Tony M

Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

428 Excellent

About Tony M

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

4,253 profile views
  1. This is from the Tier 4 guidance : Money that can be used. You can use money held in an account owned by you or by your parents or legal guardian. If you are a Tier 4 (General) student and using funds held by your parent(s)/legal guardian(s), you will need to show us evidence that you are related to your parent(s)/legal guardian(s) and that you have their permission to use this money. How do I show evidence of my funds? You can show that you have enough funds in one or more of four ways. • Your bank statements • Parental/legal guardian(s) bank statements • Official financial sponsorship • Student loans The Tier 4 Policy Guidance (pages 38-43) explains these documents and what they should contain. data/file/514308/T4_Migrant_Guidance_Apr_2016.pdf Most visa applications are refused because of incorrect financial documents. You must meet the requirements exactly in order for your application to be approved. 1. Your bank statements If you use your own money, or your parents’/legal guardian’s money as evidence of maintenance, you must provide a document from your bank which confirms that you have held the required amount for one month (at least 28 days). The most commonly accepted documents are an official bank statement or a purpose written letter from the bank. An official statement must cover a period of at least 28 days that ends within the month prior to your visa application date. Alternatively, a purpose-written letter from your bank (on letter-headed paper) should confirm that the minimum balance on the account has been above the required amount over a period of at least 28 days. The letter should be dated within the month prior to your visa application date. The statement or letter from the bank must show: • That you have had at least the required amount of money (tuition fees + living costs) in your bank account for every day of a 28 day period. The balance must not fall below the required amount during the 28 day period, otherwise your application will be refused; • The date of the statement or letter. This date must be within one month of your date of application; • Your name/your parents’/legal guardian’s name(s); • The account number; • The financial institution’s name and logo. Salary, stocks, shares portfolios, property value or other non-cash assets such as government pension schemes are not considered as evidence. The evidence you provide can be issued from a bank in your home country or from the UK. There are restrictions on the acceptability of some banks’ statements. You can find more information on which banks can provide evidence of your funds online: 2. Parental/legal guardian(s) bank statements If you are using your parents’/legal guardian’s bank accounts, you must also send: • Your original birth certificate or an adoption certificate or official court document confirming legal guardian status. • A brief, signed letter from your parents/legal guardian which confirms your relationship to them, and that the funds can be used for your UK education. • Official translations of all documents that are not in English or Welsh (for further information about translations see page 5). Only biological parents or legal guardians (through a court of law or adoption procedures in your country) are eligible to be considered for ‘parental’ sponsorship. You cannot use financial evidence which belongs to other family relatives.
  2. Went to do my marriage extension at Jomtien last week. This is the 7th extension. The lady that does them knows us now. This time she told us to go away and bring a witness who knew we are living together. When I asked why, she said that maybe we didn't live together. I was going to remind her that 2 years ago, Jomtien immigration had said that all applications for marriage extensions needed a witness to attend. We had done so, and she had asked why we had brought a witness as she knew that we had lived together for 5 years. My wife restrained me from saying what I wanted to say. All the documentation was complete, apart from this (new) witness requirement. We went away, got a witness, and came back. She got her boss to interview the witness, took copies of his documents, and the application was accepted. Extension will hopefully be issued in a month.
  3. The letter and the passports are given to the aircraft captain to be handed over to immigration on arrival (at least that is the way it is supposed to happen !).
  4. I haven't flown in or out of Phuket in many years, so I don't know if they routinely scan the passports at immigration. I'm pretty sure that these passports would have had red lights on any document scanning machine. Maybe passports are only put through a scanner on arrival, and these two weren't scanned on departure. Maybe they used genuine passports to leave Thailand, and were using the Portuguese passports to obtain visa free entry to South Korea. Maybe their real nationality requires a visa to enter South Korea. They could easily have bought the passports in Thailand. I don't think it is any secret that it is possible to do so. To be honest, I don't think they would have paid much money for these two passports. The quality is pretty poor, and it is unlikely that they could have entered Thailand on these documents (assuming that the passports would have been scanned on arrival in Thailand). The forger was probably quite happy to take their money, and do a botch job on the documents.
  5. They have a choice of what they want to do with them. If they decide to try to find out their true identity, and cannot, what do they do then ? Where are they going to send them to ? They become "refugees", and the country can't get rid of them. There is an international convention, the Chicago Convention, that says that if a passenger arrives with fake, falsified, forged, etc documents, then the last country that had accepted them must accept them back. The country they have pitched up in finds, more often than not, that it is better to get rid of them, back to where they came from, than get stuck with them. The Convention says that they can be returned from whence they came on a "Chicago Convention letter"), but many countries will not accept the passengers back without the passport they traveled on.
