GeorgeCross

12 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

Jomtien said exactly the same....get insurance, go out of Thailand and come back.

for the younger retiree's.. remember that shiny non-o is only 5 kms over the border.. just saying ????

30 minutes ago, deej said:

May i ask for valid confirmation of your above comments.

Particular (As they are currently discussing)????

have a look back through user 'Sheryl' posts she discusses it

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

Imo it makes more sense not having a forced on crappy thai insurance at all if not needed. I mean, start all over with a Non-Immigrant O with 1 year extensions. 

dangerous game to play if near 75 though because if you move to O and then they migrate the policy to other classes (as they are currently discussing) one might oneself to old to get insurance and then be faced with a forced flight home anyway ????

1 hour ago, Momofarang said:

The whole immigration system looks like a 30 years old car driven on tyres from 4 different makers with a states of wear varying from 5 to 25 years.

i can safely say it is a WHOLE lot better than what they would come up with if they scrapped it and started again *shudder*

4 minutes ago, travelerjim said:

Pacific Cross also has large deductible choices up to 300,000 Thai baht which will reduce annual premium about 50%. Ideal for those who have other health insurance 

.

deductibles are not acceptable for immigration accepted insurance policies

an applicant would need to switch to a non-o to get one of these and then that opens up the broader general insurance (incl. foreign) market as an option as well

6 minutes ago, anyone said:

As I live here a few years already (non-B) I did not prepared it yet.

do you have any previous tourist visa/visa exempt/voa entries at all or are they all non-B?

as far as i know insurance is not required for any visa except non-oa and non-ox

27 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

Which Pacific Cross insurance did cost 73k with 40k deductible when 66 years old? It's much smarter to skip the outpatient entirely and get 20% off and 0 deductible. Then pay cash for eventual OPD cost. 

yes it is.. but not too smart if want it for immigration purposes!

37 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

Applies only to O-A Visa issued after 31 October 19

please where does it state this?

1 hour ago, Maestro said:

1. Yes, if you meet the consulate's criteria for for a non-O visa.

 

2. It will depend not on your visa category, but on the reason for which you get a one year extension of stay at your local immigration. If this extension is for the reason of retirement, under clause 2.22 of the extension rules, your wife qualifies for a so-called dependent extension under clause 2.20

 

 

if the wife applied would the husband qualify as a dependent? ** serious question **

4 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

I talk to the agent at Pacific Cross and they told me that I could do it.

in reply to one of your posts on this:

6 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

Ej

 

To answer your questions:

1.  I have been submitted claim to Tricare for 13 years here.  All inpatient and outpatient.  Had operations from replacing the joints in both knees, Aortic Valve Replaced and two Hernias.  All at Bumrungrad Hospital.

2.  No, it can only be used in the U. S.

3.  No I do not know but I doubt it very much.  Only those listed here can be used as far as I know.  http://longstay.tgia.org/home/companiesoa

My plan if I don't do an O based on marriage is with Pacific Cross.  They have plans that you can take a 300,000 baht deductible and the cost is reduced by 50%.  Pacific Cross not paying is not a problem because Tricare will pick up everything the Pacific Cross does not pay.

i believe the deductible is not allowed on OA insurance coverage, sheryl posted this was advised by PC in error

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

Agreed-  even the Thai veresion steates the order applies only to O-A Visa's issued after 31 Octobere 2019.  

 

How can a law/order/regulation apply to anyone who has a Visa/extension stamp  PRIOR to 31 October 2019.  This would make the change retroactive which in every country I have ever been- not only unfair but illegal.

 

If this is indeed the case- letters need to be written to the isuing Thai Embassy/Consulate with copies to the Foreign Minister- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and  the Health Minister-  Ministry of Health.   I can't remember if Thailand has an Attorney General but they also need to be notified.

unfair maybe but illegal? doubt it, their country, their rules.

they changed the retirement extension financials retroactively this year too. maybe advise them of this too. 

let us know how you get on 

2 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I’ve seen an interview with a couple of Pacific Cross agents. They confirmed that most of the higher price is due to the restricted pool of applicants over 50 years old. They would much rather sell you high value policies when the customer base is all age groups. 

yes as stated before if the risk pool is high risk, as in this case being all over 50 year olds, then the premium will be high too.

the whole idea of insurance is that the sum of claims paid out is equal (minus a profit for the insurance company*) to the sum of premiums taken in.

free market principles dictate where the profit margin sits unless a cartel has been formed.

15 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

people arriving with a 1 year non imm OA multiple are being given 30 days to buy the insurance, its only logical that once they purchase the insurance tehy are given the further 11 months that thier entry suggests they should have. 

logical yes, but reports are saying they are getting visa-exempt stamps. so i guess we have to wait to see what the stamp says..

1 minute ago, LivinLOS said:

And when given 30 days to extend, do they 'only' need insurance or must money again be seasoned for 2/3 months ?? So a timeline longer than the 30 day period of stay admitted until. 

The implications of this mess keep growing.. 

not sure its even possible to extend a visa exempt?

3 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Very sad and disturbing story!

It confirms that the present practice in Suvarnabhumi Airport is that ALL holders of an OA Visa or a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa, irrespective when it was issued, are from now on required to meet the new health-insurance requirement.

And you have 2 options > either buy that required health-insurance on the spot OR enter Thailand Visa-exempt and sort it out later at an in-country IO after having bought thai-approved health insurance and get stamped in for the full year you were entitled to if you had met the HI requirement on entry. 

< or go for the Non Imm O Visa application, that does not require health insurance >

If the Suvarnabhumi case (several reports) is the official stance on how to deal with Non Imm OA Visas from now on, this means that ALL Non Imm OA Visa holders would be affected somewhere within the coming 12 months when a) entering or re-entering Thailand, or b) applying for an extension of a permission to stay.

 

I think it would be difficult to turn this practice back, now that the tone has been set.

Yes indeed, Amazing Thailand...

wouldn't it be ironic if local immigration offices refused to reactivate the OA (from the visa exempt) thus forcing applicants to local countries where they could ONLY get non-o's!!!