wgdanson Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 28 minutes ago, Tanoshi said: They don't and can't 'verify' his income/pensions. They accept his documents in good faith and supply a letter as such certified by his Embassy. Was it not the Thai Imm who wanted our documents verifying by the British Embassy, who said they could not do it easily. So the Austrian Embassy, German speaking, can verify a Belgian pension statement which is probably in French or Woloon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 25 minutes ago, wgdanson said: Was it not the Thai Imm who wanted our documents verifying by the British Embassy, who said they could not do it easily. So the Austrian Embassy, German speaking, can verify a Belgian pension statement which is probably in French or Woloon. Yes and a total cock up. According to the announcements from the UK and US Embassy, TI requested they 'verified' the incomes. All other Embassies issue a 'certified' letter, the BE never used the word 'certified' in their income letters. Immigrations amended order to 138/2557 states; Income certification certified by the Embassy or Consulate. The previous or amended TI orders never mention 'verified' income. I truly believe TI used the incorrect terminology. 'Verified' and 'certified' have totally different legal implications in western Countries. They've certainly changed their tune and terminology and now request only 'certified' letters of income, however I believe this change came about after the BE made the decision to cease the service. There is no reason why the BE could not have 'certified' their Income letters, if that had been requested at the time by TI. I very much doubt the BE would reintroduce the service now TI have announced an alternative method to prove income. The US (affidavits) and Australia (stat decs) would have had to completely change their system of issuing letters of income, but they were also under the impression from TI that incomes should be 'verified'. Data Protector law prevents third parties from any access to you personal private details, without your written authority. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckyluke Posted January 29, 2019 Share Posted January 29, 2019 3 hours ago, wgdanson said: So the Austrian Embassy, German speaking, can verify a Belgian pension statement which is probably in French or Woloon. It is the Austrian Consulate in Pattaya. Belgium has 3 National languages : Dutch, French, German. My documents are in Dutch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropo Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 16 hours ago, ubonjoe said: I am just preparing in advance. By bank book shows the same dates and transactions as the printout so it would back up the printed out statement if needed. No problem to get a one year statement from the bank if needed. What are your thoughts about "domestic transfer" indicated on a bank statement, for a SWIFT transfer made in THB? That's exactly what shows on my statement for a Thai Baht SWIFT transfer from Australia. My guess is that the international THB transfer went through a corresponding bank first, and then a domestic transfer was made to my bank (K-Bank). My bank sees it as a domestic transfer. Of course, I have the SWIFT transfer details, but this would get very messy having to back up documents for every transfer. Next time, to avoid this I will transfer AUD instead, but I got a good THB rate and decided to send THB instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubonjoe Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, tropo said: What are your thoughts about "domestic transfer" indicated on a bank statement, for a SWIFT transfer made in THB? It is not clear what immigration will want to see. Until more people use the new option we cannot be sure about it. I think there are many banks that use a correspondent bank here for transfers into the country. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onera1961 Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) On 1/24/2019 at 6:41 PM, jesimps said: So should sworn declarations. The worst kind of verification. No meat in it. Thousands of people do lie under oath. They hesitate when the officiating officials threaten them with consequences. Edited January 30, 2019 by onera1961 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skatewash Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 On 1/29/2019 at 8:59 AM, LucysDad said: That is what immigration have said if you read the specific immigration threads. You seriously think IO's are capable/inclined to analysed a bank statement - now THAT would be wishful thinking. 1 IOs currently do exactly that for the lump sum money in the bank method. The bank letter merely states that the applicant has an account at that bank with a certain balance on a certain date. Whether the balance has dropped below the minimum threshold (800,000/400,000) is determined solely by the IO from looking at the bank statement or bank passbook, not from the letter. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skatewash Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 19 hours ago, JackThompson said: My bank-book and online from Bangkok Bank also show FTT. - I mean that I don't think immigration will accept self-printed bank-statements for showing monthly income, due to fear of forgery. My bank-book is useless for this purpose - due to reasons in my prior post. I'm happy to pay the bank for a signed/stamped statement which imm will not question, in lieu of a consistently-updated bank-book. Some IOs have insisted for years on a bank-issued signed/stamped bank statement (for example, Phuket). They also want to see a bank passbook. They like it when all the numbers match ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OJAS Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 18 hours ago, Tanoshi said: Data Protector law prevents third parties from any access to