  6. It seems that they require some (more) training. Not much point in having an immigration control if the officers can't identify forged or counterfeit passports, possibly being used by terrorists, criminals, people traffickers, illegal immigrants, etc.
  7. There are several errors on the page, all easily spotted with the naked eye. That is, if the person checking the passport knows what they are doing. It would seem that, maybe, the Thai Immigration Officers don't know what they are supposed to be looking for.
  8. "The fake passports were spotted by Phuket Airport immigration officers in the early morning." I suspect that it was the fact that Korea Immigration had sent them back, with a letter saying that they had come from Thailand with fake passports that aroused the suspicion of Thai Immigration in Phuket. That series of Portuguese passports hasn't been issued since 2006, I think !
  9. There are only two OISC registered agents in Thailand (I believe). The forum sponsor is one of them.
  10. We are still waiting, of course, for the Home Office to make some kind of decision on the settlement applications that are on hold because of the Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court said that the Home Office should look at changing some of the requirements in the current rules, for instance allowing the future income from an applicant's job in the UK (assuming he/she had one at the time of application). Because the Supreme Court also said that an income threshold (currently 18,600 GBP a year) is legal, I'm wondering if the government will do a mix and match. Perhaps allow an applicant's job-offer income to be taken into account, but raising the threshold at the same time. Give a little, take a lot. I wouldn't be surprised to see the threshold go up to around 25,000 GBP if that happened. As an example of how the government considers the importance of family life (for settlement applicants and visit visa applicants), this is taken from a visit visa refusal notice where the applicant has a husband and two British children in the UK, but cannot get a visit visa to see them. Her husband does not meet the 18,600 GBP threshold : "It is also open to you to maintain close contact through all modern means of communication " That, in my opinion, is shameful.
  11. Dial 1175. Work your way through the short menu. It's in English. Worked for me.
  12. The scanning service is, apparently, up and running in South Korea. VFS charge per application (not per document), and the current charge is the equivalent of around 1,700 THB per application.
  13. Indeed, 7x7. Hopefully the OP, if he wants to use an agent, will do some checks before signing on the dotted line !
  14. It's difficult to give a complete answer as we have no idea what was said in the original application, and what evidence was submitted. I suspect that there were a few reasons for refusal, but you gave the ECO an easy option in not providing any evidence of the applicant's savings. If you re-apply, with evidence of the savings, then it is likely that the ECO might try to find other reasons to refuse. I mean no criticism in saying this, but getting a visa is not as simple as just applying for it. Areas of concern to the ECO will include some of the following : You haven't known each other very long, so how are you demonstrating that the relationship is genuine ? The applicant has some savings but where did they come from ? Is she employed ? If so, does she have leave from her job ? If she is not employed, how is she supported ? If she is supported by you, then you will need to provide evidence of that. If you support her, how was she supported before you met her ? Did she work ? If so, what did she do ? Does she have any assets (land, property,) or ties ( family, job, etc) that would encourage to return to Thailand ? There is a lot more I could point out, but I'm sure you get the flavour ? As you can see, there is more to it than just submitting an application, but the ECO found a very easy option to refuse. The refusal will be taken into account in any new application, and you will have to say why no evidence of her savings was submitted. ECOs will say that each application is treated on its merits, so he may well use any one of the above reasons to make a new refusal out of the application. He shouldn't, as he is supposed to put all reasons for refusal in the refusal notice, but ECOs often "find" new reasons to refuse that they should have mentioned in the first refusal. As there is n o right of appeal against the ECO's decision, he can pretty much do what he likes, and keep taking your application fees. If you have funds, you might want to look at using an agent. There is no need to do so if you are confident about a new application, but most agents (in Thailand) will offer a "no visa, no fee" service. You will need to pay the Embassy visa fee, but if the application is refused you will not pay any more. If the application is issued, then you also pay whatever balance you have agree with the agency. If you do want to go down the agency route, then I would recommend using an OISC registered agent. That means they are also registered to give immigration advice in the UK. There are only two registered agents in Thailand, and one (Thai Visa Express) sponsors this forum.
  15. You are right. The nonsense of it all is that it is government policy to reduce the number of immigrants, yet the UKVI refuse genuine visitors, and force them, in many cases, to apply for settlement. Their decisions actually go against government policy, as they are contributing to higher immigrant numbers.