Jump to content

TerraplaneGuy

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    764
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TerraplaneGuy

  1. 7 minutes ago, Caldera said:

    ...

     

    Personally, I think changing to a Non-O visa - while tempting - will lead to a very short-lived victory for those who do it. Now that Thai immigration and insurance companies have created that nice little earner, does anyone really believe that they won't maximize the number of "customers" (victims) in the very near future? I bet it's just around the corner.

    That's my concern and why I've held off on changing.  

    • Like 1
  2. 2 hours ago, EricTh said:

     

    ...

     

    Is it possible for the insurance company to add a few days backwards ? or must the insurance policy be exactly one year, no less and no more?

     

    I doubt they can do that, but I'm going to ask Aetna if they can do  something similar (and along the lines of TallGuyJohninBK's thought):  increase the OPD coverage on the remainder of my existing policy so I can show Immigration that I'm already covered at the required level.  Since it's only 20 days (and only upping coverage from 35K to 40K) they shouldn't charge much for that.

    • Like 1
  3. 1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

    System  gone  mad ! How in any sense of  logic, rationale or simple common sense expect people to have existing  insurance on an extension which pre dates an application for  renewal when on the existing extension it was  not a mandatory  requirement?

    Any further  continuation of permission to stay takes  effect (if  approved) on the  date  following the expiry of the last extension, not from the date preceding application.

     

    I said the same thing at least 10 times to the frontline officer and the Supervisor.  They both replied every time with the mantra “you don’t have insurance NOW.”   As if I had overlooked that obvious defect in my analysis.   

    • Like 1
  4. 11 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

    The extension would still be for one year but would start on the day you apply for the extension.  ...

     

    I don't think that would work because my insurance would cover me from 11 Feb 2020 - 11 Feb 2021 but my extension would be from 12 Feb 2020 (the first day I could apply given my policy starts 11 Feb at 4:30 PM) expiring 12 Feb 2021, with the result that the last day of my extension would not be covered by my policy.  Aetna obviously thought this too which is why they suggested requesting an extension of 364 days which would begin on 12 Feb 2020 (covered) and end on 11 Feb 2021 (still covered).  I just wonder if the CW officers will do that for me.  

  5. 4 hours ago, OJAS said:

    Not terrified but more likely a bunch of sadists ...

     

     

    In fairness and to make the story even more complex, I should add that the Supervisor who jerked me around for over 4 hours in the end seemed to take pity on me (I may have been in tears at that point, can't remember exactly but I know I'd eaten my now stale-dated bank letter and bank book copies) and made this offer:  If I just stick with my existing Aetna certificate and return to CW on 12 Feb (my expiry date) at around 4:00 PM, and ask for her, she would make sure my extension gets registered that day (presumably around 4:31 PM as everybody is leaving).  I pointed out that, magnanimous as that was, it would mean that I would not get my re-entry visa because for sure those people would not wait around for me to get the copy of the extension, etc.  She acknowledge this and suggested I get one in the airport on the way out whenever I travel next.  I told her I am often too rushed at the airport to consider such a thing and then she suggested I just come back to CW another time to get the permit.  I guess to her going to CW every day is just what life is about - after all, she does it.  But this may in fact be the way the story ends for me since Aetna's various workarounds all seem uncertain.

    • Like 1
  6. 3 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

    So I'm trying to understand the practical impact of this... for folks with O-A visa extensions of stay requiring insurance (and they DO require insurance, BTW...)

     

    AFAIK, I've heard that some of the Thai insurers are willing to write policies for that month or weeks stub period, at a prorated premium amount, and then have the full year follow-on policy that matches one's extension period...

     

    And if someone was able to do that with their Thai insurer on the front end for the first time, then I think they'd be OK for future cycles, as their annual insurance period would match their annual extension period... and they could apply to Immigration early because they'd already have valid insurance in force each successive year.

     

    I do think that would work.  The Supervisor said if I could prove that I NOW have the requisite insurance levels as well as the certificate stating that on 12 Feb (my extension date) my new policy will kick in with the same levels, she would have gone ahead as usual and issued me my extension in advance.  That's why I said in my first post that they in effect are requiring two certificates.  Unfortunately Aetna didn't anticipate this problem when they adjusted my policy to match my extension dates so didn't boost coverage on the stub period and didn't of course give me a certificate for it.  And I had no idea at all that I'd find myself in the Matrix.

    • Like 1
  7. 32 minutes ago, BritTim said:

    Is there a chance that immigration would then object that you do not have a policy for the whole period of your extension (you would not be covered from (09:00-23:59 on the last day)? If they want to be stupid, are there any limits?

    I wondered the same since it's hard to see why they would be so worried that the first minute is not covered, if they apparently don't care about the last.  I thought of raising it with the Supervisor but given the way she kept arguing in circles and ignoring the plain logic of my position made me conclude it would be a waste of time.  So to answer your question, no there are none.

