Tony M

That's the question we want answered, I think. According to the British Embassy, it is a question for the MFA to answer. If it does turn out to be that insurance is required for the period of your stay/visa, then how would that affect Elite 5-year and 10-year visa holders (not that I am one ) ?

I asked a similar question in the British Embassy Consular Section forum. It kind of gives an update, but no actual clarification. Maybe you want to add your concerns to the post, so that the British Embassy are more aware of our concerns. https://aseannow.com/topic/1238086-the-new-requirement-for-insurance-coverage-of-at-least-50000-to-enter-thailand/

Thank you for following up on this, and for bringing the concerns up with the MPH. With respect, the lack of detail from the meeting with the MPH looks very much like you were told that this is a Thai matter that it is none of the British Embassy’s business. That said, if this is so, then at least the MPH is now aware of our concerns. There have been some developments since my original post. We still have no definitive requirement from the Thai government. We have the original new requirement that all non-Thai “visitors” require insurance coverage of 50,000 US$ for the duration of their visa/stay. Now we also have Richard Barrow’s posted details of his meeting with the director general of the Department of Consular Affairs at the MFA. The DG said (apparently) : “ For a start, it doesn’t seem to be written down anywhere that you need to have special insurance to cover you for the time you will be in Thailand if you are on a long-term visa. It was just implied by some embassies. I asked the director general about this, and he said a 30-day policy would be plenty. After all, if you test positive, you will only need to do 10 days in a hospital and a possible 14 day quarantine afterwards. So, a 30-day policy would cover you. “ See Richard Barrow’s publsihed info here : https://www.getrevue.co/profile/richardbarrow/issues/latest-updates-about-the-thailand-pass-849676 The problem is, of course, that there is no official confirmation of the DG’s statements to Richard Barrow. If, indeed, returning expats only need 30 days coverage to re-enter Thailand, then can the MFA confirm this ? I, for one, would be happy to take out a policy that covers any Covid problem during the first month of return to Thailand, and to then rely on my current, long-held, insurance policy. If you are able to raise the matter with the MFA, then please consider asking them for a definitive “requirement” on the re-entry concerns for elderly expats. And, as I mentioned in my earlier post, please consider reciprocal requirements for Thai nationals visiting the UK, as they (along with many other nationalities, of course) also use, and sometime abuse. the NHS. Let’s require them to also be insured before arrival in the UK.

I asked for an insurance quote from one of the advertisers on Aseannow. This is the quote (attached) for me, 71 years old. Yes, it includes dental, etc and there are deductibles that can reduce the premium. You might be forgiven for thinking that the premiums shown are annual, but they are monthly. The cheapest option, if I have worked it out correctly is a mere 10,000 GBP a year. Yes, ten thousand Pounds a year ! The top option (of the three options) is pushing 20,000 GBP a year !

Don't worry, the Foreign Secretary is here this week. I'm sure she will bring this up with the Thai government, and all will be resolved.

With respect to previous posters, there is a fair amount of wrong infomation so far. The OP does not have to be divorced if he can evidence that he and his partner have been living together (as stated by theoldgit) in a relationship akin to a marriage for two years. This is termed as an "unmarried partner". The evidence required to establish the unmarried partner relationship for at least two years must be provided, as the UKVI is aware of how easy it would be for people just to be able to say that they have been living together for two years. The OP doesn't have to adopt his partner's daughter. But, the onus will be on the child's mother to evidence that she has had "sole responsibility" for her daughter,and that can be another tricky area in this category of applicaton. The UK does recognise Thailand Hague Convention adoptions, but such adoptions can be complicated and lengthy. If the OP, his partner and her daughter have been living together for 11 years (etc, etc, for establishing sole responsibility), then there is no reason to even consider adoption at the initial entry clearance stage as the child is applying as a depensdant of her mother. If they wish (as bigyin did) to adopt later, in the UK, then they can. Regarding chickenlegs post, there are also de facto adoptions, which are recognised by the UK, but not strictly applicable in this instance.

And this thread also shows the complexity of this issue : https://aseannow.com/topic/1238210-elderly-expats-dazed-and-confused-over-insurance-‘retirement-visas’-and-covid/

Some interesting thoughts and comments, on the subject, in this thread -

Thank you for recognising the problem. Hopefully, some pressure can be put on the Thai government to alleviate our concerns.

Customers applying to remain on a temporary basis including as spouses, workers, Tier 1 general and entrepreneurs, students and organisations seeking to sponsor a worker - 8 weeks (5 working day priority or the end of the next working day super priority services - please check your application type for available priority services) https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/uk-visas-and-immigration/about-our-services#service-standards

Good stuff. Let's inform the Embassy of our concerns.

