The Latest Info on Retirement Visas from Immigrations

[indepth]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

And it's always been my assertion that, in the meeting with embassy staff, in May, TI asking for "greater verification" (we don't know exactly what was said) was probably aimed solely at the US and Australian Embassies. Subsequent to the meeting some IOs (notably CM) started asking some US citizens for documentary backup to their income affidavits when presenting them for obtaining their visa extensions. AFAIAA, this practice was exclusively reserved for US citizens.

 

To have satisfied immigration, and prevent all this brew ha ha, all that was required, was for the Australian and US embassies to change their requirement for the issuance of income letters and ask their citizens for documentary evidence of income. They could actually still do this.

 

But no, 4 embassies decided to poke the sleeping tiger, for their own reasons, and we are where we are today.

 

Cheers!

Time for facts, not fiction . Oz embassy stopped issuing stat decs because they are not valid for proof of income and are not a legal document outside of Oz.

[Spidey]

3 minutes ago, indepth said:

Time for facts, not fiction . Oz embassy stopped issuing stat decs because they are not valid for proof of income and are not a legal document outside of Oz.

Which is exactly what I said.

[Peterw42]

25 minutes ago, indepth said:

Time for facts, not fiction . Oz embassy stopped issuing stat decs because they are not valid for proof of income and are not a legal document outside of Oz.

Yes thats basically the reasoning, however the embassy still does "freedom to marry" stat decs, and these stat decs state your income.

So they are still doing stat decs stating income and used as a legal document outside of Australia.

 

https://thailand.embassy.gov.au/files/bkok/Consular_Marriage Stat Dec form.pdf

 

I know at least one person who swears he has used one of these (marrige) stat decs for an income based extension.

 

 

Edited February 11, 2019 by Peterw42

[phutoie2]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

You can't get an O-A visa in Thailand.

He didn't write that, read again. 

He wrote extension of an O-A visa. 

[Thaidream]

10 hours ago, Monomial said:

e US is composed of 50 independent states and many private enterprises, and the US federal embassy can not attest to the accuracy of most documents that people receive in an official capacity. The US embassy can not even certify a birth certificate, a document that confers US citizenship. They would only be able to do what they are already doing...stating that the applicant has certified under penalty of perjury he is telling the truth. The Thai government wants the Embassy to take responsibility for the accuracy of those documents. There is simply no mechanism in the US federated system that would make this possible. Even US government departments often times can't share information due to regulations.

 

The embassy was already doing everything they legally could. Your suggestion above would offer no significant difference to the existing system, and the Thais already said that was unacceptable. Hence, they can no longer issue the letters.

 

Other Embassies aren't representative of countries made of independent states, each with their own laws

I would suggest you look at the website for the US Embassy- Bogota, Columbia/US Citizen Services/Notarials and explain why that US Embassy has no problem with certifying US citizens income and providing  it to Colombian Immigration and the Us Embassy Thailand refuses to do the same.

[billsmart]

1 hour ago, Spidey said:

You can't get an O-A visa in Thailand.

 

I'm talking about an extension of stay for a pre-existing Non-immigrant, O-A (Long-stay) visa - a.k.a "Retirement visa." 
"
And, by the way, I have switched from an O-A to an O based on marriage, and then back to an O-A without leaving Thailand. But, like you, I also believe the initial visa must be issued at an embassy outside of Thailand. I think I got my last one in Singapore when I changed from a Non-immigrant, B (Business/Work) to an O-A. I have never gone back to the US to get one.

Edited February 11, 2019 by billsmart
Grammar

[Joe Mcseismic]

33 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I would suggest you look at the website for the US Embassy- Bogota, Columbia/US Citizen Services/Notarials and explain why that US Embassy has no problem with certifying US citizens income and providing  it to Colombian Immigration and the Us Embassy Thailand refuses to do the same.

Well......I guess we know which country you'll be settling in once you can't stay here.

[Joe Mcseismic]

@luckyluke

Yes, it is sad when a person just can't move on, or accept a change in their embassy's policy that they can do nothing about. It has been explained umpteen times why these embassy's have stopped issuing these (fraudulent) letters, yet, some people still attribute the blame to the wrong party.

