Jump to content
BANGKOK
spambot

Online TM.30 for occupiers - Not owners

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, MikeN said:

And if you look at the actual form, (http://www.immigrationbangkok.com/files/visa_forms/tm28.pdf) it says no such thing....  the TM28 starts "To the Immigration officer" and ends as being signed at "xxxxx" Immigration office

Also if you translate from the Thai version it does not mention the Local Police station.

 

The TM 30 also states that it can be done at a Police Station if there is no Immigration office in your area

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, MikeN said:

And if you look at the actual form, (http://www.immigrationbangkok.com/files/visa_forms/tm28.pdf) it says no such thing....  the TM28 starts "To the Immigration officer" and ends as being signed at "xxxxx" Immigration office

You might get the impression that this is the current form, because that's what immigration has on their website, but afaik it's not correct

The official form can be found in this document: http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2522/A/096/1.PDF

Page 5 in this PDF is form is TM27, Page 6 TM28, and Page 7 TM47

I didn't find any ministerial order ever updating this form, so the version found in this PDF is the legally correct version.

The form to which you posted the link was made up by immigration police, they might use it, but the changes which they made to it have no legal grounds and are contradicting what is clearly written in the law.

 

As you can see on the actual TM28 form, it is addressed to "The local police station", and signed by "police officer"

If you look at the TM27 and TM47 form you can see that this is clearly addressed to immigration, so the TM28 is supposed to go to your local police station, not at immigration police.

Edited by jackdd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ThomasThBKK said:

Thai lawyers i asked all interpret it as the Housemaster as listed in the Tabiaan Baan

I tend to agree.

 

When I took my TM30 to IO with the current house 'possessor' who happened to be the mother in law listed in the tabien bahn for the house where my father in law and mother in law still live together happily married, my TM30 was rejected outright because my mother in law is not listed as the house master. Only reason I went to IO was to get a re entry permit and this was rejected until I went all way back home and got the father in law ID instead for a correct TM30 submission. He happened to be 300km away at time in a hospital undergoing chemo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, jackdd said:

The official form can be found in this document: http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2522/A/096/1.PDF

Page 5 in this PDF is form is TM27, Page 6 TM28, and Page 7 TM47

I didn't find any ministerial order ever updating this form, so the version found in this PDF is the legally correct version.

The form to which you posted the link was made up by immigration police, they might use it, but the changes which they made to it have no legal grounds and are contradicting what is clearly written in the law.

Those were the first forms done as an example I would guess. I think you might find later orders that allows immigration to change the forms without a new order being needed.

What you will find on the immigration websites are the latest versions and are certainly official and legal forms.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Those were the first forms done as an example I would guess. I think you might find later orders that allows immigration to change the forms without a new order being needed.

What you will find on the immigration websites are the latest versions and are certainly official and legal forms.

The forms on the immigration websites contradicts itself. It says "to immigration officer", but in the middle it says "Your local police station...".

And the form contradicts the law, because the law clearly says that this has to be done at the local police station.

Do you think police can legally make up a form which is not in accordance with the law?

Edited by jackdd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Do you think police can legally make up a form which is not in accordance with the law?

As I wrote before I am certain if you were able to find it that there are newer ministerial orders that allows immigration to modify the forms as needed. 

Dredging up old orders in the royal gazette online can be misleading since there are probably many that that have not been scanned and posted online yet.

I am sure there are also orders that refined the authority and responsibilities of immigration and the police.

You have to remember that the immigration act is very old and things have changed greatly since it was written. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, jackdd said:

The forms on the immigration websites contradicts itself. It says "to immigration officer", but in the middle it says "Your local police station...".

That seems to be an error since the Thai text does not mention the police or immigration.

It roughly states this, "Note 1. Move accommodation must be notified within 24 hours."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

As I wrote before I am certain if you were able to find it that there are newer ministerial orders that allows immigration to modify the forms as needed. 

Dredging up old orders in the royal gazette online can be misleading since there are probably many that that have not been scanned and posted online yet.

I am sure there are also orders that refined the authority and responsibilities of immigration and the police.