You are hopefully aware of the new requirement for all "visitors" to hold at least $50,000 insurance coveragein order to enter Thailand, even those of us who are on annual extensions of stay. I have no problem with requiring visitors to hold medical insurance for the period of their visit, and I do have health insurance already. However, this new requirement means that those of us who live in Thailand on annual extensions of stay, and who already need to hold bank balances of up to 800,000 THB, must now purchase mandatory insurance for up to, possibly, 12 months even if we only leave Thaioland for one day and then return. You are, presuambly, aware of the cost of insurance coverage for elderly "visitors", and many of us are elderly. It looks like the newly required insurance coverage could mean a policy cost of up to 1,000 GBP (for 12 months coverage) just for having left Thailand for a day or two, or a week or two. Ways around this requiremnt have been suggested. For instance, don't obtain a re-entry permit/visa and abandon your annual extension of stay, apply for a new non-imm o visa outside of Thailand, re-enter Thailand and start the whole extension process again. Really ? There will be discussion on this subject, for sure. At least one thread is open in this visa forum (https://aseannow.com/topic/1238067-pattaya-retirees-feel-%E2%80%9Ctrapped%E2%80%9D-in-thailand-because-of-insurance/). It is headed "pattay retirees", but applies equally to many "visitors" to Thailand. My request to you is for the British Embassy to lobby the Thai government on this matter. As stated above, I'm not against requiring visitors to hold insurance. It's something we should do in the UK too. But, many of us don't consider ourselves to be "visitors" to Thailand despite the Thai governments position on this. We are not visitors. We live here, own property, have businesses, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought the 800,000 THB held in the bank was to cover such things as medical emergencies ? It's time that Thailand recognised that many of us are not visitors to Thailand, and made some concessions to long-term "residents". In the alternative, perhaps the UK should consider reciprocity and require Thai visitors to the UK to purchase compulsory medical insurance or hold up to 20,000 GBP in their bank account while in the UK ? I do, of course, realise that the Embassy's hands are somewhat tied, but surely the concerns of British visitors (and other nationalities too) should be brought to the Thai governments attention ? I am asking you to do this on our behalf.

Jomtien Beach was certainly busier than usual over the weekend, and this has continued over the past couple of days. Many people on the beaches, despite the rain. It got me wondering how the "online learning" is going for the kids, as it seems to be mostly families on the beach at the moment. I suspect that many children have not actually done much learning over the past year or so.

Pattaya is advertising two music festivals in Pattaya in November - 5th and 6th at Pattaya Beach, and 12 and 13 at Jomtien Beach and Koh Larn (!) (and two more weekend music festivals in December). In addition, they are advertising Loy Krathong festivities on 19th November. Are they really expecting less than 500 people or "allowing" less than 500 people at such events, ?

So there's no curfew in November ?

Wow, that's a lot of information (and most of it beyond me!). Many thanks for your time and help..

That's a great post. Many thanks. I've never heard of RTSP (not surprising really !), and the post is very informative. I will look into into it now that I have a better understanding. I'm sure that your post will be helpful to a few others too. Thanks again.

Thanks for the clarification. Basically, I want motion activated cameras, and for the short (?) video or stills to be uploaded to the cloud. I would prefer that to be immediate upload, so that the record is immediately protected. So that probably means streaming from the camera (SD Card?) or moving files to cloud storage from the DVR ? I guess I'm trying to find out which method is possible without being tied into expensive proprietary cloud storage, and which is (for me) simple. I don't think I want/need continuous streaming to the cloud, but I'm happy to receive advice on the best way to do this.

Thanks. I do understand that. But the property is empty. If I was the "thief" I would be looking for the DVR and taking it away with me. I'm sure the thieves know that this is the best way to get rid of the evidence. So, if I do get a system with a DVR, can I set the DVR to upload immediately to a cloud, so that I still have a permanent record ?

Thank you for your reply. I understand what you say about Google "privacy". I guess the question is better if I ask if I can use any of the many cloud storage systems ? Is it possible/easy to re-program the Ezviz software to be able to upload to a different cloud ?

First off, I know nothing about this subject, and that's why I'm asking the questions. Basically. I want to put CCTV at my house. I need, I think 5 cameras to cover the exterior. I have looked a t a few different brands, and one named Ezviz looks okay. It does all the things I want - motion detection, audio, etc. There don't seem to be many dealers of the camera or the system in Thailand, although there is one in Tukcom, Pattaya that I have spoken with. He can supply, and fit, the cameras, etc, but is unable to answer what seems, to me, to be a basic question. Ezviz seem to want to tie me into using their own cloud storage system, and the fees are high (relatively, when compared to other storage fees). They charge per camera, when others have fee "packages" or an annual charge for video storage. I am trying to find out if can upload and store to Google Drive, or similar, but nobody will provide the answer. The guy in Tukcom says that he doesn't know (?), and Ezviz website "chat" were helpful until I asked that simple question. Does anyone know if it's possible to upload and store to any cloud storage, or is the cameras/camera app software designed to block this ?

I don't have much direct experience in what were EU applications, and much has changed since the UK's exit from the EU. There was, previously, a route to settlement through being a dependant of an EU citizen, but dual Irish/British nationals were barred from that route. I see several problems with your plan(s) - you are not married to your partner, so any application will probably be for a visit visa (unless you have lived together for two years) or you become free to marry. We don't know the background to your relationship, so it's impossible to comment on that relationship. I don't see that there is much, if any, difference in whether you sponsor the application as a British citizen or an Irish citizen if a visit is intended, if the application is to visit the UK. An application to visit the Irish republic would be, I think, a Schengen visa application, but you don't live in Ireland. Either way, you have the two previous visa application refusals to overcome. As an Irish/EU citizen you might qualify for a non-EU national to join you, but that will, I think, depend on you being married or in a "durable relationship" (normally having lived together for at least two years). I have attached two links to the Citizens Advice Bureau (which is possibly easier to understand than the UKVI guidance). https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/immigration/getting-a-visa-for-your-partner-to-live-in-the-uk/ https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/immigration/bringing-family-to-live-in-the-uk-after-brexit

Why is that ?

This post, and your previous post have been about the fact that your partner has been trying to get a visit visa for the UK. Now you say that you want to get your partner "out of Thailand and back home in Ireland or the UK with me." That doesn't sound like a visit visa application ? If you want your partner to live with you (and the ECO will be wondering why you don't, if you are seriously ill) then why don't you apply for a settlement visa for her ?

To be honest, I'm not sure what you are referring to ? Is this about Thailand being on the red list ? Where is your quote from ?