[sweatalot]

22 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Recently returned from immigration, after renewing my marriage visa. The upside to this visa, is that only 400,000 is needed as a deposit, and it does not have to stay in the bank, once your visa is granted. The downsides are:

 

The hurdles you need to jump over, in order to get a marriage visa are stupid, ridiculous, unnecessary, draconian, wasteful, and silly. I understand the need for them to verify that you are a legitimate couple. Upon the first application. But, the dumb requirements should not relate to renewals. You should not be required to show fresh images of the house each time, copies of the marriage papers, the house documents, either come with a local Thai witness, or bring a signed affidavit from a local Thai each time, provide new maps to the house, and dozens of other requirements.

 

I just do not even know what to say about the process. I felt like a street dog by the time I left. After hours of paperwork, copy after copy after copy, each page having to be signed, and then being grilling by the surly officer, I literally felt like a street dog. The level of disrespect that immigration shows married couples here, and foreigners in general, is totally uncalled for, beyond the pale, and inane. The copy woman, the guy sorting our papers, they were all nice. But, the officers? Such sourpusses. The woman who was helping us was so difficult to work with, when she finally rejected us over the tiniest thing she did not like, after nearly an hour of reviewing every document with a microscope, so to speak, and said no, I responded by saying yes. YES, you are going to do this. Yes, you are going to do this right now. YES, you are going to stop saying NO to me right now. This ends now. She looked at me and did not know what to say. I asked for the manager. The top brass came over, and we had it sorted in 30 minutes. Took nearly 3 hours. And as usual, it will be a month, until I have final approval. Is it worth it? NO. It is my last marriage visa. I will go back to a retirement visa next year, or leave the country, before I subject myself to that abuse one more time.

 

I totally blame Prayuth, and the biggest joke. Immigration has gotten worse under their tutelage and their arrogance, and their insufferable xenophobia knows no bounds. This whole thing leaves a bitter, sour, nasty, foul taste in one's mouth, and the stench can be smelled for kilometers. Thailand is moving backwards on so many levels, I do not even know where to begin. I believe at this point, that if Brittany Spears were to declare her candidacy, she would beat Prayuth, hands down. That is how much he and the army are despised, at this point. Especially after the recent stunt he pulled.

I can understand your reaction after this experience. My experience is different. Yes the requirements are ridiculous - but the immigration officers whom I have to confront are very kind - even if strictly follolwing the rules.

[Thaidream]

26 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Well......I guess we know which country you'll be settling in once you can't stay here

I have no intention of leaving Thailand and can easily meet their requirements.  However, the Embassies have not been forthright on why exactly they decided to end the letters.  If Thai Immigration asked for something they cannot do- they could simply state that or negotiate a solution that benefited everyone. It's called Diplomacy- that's what diplomats are supposed to do,

 

Your categorization of Embassy letters as 'fraudulent' does a disservice not only to the  US Government but every person who received the letter and never lied= including my self.

 

As far as acceptance= while I accept the change- I disagree completely that it had to be made; how it was carried out; and the lack of any transparency.

 

 

 

Edited February 11, 2019 by Thaidream

[Joe Mcseismic]

Yes, they were were used in a fraudulent manner. The US letter just verifies the identity of of the person, yet, it is presented to TI as verifying income. Not the same are they? There is something definitely fraudulent about that, even if you don't lie about your income.

 

If you have no problem meeting the new conditions, why are you like a small dog with a big bone, by not letting go? I see your complaint on different threads. Dozens of them. Let it go for crissake as I know you are boring the pants off of me and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

[JackThompson]

31 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

It has been explained umpteen times why these embassy's have stopped issuing these (fraudulent) letters

Embassies are still issuing letters which do not involve checking with the income-sources to verify the amounts stated - or that the documents presented are even more than well-made forgeries. 

 

8 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Yes, they were were used in a fraudulent manner.

(evidence needed here)

8 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

The US letter just verifies the identity of of the person, yet, it is presented to TI as verifying income. Not the same are they? There is something definitely fraudulent about that, even if you don't lie about your income.

The USA letters stated exactly what they were in black and white - that the person is who they say they are and have Sworn Upon Penalty of Perjury (felony-crime in one's passport-country) that the info provided is correct. 

 

Thai Immigration could have reported any violators, but appears to have never found someone here who made such a claim and didn't have money to pay a bill, etc.  I'm sure it would have been front-page news if they had (even if just one - used to tar everyone).