You have to remember that the immigration act is very old and things have changed greatly since it was written. 

 

1. This is technically not possible. They can't just overrule the law. The law specifically says this has to be done at the local police station, it doesn't allow a ministerial order to change this. So to change this they would have to change the law which they clearly didn't do.

 

2. Here the ministerial orders concerning Section 37 put together by the Council of State: http://www.krisdika.go.th/librarian/get?sysid=318871&ext=htm

As we can see in this document, the last time this was updated was in 2016. Regarding the forms they still refer to the original document from 1979, so this is most likely still the current legal version. If there were a newer ministerial order they would refer to it.

 

For sure they can modify the forms slightly, to give them a more modern look, but certainly they can't just change the responsibility from regular police to immigration police, especially if it's not in accordance with the law.

Edited by jackdd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you live in a residence that is rented by your Thai partner from a Thai owner, the person responsible for the TM30 form would be your Thai partner?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can somebody tell me what I should have stapled in my passport a confirmation of the TM 30 or the TM 28

In my passport I have a confirmation of the TM 28 which I submitted to the Immigration office 3 years ago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, fondue zoo said:

So if you live in a residence that is rented by your Thai partner from a Thai owner, the person responsible for the TM30 form would be your Thai partner?

 

Yes

(the owner is of course also responsible, but if one of them reports you that's enough)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, offset said:

Can somebody tell me what I should have stapled in my passport a confirmation of the TM 30 or the TM 28

In my passport I have a confirmation of the TM 28 which I submitted to the Immigration office 3 years ago

Technically neither one has to be kept in your passport.

Which one they  might want to see depends upon the office you have to go to for whatever you need to do.

At this time the TM30 form seems to be more important to immigration than a TM28 form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 8:11 AM, spambot said:

Is there an online TM30 reporting for occupiers only, rather than owners.

 

If I look here at the IOS app it says that the app is for "Owner or occupant of a dwelling place" - is this really true?

Are you shure this app belongs to us as foreigners living in a normal house, registered at the district, with a house book assigned to it ? I Not want to write something wrong or confuse other posters, but if I read "the app is for "owner or occupant of a dwellingplace"" than it sounds to me as it would concern to the second group of persons the art.38 immigration act is talking about.

 

I not downloaded the app to take a look to it, it was just the description makes me to comment it.

 

 

Here the 3 groups we have in article 38:

 

1st group is "housemates".

 

2nd group is "owner or possessor of the residence" but better translated from Thai ==> English would be "owner or possessor of a dwellingplace".

 

3rd group is "hotel managers" etc.

 

Please trust me in understanding written Thai. I can read it fluent in the most cases. I am not perfect but perfect enough to fight with the authorities in written form using the Thai language without any need of a lawayer or a translator.

 

The 2nd group covers dwelling or living places where people could live. Those places differ from normal houses or condos because they are not registered at the district office due to different reasons.

Because they are not registered according the people registration act, they do not have a house book too and we can not apply the definition "housemaster", because this definition comes from the people registration act. The "housemaster"

definition only takes place if the house or whatever place is registered at the district office under the law of the people registration act.

 

There still a lot of possible living places not registered at the district office an may be can not be registered because they fail in some regulatory aspects to be a "house".

This could be a boat, a storage hall, a worker's camp with temporary simple homes, a wooden small house without any sanitary rooms in the middle of a rice field or something similar. 

 

For this kind of living or dwellingplaces the "housemaster definition" can not be used.

 

So far, it's my feeling this specific app is to register for those specific cases and most likely not for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 9:29 AM, jackdd said:

I think your understanding of "occupier" and "possessor" is somehow off.

Please explain your living situation. At what kind of place do you stay, who is the owner of the place where you stay and in which way were you given permission to stay there?

That is the correct approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/16/2019 at 10:25 AM, spambot said:

Ok - You are probably right - I live in a condo in Bangkok together with 70 other residents and I have a 6 month contract to pay rent monthly.

If you moved in (your body)

before you signed the contract then the person you rented from has to report you.

 

If you moved in after you signed the contract then you have to report, because from this moment you are the "chief possessor".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...