you personal private details, without your written authority. However, I would have thought that the BE could easily have devised some standard formal written authorisation which we would have had to sign permitting them to access our personal private details for income confirmation purposes as might, in their view, have been required by the Immigration Bureau. Strikes me that they have cited DP concerns as purely a smokescreen for purportedly justifying future zero effort on their part in this matter. But all academic now, of course. Edited January 30, 2019 by OJAS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucysDad Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 2 hours ago, skatewash said: IOs currently do exactly that for the lump sum money in the bank method. The bank letter merely states that the applicant has an account at that bank with a certain balance on a certain date. Whether the balance has dropped below the minimum threshold (800,000/400,000) is determined solely by the IO from looking at the bank statement or bank passbook, not from the letter. Be fair, ????a trained monkey can look back over 90 days to see if a passbook balance has dropped below a minimum figure; I am talking about analyzing transactions on a bank statement to establish a minimum income figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post skatewash Posted January 30, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted January 30, 2019 (edited) 56 minutes ago, LucysDad said: Be fair, ????a trained monkey can look back over 90 days to see if a passbook balance has dropped below a minimum figure; I am talking about analyzing transactions on a bank statement to establish a minimum income figure. I find it interesting that some people (maybe including even Thai Immigration) think that it's going to be an easy job to get a branch bank manager to write a letter that certifies a thorough forensic accounting investigation into twelve incoming deposits, to include looking at overseas bank statements (in various languages other than Thai), credit advices from other intermediate Thai banks, and TransferWise receipts. Are these the same Thai banks at which some people are having great difficulty opening a savings account? ???? Can I see banks issuing the same bank letter that they've been issuing for years, the one that verifies that the subject of the letter is the owner of a bank account at that bank and on a certain day it had a certain balance? Yes, I can see that happening as it already does happen. Then, it will be up to the immigration officer, like it is now with the lump sum money in the bank method, to make the determination of whether the requirements have been satisfied. Trained monkeys could, as you say, determine whether a balance dipped below a threshold amount during a certain period of time, but interestingly, at the bank they don't currently do even that. I've never seen a bank letter, and I've done five at two different banks myself, that stated that. Every single time in my experience it is the immigration officers who do that analysis and make the determination of whether it meets the requirements. The bank letter is completely agnostic on that issue. "This guy has a bank account at this branch and consulting only our own computer system on this day the balance was such and such, that's all we know. That will be 100 baht, please." My imagination isn't powerful enough to envision a situation in which the banks agree to do a much more involved analysis and determination to certify that based on potentially dozens of pages of documentation they have seen (that did not originate in just that bank, but in another Thai intermediary bank, a foreign bank most likely not in the Thai language, and/or TransferWise receipts) they will attest and certify by stamping with the bank's seal that there were twelve international transfers that meet whatever the current requirements for a marriage or retirement extension are currently being used for the monthly income, or in the more complicated case, the combination method. I can see this happening, but the trained monkeys are going to want to be paid a lot more to do this extra work that they are currently not doing. ???? If it turns out the trained monkeys are really good at doing this, I'm thinking of asking them to do my taxes next year. I'm willing to pay up to 100 baht. Occam's razor suggests that the most likely outcome is that the banks will continue to issue the same letter that they do today and Thai immigration officers will be faced with looking at a bank statement from a Thai bank and trying to figure out if transfers are internationally sourced or not, and whether a specific amount was transferred every month, and what that amount adds up to, and whether when added to a properly seasoned bank balance it adds up the required annual threshold for the particular extension being applied for, while, of course, at the same time being lenient. Some immigration officers will no doubt welcome the opportunity to trace the path of your twelve deposits from your foreign bank account through intermediary banks and into your Thai bank account (probably the same types that enjoy doing a Sudoku or solving a Rubik's Cube). Others, not so much. I wish everyone who depends on this method the best of luck. Sincerely. It could turn out to be a very simple process. It could turn out to be quite complicated and frustrating. At this point in time, no one knows. Hoping for the best! Edited January 30, 2019 by skatewash 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingthing Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 Hoping for the best but not even close to expecting it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 2 hours ago, OJAS said: However, I would have thought that the BE could easily have devised some standard formal written authorisation which we would have had to sign permitting them to access our personal private details for income confirmation purposes as might, in their view, have been required by the Immigration Bureau. Strikes me that they have cited DP concerns as purely a smokescreen for purportedly justifying future zero effort on their part in this matter. But all academic now, of course. Well, there is already a procedure for 'verifying' foreign documents to be accepted as authentic in Thailand. Two examples that immediately spring to mind: 1. Marriage to a Thai in the UK, then registering that marriage at a local Amphoe. 