 

I can see why corrupt IOs would find sworn statements less than compelling, given their daily violations of the law and their oaths of service - and undoubtedly angry that the letters were getting in the way of raking in more agent-pipeline money.

Edited February 11, 2019 by JackThompson

[sumrit]

22 hours ago, billsmart said:

22 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Nonsense

Not sure who gave you that incorrect info. Both are accepted as of now since many people can no longer get income proof from their embassy. I suggest you read this. Amendment to police order 138/2557 Revising clauses 2.18 and 2.22 to include options for proof of income

 

They were very clear about ONLY accepting letters from your embassy regarding pension beginning in 2020. for 2019, they will accept a letter from your bank as I've described.

I got as far as reading the first three PDFs you supplied and all three made me suspicious as to them being official and accurate (translations) documents issued by Immigration. The first line on all three says "Documents Required: RETIREMENT VISA". Now while we all know some people refer to them in this way (especially visa agents) the correct term of "Extension of Stay..........." is always used by Immigration on Official Documentation. They do not replace that terminology with the sometimes used but totally incorrect "Retirement visa" term.

 

Creating twelve months worth of Bank income deposits from overseas to prove income would be extremely difficult. I suspect that this possibly originated as a document originally put together by somebody like a Visa Agent, using part of the Police Order with some parts missing, in order to make it appear very difficult/almost impossible to go the monthly income route, so leaving/encouraging the money in the bank option, using an agent to supply the required documents, the obvious alternative. 

[Joe Mcseismic]

4 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

Embassies are still issuing letters which do not involve checking with the income-sources to verify the amounts stated - or that the documents presented are even more than well-made forgeries. 

 

(evidence needed here)

The USA letters stated exactly what they were in black and white - that the person is who they say they are and have Sworn Upon Penalty of Perjury (felony-crime in one's passport-country) that the info provided is correct. 

 

Thai Immigration could have reported any violators, but appears to have never found someone here who made such a claim and didn't have money to pay a bill, etc.  I'm sure it would have been front-page news if they had (even if just one - used to tar everyone).

 

I can see why corrupt IOs would find sworn statements less than compelling, given their daily violations of the law and their oaths of service - and undoubtedly angry that the letters were getting in the way of raking in more agent-pipeline money.

See my post that you quoted why the letters were used fraudulently.

[Raindancer]

22 hours ago, billsmart said:

They were very clear about ONLY accepting letters from your embassy regarding pension beginning in 2020. for 2019, they will accept a letter from your bank as I've described.

Retirement Visa Rules 2020.pdf 640.14 kB · 16 downloads

Pm sent

[marcusarelus]

2 hours ago, indepth said:

Time for facts, not fiction . Oz embassy stopped issuing stat decs because they are not valid for proof of income and are not a legal document outside of Oz.

Why were the facts OK for 20 years and the facts suddenly not OK this year.  Do facts change depending on the year?

[marcusarelus]

1 hour ago, billsmart said:

 

I'm talking about an extension of stay for a pre-existing Non-immigrant, O-A (Long-stay) visa - a.k.a "Retirement visa." 
"
And, by the way, I have switched from an O-A to an O based on marriage, and then back to an O-A without leaving Thailand. But, like you, I also believe the initial visa must be issued at an embassy outside of Thailand. I think I got my last one in Singapore when I changed from a Non-immigrant, B (Business/Work) to an O-A. I have never gone back to the US to get one.

So anyone who at one time had an "O-A" visa may let it lapse and use another kind of visa and then get a new* "O-A" from within Thailand?  That is what you are saying is it not?

 

*It would have to be new as the old one lapsed and was replaced by another kind. 

[albertik]

I think a "GoFundMe"  account may be the answer to navigate / mitigate this rabbit hole maze.????

Edited February 11, 2019 by albertik

[Andrew Dwyer]

 

I'm talking about an extension of stay for a pre-existing Non-immigrant, O-A (Long-stay) visa - a.k.a "Retirement visa." 

"

And, by the way, I have switched from an O-A to an O based on marriage, and then back to an O-A without leaving Thailand. But, like you, I also believe the initial visa must be issued at an embassy outside of Thailand. I think I got my last one in Singapore when I changed from a Non-immigrant, B (Business/Work) to an O-A. I have never gone back to the US to get one.

I think you need to post a photo of the (second) OA Bill , not that I’m doubting you ( maybe a little bit [emoji51]) but if you really did this then it surely must be a one off ?