    • Like 1
  8. 39 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

     

    I have noticed that as well when looking at their historical charts lately. And I actually like it. I think it DOES give a more nuanced and clear look at the pollution levels -- as long as you view the charts with a clear understanding of what the different color shadings mean...

     

    As in yes, only the DARK green color shadings reflect the under 50 AQI "Good" air state, then "Moderate" air starts out as light green, and transitions to yellow and then light orange as the AQI numbers head toward the upper end of the 100 AQI top end of the "Moderate" air category, etc etc.

     

    But I'll agree... I didn't catch the subtlety of the difference between the daily charts color codings and the historical charts color codings on initial viewing... It took a bit of looking and attention before I finally caught on to what they were doing.

     

    It does have advantages.  But the trouble is that since BKK gets so few dark green (under 50) days and no very dark green (under 25) days at all, it makes the light green days look better than they are and easy to mistake for clean.  The fact is our air is almost never better than “moderate”.  

  9. Here's something I just noticed.  The aqicn.org historicals use a different color scheme from the daily readings.  Take a look at July 2018 (underlined in the pic).  The left-hand summary shows 28 green and 3 yellow days.  Yet not a single day that month (see right hand detail) was really green (i. e. under 50 AQI).  In the historicals, unlike the daily real-time reports, they only count days that are 75 or more as yellow.    Anything less is green of some shade.   If the day is under 50 they give it "bright" green (see August 2018 which has 2 of those days).  So what they've done is applied a more nuanced color scheme for the historicals but it's misleading (especially if you focus on the the left-side summaries) because the basic colors actually include higher readings than the aqicn standard colors.  What this shows is that in 2018, there were only 7 days in the whole year that were truly "green" (i. e. under 50).  Those show as dark green.  Compare with New York, where the large majority of days in 2018 were dark green and many were very dark green (under 25).

    InkedAQIC Chula Hospital 2018 2_LI.jpg

  10. 3 hours ago, thedemon said:

    What a difference a day makes!

     

    Yesterday (Friday 10th) at 0650

    IMG_20200110_065058.thumb.jpg.60426042c23324a2d30c4fa6c44d27cd.jpg

     

     

    Today (Saturday 11th) at 0650

     IMG_20200111_065037.thumb.jpg.5d319b11104838ffcc9ee82ffe9bffde.jpg

    Yes it’s a relief but let’s not get excited ????  It’s already worse again than it was early this morning.  I’m about ready to leave BKK.  After 8 years, it’s only getting worse.  I’m not going to spend the rest of my life cowering behind a mask and darting from home to safe haven to home again lol   You’ve got to have a very good reason to stay here long-term. 

    • Like 2
  11. 12 hours ago, edwardandtubs said:

    Most people are not that analytical. Health scares are driven by the media and it looks like for some reason the Thai media is not giving the pollution much attention this time around.

    Fair enough although some of the Thais I know have learned a lot in the last year or so about this.   As for the media, I suspect it's just not news anymore.  The Thai language media is likely bowing to pressure from the government which obviously wants to downplay it.  But even the BKK Post is giving it slim coverage.  I think mostly there just isn't anything new to report.  We can all see the smog and check the AQ sites and what is the media going to tell us that we don't already know?  I think many locals don't want to know more about it, they don't have any good options to avoid it.  

  12. 13 hours ago, Pravda said:

     

    I noticed the same thing and I think it's simply that people don't care. Lady year it was "new" news... Perhaps even a fashion statement ????

    I suspect they've caught on to the fact that indoor air is mostly as bad as outdoor so the mask doesn't make much difference.  Yes there are exceptions but most locals work or study in unfiltered spaces and they cannot afford a home air purifier so they're breathing bad air 24/7 anyway.  

  13. Couple hours ago I was outside at Sathorn on the skywalk above Naradiwas (BTS Chong Nonsi).  My monitor was reading 140-142 (that's mcg/cubic meter = almost 200 AQI).  I've monitored there many times and this was by far the highest I've seen.

  14. 13 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

    ... The red-orange parts of the year for PM2.5 are really mostly clustered around November to January, sometimes a bit earlier, sometimes a bit later. But most of the rest of the year is reasonable.

     

    Actually you have to throw in February.  In 2019 February wasn't too bad but in 2017 and 2018 it was even worse than December and a lot worse than November (aqicn.org historicals).  So basically November-February are the problem.  The rest of the year is indeed reasonable.   But that means 4 months/year are to be avoided.   Not a very acceptable situation.  The trouble for me is finding an alternative in Asia.  Outside of Japan and Taiwan there don't seem to be any major cities that are much better.   Don't trust those figures from Malaysia, they don't monitor properly. 

×
×
  • Create New...