Exploring Thailand

6 hours ago, Maestro said:

I am not confused, but astonished. He exposes himself as another lawyer who does not know to interpret a Police Order correctly, a lawyer who mistakenly believes that an application for a permissions to stay and an application for an extension of permission to stay are the same. Sadly, he does not allow comments on his video and therefore nobody can set him right.

There are currently 94 comments on his video. If you want to set him straight, have at it!

2 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Be very careful with those historical contracts.

Because when those insurances are not often sold anymore than the average age of the insured people in those contracts is going up all the time. And that means the cost for the insurance for that contract goes up. And that means renewing them will likely get a lot more expensive compared to other contracts which have also lots of young people covered. 

Actually, he was just using  the term "historical" in the context of that thread. By "historical" he means the policies they have had available on their website for a long time, as opposed to the ones that are linked to from the www.longstay.tgia.org. The "historical" policies "Standard", "Premiere", "Maxima","Ultima" are much better value than the OA-specific ones, "Platinum1/2/3".

Thanks that's very interesting, and a bit of culture shock coming from the UK. As far as I know, in the UK, the privacy of your medical record is sacrosanct, but then there is usually no need for an insurance company to want to look at, unless you have private insurance.

33 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And be aware that health insurance companies talk to each other. If you wrote in one application form you have a heart problem and you get rejected and then you apply at another company and don't mention your condition that is a bad idea and likely a reason to throw you out.

 

In general about preexisting conditions: Insurance companies ask about your medical history. And in bad cases they might not insure you at all or they exclude preexisting conditions. But if they insure you that does not mean all is fine.

Because if you have some expensive bill, maybe years later, then at that time the health company might start digging if you had anything previously which you maybe didn't mention in the application form. And then, years later, they might tell you that they don't pay for the invoice which you just sent them. And in bad cases they will throw you out completely because you didn't tell them the whole truth. But obviously they keep the money which you paid over the last years.

 

Just curious as to how they dig. Say you have an operation. Assuming that the hospital has records showing that it is a preexisting illness, or is able to deduce that it is, will the hospital report that information to the insurance company?

4 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

You mean that someone (agent, officer?) will print a stamp in your passport lying about the fact that you have a valid insurance ? 

I don't see that happening. To risky for them IMHO.

No idea. I don't know how the agents do what they do. I don't understand how they can get extensions for people who don't have the required funds. Those people end up with a stamp in their passport confirming that they have met the requirements (i.e. they get the extension).

4 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Simple?

And at your first trip outside Thailand, what will you show to the Airport Immigration Officer when you will want to re-enter in Thailand ?... 

You show them the annotation on your passport confirming that you have the required insurance, the same annotation that appears on the passports of people who actually bought the required insurance. No one has to show insurance papers at the point of entry.

17 minutes ago, Saltire said:

Thanks for the info, I will check the link.

 

I am with Health Care International (HCI) I can't recommend or otherwise as I have luckily never had to claim. Been with them 5 years and at 65 soon, better staying with them than changing in my opinion. Not sure if they would honour it, but they say if there is no claim based on my pre-existing conditions in the first 3 years of cover, they put a moritorium in place and would 'consider' covering them.

Thanks. I'll check them out. "Consider" is a typical insurer's word, but at least it's better than "no"!

5 minutes ago, Saltire said:

Thanks for this, I wsa hoping someone would do this ????

 

This confirms that everage premium for these policies, for me is about 90K Baht for very low, inadequate cover. My current UK International policy covers me for 13 million Baht , for half the premium. If this ever gets applied to extensions of stay I will need to ask them to add out patient cover and hope my insurance company will sign the certification form.

Do you mind sharing which UK company you're with?

You might also want to check out this post by a representative of one of the companies in the Spreadsheet (Pacific Cross). He seems to be saying that he will be possible to use their other policies (he refers to them as "historical") which are slightly more expensive than the ones in the spreadsheet, but offer ten-times or more the cover.

3 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

They dont list every combination of possibilities, but that just means we are once again going to be at the mercy of IO mood and interpretation and i do not intend to risk being detained and deported.

Yep. As always.  

I think the idea is that the IO will be instructed to check O-A visas issued on or after 31st Oct for an annotation indicating that the passport holder has insurance. The passport holder's A-O visa will be valid until the insurance expires (or the visa expires). 

Regarding the renewal of the insurance to get a second year, I guess they will require the passport holder go to a local Immigration Office and get the passport updated with the new insurance details.

20 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

If this is the key document, then it says nothing about when the O A visa was issued, it just says an alien entering under O A visa will need insurance from 31st October.

 

It also says nothing about reentry permits and extensions. based on O A.

 

At this point I see no reason to believe an IO would not be able to justify denial of entry for an existing O A and/or extension, based on claimed inadequate insurance.

 

13 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's pretty much the way I read it....

 

9 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

You have a point wrt O-A Visa Entry, after Oct 31st. But a person on an Extension would be using a re-entry permit. If that Permit is based on an extension for retirement or marriage, how is it associated with an O-A?

It's not particularly well worded, but the way people are reading this is that it is intended for people who are applying for a new O-A visa. You have to provide proof of insurance at the time you apply for the visa. The consulates have instructions to check the insurance meets the requirements and annotate the applicant's passport accordingly. The IO looks for the annotation on entry. It's not clear what will happen if you subsequently get a new insurance and exit/reenter.

41 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The latest report from The Nation today and the comments therein by the Public Health Ministry guy certainly did NOT suggest the new requirement is only going to be applied to Non-O visa holders.

Which comments are you referring to?