[billsmart]

1 hour ago, marcusarelus said:

So anyone who at one time had an "O-A" visa may let it lapse and use another kind of visa and then get a new* "O-A" from within Thailand?  That is what you are saying is it not?

 

*It would have to be new as the old one lapsed and was replaced by another kind. 

No, that's not what I said. I did not use the word "lapse." I used the word "extension."

In my case, I had a valid O-A, but when its year was almost up, I went in and took all the paperwork to get an O visa based on marriage. They processed it, sent it away for approval, and gave me a 30-day extension to wait on the O visa. I went back in 30 days and got my O visa with a one-year stay based on marriage. 

A couple of years later, I did the same thing in reverse and now have an O-A visa.

 

There was no lapse involved. I suspect if there was, this couldn't have been done.

[billsmart]

30 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

I think you need to post a photo of the (second) OA Bill , not that I’m doubting you ( maybe a little bit ) but if you really did this then it surely must be a one off ?

<deleted> is the matter with all of you? Do you regularly have forum members outright LIE to you, or what?

Here are two pages from my passport. They don't show the transition from O-A to O (Marriage) because I was traveling a lot then and my passport pages are full and more confusing. These two pages (15 and 16) do show the serial transition from an O (Thai Wife) 2015-16 on page 15, and then O-A (Retirement) 2017-19 on page 16. I do now still have the O-A.

 

And, in looking at these, I noticed two, strange things:

1. The O visa (Marriage) is stamped with "Thai Wife." Do you think they have a stamp like this for female ex-pats that reads "Thai Husband?"
2. Even Thai Immigration refers to the O-A visa as a "Retirement" visa. It's really not that.

Edited February 11, 2019 by billsmart

[Thaidream]

2 hours ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

s, they were were used in a fraudulent manner. The US letter just verifies the identity of of the person, yet, it is presented to TI as verifying income. Not the same are they? There is something definitely fraudulent about that, even if you don't lie about your income.

 

If you have no problem meeting the new conditions, why are you like a small dog with a big bone, by not letting go? I see your complaint on different threads. Dozens of them. Let it go for crissake as I know you are boring the pants off of me and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I don't give a damn whether I am boring you or not. When you see my moniker- don't read it.

 

There was nothing fraudulent about the Embassy Letter- it had a disclaimer indicating it could not guarantee the veracity of what was written but that  an applicant's signature made under Oath subjected them to a penalty of perjury.

 

When I know a wrong decision has been made based upon a statement I know is withholding the real reasons of why it is made- I do not just let it pass.  And when I see another US Embassy doing the same thing that the one in Bangkok is saying it cannot or will not do- I find that that verifies my  narrative.

 

I have no idea why my opinion bothers you, I have not directed anything personal towards you but I have noticed that you  tend to answers posts in a sarcastic manner.  You might want to look into a mirror and examine your attitude towards others.

 

 

[billsmart]

2 hours ago, sumrit said:

I got as far as reading the first three PDFs you supplied and all three made me suspicious as to them being official and accurate (translations) documents issued by Immigration. The first line on all three says "Documents Required: RETIREMENT VISA". Now while we all know some people refer to them in this way (especially visa agents) the correct term of "Extension of Stay..........." is always used by Immigration on Official Documentation. They do not replace that terminology with the sometimes used but totally incorrect "Retirement visa" term.

 

Creating twelve months worth of Bank income deposits from overseas to prove income would be extremely difficult. I suspect that this possibly originated as a document originally put together by somebody like a Visa Agent, using part of the Police Order with some parts missing, in order to make it appear very difficult/almost impossible to go the monthly income route, so leaving/encouraging the money in the bank option, using an agent to supply the required documents, the obvious alternative. 

The stamps the IOs put in your passport (or at least in mine) on my extensions for my O-A visa say in red letters, "Retirement." ????

[Joe Mcseismic]

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

I don't give a damn whether I am boring you or not. When you see my moniker- don't read it.

 

There was nothing fraudulent about the Embassy Letter- it had a disclaimer indicating it could not guarantee the veracity of what was written but that  an applicant's signature made under Oath subjected them to a penalty of perjury.

 

When I know a wrong decision has been made based upon a statement I know is withholding the real reasons of why it is made- I do not just let it pass.  And when I see another US Embassy doing the same thing that the one in Bangkok is saying it cannot or will not do- I find that that verifies my  narrative.