2. Employment requiring a decree. In either case the 'certificates' have to be verified as authentic, which can only be completed by the legalisation department of the Home Office. The procedure is known as 'legalisation process. It then has to go to the Thai Embassy in London for certification. At this point the document has been authenticated and approved for use and acceptance in Thailand. These then have to be translated and the translation and original legalised by the MFA in Bangkok before the Amphoe or Education institution accept them as a genuine and authenticated documents. The Home office can only provide this 'verification' service for information they can access and confirm from public record sources, not from private record sources. The BE is neither 'authorised' or has adequately qualified staff to carry out 'verification' of documents. For private sector records, such as the DWP, company or private pensions, the procedure is somewhat different and you have to make the necessary arrangements and give authority to release this information to a third party, which is what the BE is in this situation. As you state it's all academic now, because it appears TI only required the income letters to be 'certified' by the Embassies, (as clearly stated in the amended orders), not 'verified' as per their verbal request to the BE, US and Aus Embassies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacko45k Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 On 1/29/2019 at 9:30 AM, Tanoshi said: Even then, the code 'FTT' isn't going to mean a thing to Immigration. Nor is it included in the passbook abbreviation list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaidream Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 17 hours ago, Tanoshi said: As you state it's all academic now, because it appears TI only required the income letters to be 'certified' by the Embassies, (as clearly stated in the amended orders), not 'verified' as per their verbal request to the BE, US and Aus Embassies. All the Embassies have to do is have a citizen present documents to the Embassy ( Pension statement; Military retirement etc) that match what the citizen is claiming and certify that they have seen the documents and they do indeed match the amount being claimed. An Oath is then administered such as the Us Embassy does when one is claiming anything- address; affirmation to marry and income. No Embassy needs to go back to the actual source nor can they do it. I don't think the Austrian Embassy has actual point of contact with the Belgium retirement system to view the actual documents. I seriously doubt that when a Thai applicant for a United States Visa applies for a US Visa and they declare income that the US Embassy has access directly to the Thai banking system. Everything is done by documentation- sworn under oath and notarized. The Embassies saw the request from Thai Imm as a way out of the income letters because they simply do not want to do them. As far as Thai Immigration looking at 12 months of monies into a Thai bank-IMHO- because all banks use different coding and no bank will go through the trouble of doing a month by month audit and a statement indication x amount was transferred from abroad- the bank book showing 12 separate deposits and a bank letter indicating the account is active and current balance will suffice- At some point Thai imm will cease to care about the source of the deposits- too much trouble deciphering and takes too much time. Time will tell 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 11 minutes ago, Thaidream said: Everything is done by documentation- sworn under oath and notarized. The Embassies saw the request from Thai Imm as a way out of the income letters because they simply do not want to do them. 'Affidavit's' or 'Stat Decs' (US and Australia), never required documentary proof of income. The Embassy letter was issued based on your 'statement' or sworn oath. Do you believe the Embassies lied when they announced TI had requested 'verification' of incomes? Why after the biggest 3 Embassies stopped the service, did other Embassies not follow suit? The answer is within the new amended order; Quote Income certification certified by the Embassy or Consulate. That is very different than what they asked the US, UK or Australian Embassies to comply with. Someone at TI was left with brown trousers after the big 3 pulled out and changed the request. If TI orders insisted 'Income certification 'verified' by the Embassy or Consulate', then I can assure you every EU Embassy would no longer be able to comply with that order, or issue income letters to that effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaidream Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 7 minutes ago, Tanoshi said: Do you believe the Embassies lied when they announced TI had requested 'verification' of incomes? Why after the biggest 3 Embassies stopped the service, did other Embassies not follow suit? No- but I believe that due to differences in semantics and expectations that the BE , USA and AUS Embassies saw this as an opportunity to get rid of something that they believed was becoming onerous and most citizens were complaining about having to pay a hefty charge. By simply declining to do it any longer- they lessened their workload. I find it strange that all 3 Embassies (US/UK/AU) announcements were quite similar and when you read the narratives -there is an indication that since there was 'another way' to 'prove income' and that the 'burden' would be eased the decision was made for the Embassies benefit. If the Embassies really wanted to help its citizens- they could have easily explained to Thai Imm that no one could go back to the original source but they would continue the letters as such and Thai imm could then ask for added proof. My instincts would tell me that Thai Imm would have continued to accept their letters since they are accepting those from China; Russia; Germany; etc etc. into the future. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 30 minutes ago, Thaidream said: No- but I believe that due to differences in semantics and expectations that the BE , USA and AUS Embassies saw this as an opportunity to get rid of something that they believed was becoming onerous and most citizens were complaining about having to pay a hefty charge. By simply declining to do it any longer- they lessened their workload. Those semantics, verify and certify have very different meanings and legal implications. They also lessen their income, which was money for old rope. 32 minutes ago, Thaidream said: I find it strange that all 3 Embassies (US/UK/AU) announcements were quite similar and when you read the narratives -there is an indication that since there was 'another way' to 'prove income' and that the 'burden' would be eased the decision was made for the Embassies benefit. The announcements were similar because TI requested the same requirement from those Embassies. I believe they only withdrew the service after becoming frustrated with negotiations with TI and their failure to understand the request to verify incomes was an impossibility. 36 minutes ago, Thaidream said: If the Embassies really wanted to help its citizens- they could have easily explained to Thai Imm that no one could go back to the original source but they would continue the letters as such and Thai imm could then ask for added proof. My instincts would tell me that Thai Imm would have continued to accept their letters since they are accepting those from China; Russia; Germany; etc etc. into the future. You believe they didn't try to explain that. It was TI that requested and used the term 'verify'. The decision to withdraw the service wasn't taken overnight, negotiation were over several months. They probably made plans in advance to relocate staff to other Embassies/Consulates before the final announcement. You really expect them to redeploy staff back to restart the service after TI caused the problem by the wrong choice of word. Other Embassies continue with the word 'certify' in their Income letters, which complies with the amended orders announced on 21st Dec 2018, several weeks after the UK and US Embassies decision to stop the service. It's pointless putting a lock on the stable door after the horse has bolted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattaya46 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tanoshi said: That is very different than what they asked the US, UK or Australian Embassies to comply with. // We don't have any proof on what may have been said or written by TI. That's just pure speculation . One possibility among several. 1 hour ago, Tanoshi said: If TI orders insisted 'Income certification 'verified' by the Embassy or Consulate', then I can assure you every EU Embassy would no longer be able to comply with that order, or issue income letters to that effect. "Letter from the Embassy verifying the Income" is what is written in some Thai Immigration documents for many years... Edited January 31, 2019 by Pattaya46 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 2 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said: You don't have any proof on what may have been said or written by TI. That's just pure speculation . One possibility among several. We have the written announcements and a video of an interview with TV and the BE. If your opinion is that they lied, please state the reason. 5 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said: "Letter from the Embassy verifying the Income" is what we find written in some Thai Immigration documents for many years... And the new amended order clearly states 'certified' letter of Income from the Embassy. This just reinforces my opinion that TI had no idea of the legal ramifications between the request to 'verify' or 'certify'. I think they perfectly understand now, but not before causing turmoil and distress for many expats. Most are aware for example an extension is not a Visa. But Immigration still persist with calling it a Visa. It's term is misleading and causes confusion. That in my opinion is exactly what happened with TI and the Embassies, before the penny finally dropped, unfortunately to late for many of us. We will never know exactly what happened after the 4 Embassies withdrew the services, but TI appear to have had a change in their request and now only ask for 'certified' Embassy letters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pattaya46 Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 12 minutes ago, Tanoshi said: And the new amended order clearly states 'certified' letter of Income from the Embassy. False. No word 'certified' as the document is written in Thai language. What about the translation ? 13 minutes ago, Tanoshi said: his just reinforces my opinion that TI had no idea of the legal ramifications between the request to 'verify' or 'certify'. Same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanoshi Posted January 31, 2019 Share Posted January 31, 2019 1 minute ago, Pattaya46 said: False. No word 'certified' as the document is written in Thai language. What about the translation ? My wife confirmed the Thai states 'certified'. The translation is accurate in that respect. 'Verify' and 'certify' are different in Thai and have different meanings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now