have to be done to help them out come the next round. So much leaping about for now.

[marcimarc]

Not all agents are wiped out, but i becomes far more expensive for us. I changed my agent due to the pricing and are now paying 18k

[JackThompson]

7 hours ago, SheungWan said:

The reason why some of those who are currently using embassy letters are so vehemently against employing agents is far more prosaic. They are fundamentally upset at having their fee go up from 1900 baht to around 15000 baht. The moral outrage is somewhat for show and also there is a gamble that if the agents can be shut down, then something will have to be done to help them out come the next round. So much leaping about for now.

An agent costs about the same as my Non-O ME Visa solution (married to a Thai), and would be much simpler, as I will be 50 when my current Visa runs out.  My primary concern, is if an agent I chose were thrown under the bus, I could get ground-up in the wheels with them.

[balo]

They are still operating , a friend of mine got a 1 year visa for 18k a few days ago.