 

I have no idea why my opinion bothers you, I have not directed anything personal towards you but I have noticed that you  tend to answers posts in a sarcastic manner.  You might want to look into a mirror and examine your attitude towards others.

 

 

If a document is one thing (veracity of signature), but, is used for another purpose (veracity of income), then it's dishonest.

You're boring me because you keep blaming your embassy across multiple threads when they have actually done the honest thing. Try blaming the blame-worthy which is the oragnization that started all this. Thai immigration.

As there is absolutely nothing you can do about it, let it go........it's affecting your mental health......or, at least making it worse.

I look in the mirror all the time and all I see is a "hansum man".

[billsmart]

21 minutes ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

If a document is one thing (veracity of signature), but, is used for another purpose (veracity of income), then it's dishonest.

You're boring me because you keep blaming your embassy across multiple threads when they have actually done the honest thing. Try blaming the blame-worthy which is the oragnization that started all this. Thai immigration.

As there is absolutely nothing you can do about it, let it go........it's affecting your mental health......or, at least making it worse.

I look in the mirror all the time and all I see is a "hansum man".

I agree with Thaidream on this issue. I am a US citizen, and I fully understand what a "notarized affidavit" is, and what it isn't.

 

Below, is the last portion of the form letter we had to fill out. Above are our name and address in Thailand,  our passport number, etc. Below it are our signature, the signature of the embassy officer taking our sworn statement, and the seal of the embassy.

 

Also, please notice the affidavit says "...monthly income...from sources in the United States" and not "pension."

 

Please read the entire statement here, and then go look in the mirror again... ????

Edited February 11, 2019 by billsmart

[Joe Mcseismic]

Nice one. Someone actually providing proof.

Unfortunately, that second from last sentence is probably why the US discontinued this letter as it goes against TI's request that the embassy should verify income.

As I said before, the letter wasn't filling the requirement by TI, though, in this case, I can see that it isn't fraudulent. But, I'm pretty sure that most, or even all of the embassy's still churning out these letters don't actually verify the income stated, either because of privacy laws, or, they recognize that it's not their job. 

Edited February 11, 2019 by Joe Mcseismic

[billsmart]

1 minute ago, Joe Mcseismic said:

Nice one. Someone actually providing proof.

Unfortunately, that second from last sentence is probably why the US discontinued this letter as it goes against TI's request that the embassy should verify income.

Yes, That's what we were told by our embassy. This request (or clarification) evidently came towards the end of last year when first the UK, then the US and Aussie embassies, one-by-one, announced they would quite issuing these letters after Dec 31, 2018.

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, billsmart said:

es, That's what we were told by our embassy. This request (or clarification) evidently came towards the end of last year when first the UK, then the US and Aussie embassies, one-by-one, announced they would quite issuing these letters after Dec 31, 2018.

The Embassy could have easily  changed it's [procedure by  asking the applicant to bring in their proof of income statements (Pension letter; military retirement letter etc) and indicate that the applicant presented documentation showing  xxx amount of  income per month.  Have the applicant swear under Oath it is true and sign the form.  Of course- the disclaimer still there.  this would have easily  been accepted by Thai immigration and indicate the Embassy wasn't responsible for the content and the onus was on the applicant should there be a discrepancy.

IMO the Embassy has failed in this regard for an unknown reason=

[notamember]

35 minutes ago, billsmart said:

The stamps the IOs put in your passport (or at least in mine) on my extensions for my O-A visa say in red letters, "Retirement." ????

yes but not VISA

 

[overherebc]

49 minutes ago, billsmart said:

<deleted> is the matter with all of you? Do you regularly have forum members outright LIE to you, or what?

Here are two pages from my passport. They don't show the transition from O-A to O (Marriage) because I was traveling a lot then and my passport pages are full and more confusing. These two pages (15 and 16) do show the serial transition from an O (Thai Wife) 2015-16 on page 15, and then O-A (Retirement) 2017-19 on page 16. I do now still have the O-A.

 

And, in looking at these, I noticed two, strange things:

1. The O visa (Marriage) is stamped with "Thai Wife." Do you think they have a stamp like this for female ex-pats that reads "Thai Husband?"
2. Even Thai Immigration refers to the O-A visa as a "Retirement" visa. It's really not that.

This is an O-A visa.