38 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

While premiums are higher for older agrs there is a degree of coet sharing and the younger people do in fact partially offset the costs for the older (and the healthy for the sick). Were this not so, the premiums for people over 60 would be far higher, and likely more than anyone could afford.

The special "longterm stay" policies responded to this problem by offering ridiculously low level of cover...negating the whole ppint of insurance.

There is also always an economy of scale, the more people insured the lower the associated admin costs per person. Products designed for small markets will always be more expensive.

Sent from my SM-J701F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Cost sharing and economies of scale might make a small difference to the premium, but there's no way they could account for a ten-fold difference. The O-A policies are ten times more expensive than the others. That is unjustifiable.

I believe a more plausible reason the premiums are so high, and so similar across insurance companies, is that they knew they had a monopoly. The Thai government was mandating that people buy one of their policies. Wherever you have a monopoly you have high prices.  

Anyway, it's water under  the bridge now.  People can buy whatever policy they choose. 

27 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Well <deleted> me - I might actually be right about it being applied to Retirement Extensions.

 

 

I'd be surprised if that's the case. It seems pretty clear they've decided 400k is the magic number. You need to have that covered either by money in the bank or by insurance.  The anecdote in that thread looks like a case of Chinese Whispers. Maybe the boss half-understood the new regulations, the staff at desk 8 half understood the boss, ...

5 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

It is do expensive because:

1) it is a policy made solely for people over 50. That's a high risk group claims-wise as well as a smaller group. Regular oroducts are aimed at multiple ages and larger pool of 8nsured.
 

That is the explanation they gave. I don't understand it.  What difference does it make who else is in the group? If they are saying that 50 year-olds will get lower premiums because they are in group with 20-year olds, then they are saying that the 20 year-olds will get higher premiums because they are in the group with 50 year-olds. I don't think insurance premiums work like that.

A premium is based on the risk assessment of the individual insured. If a 20 year-old is a group with a 50-year old, the 20-year old will have a low premium and the 50-year old will have a high premium. 

If a group is made up entirely of older people, they will be making more claims but they will all be paying higher premiums so the group pot will be bigger. If a group is made up entirely of younger people they will be paying smaller premiums so the group pot will be smaller, but they will be making fewer claims.

2 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

Does anyone know for sure when you have to actually get the insurance??  Is it a requirement to have paid for the airline ticket and the required insurance policy, before you lodge your O-A Visa application?  Can you buy it online after getting O-A Visa approved, but before you arrive? Can you buy it upon arrival - at the airport?

You have to submit the insurance documents with your application. See this page. 

One way around the problem might be to post-date the start of the policy. Have the policy start on the day you enter Thailand. Then if the visa is refused, cancel the policy. This would, of course, require the co-operation of the insurance companies. I think in the UK insurance policies have a mandatory cooling-off period, so you cancel within a week of signing, but I somehow doubt that's the case in Thailand.

19 minutes ago, Thaivisa Health Protect said:

...the historic product suite available is now approved, meaning any plan that meets or exceeds the 400k/40k minimum can obtain the visa.  This is actually a big improvement, as the premiums for the Long Stay plan were skewed do the the age group of applicant.  Therefore one should look at the historic products not the specific Long Stay approved plans. 

Thanks for the reply. That's good news.  Perhaps it would be a good idea to retire the old plans as, as you point out, they are very poor value. 

Any British person currently looking at the Thai Consulate website will be directed directly to the those plans.  This page links to the long stay website and that site links directly to your old plans. I understand that things are moving quickly and you have no control over the Thai Consulate websites.

39 minutes ago, Martyp said:

What I have yet to see or hear about is what specifically would you show the IO at the Immigration desk that would demonstrate that you have the insurance? Couldn't you get this for any policy that meets the recommended requirements?

For the initial issue of the O-A, you send a copy of the insurance documents with your application. If it is approved they annotate your passport to indicate you have the required insurance. They haven't made it clear what happens if you subsequently renew your insurance (e.g. after 11 months) and exit and re-enter. 

44 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I see why they made the special policies. Everyone else was doing it and the Thai government wanted them. They had to remain players in the process.

Sure, I don't blame them for creating the policy. What I don't understand why it so expensive for the benefits provided. 

O-A policy
Premium 58000  Max per disability per year 645,000

Maxima Policy

Premium 68000 Max per disability per year  5,000,000

With one of their standard policies a premium of 68000 buys you 5 million coverage. With their special O-A policy 58000 buys you a tenth of that.

30 minutes ago, Martyp said:

It might be worthwhile to contact agents at some of the insurance companies to see if better, cheaper, more compressive policies would comply. Clearly the IOs at the airport are not going to be scrutinizing insurance policies. There must be some sort of easy to interpret certificate the identifies a policy as having complied with the regulations.

I've written to Pacific Cross asking them which of their policies can be used to support an O-A application. They have a "Platinum" policy which is designed specifically for O-A visas, but there is a huge discrepancy in the coverage provided by that the coverage provide by their other policies. The other policies do seem to meet to the minimum requirement of 400k + 40k, so I don't see why there is a need for a special high-cost, low-benefit O-A policy.

50 minutes ago, spambot said:

When I review the application in the system (few mins ago) I can see that there is no extra insurance being required (below is the last stage for attaching documents scans before applying) - However since this will get reviewed manually before being approved, likely might get rejected - and yet unknown.

That's interesting. I'm going to rush things through in case there is a loophole whereby people who have already submitted their application are not required to provide insurance. It's a long-shot, but worth a shot. I'm also hoping that the UK Consulate fall into line with everyone else and don't enforce it until the date stipulated on the Police Order.

Just now, Lovethailandelite said:

You will be granted a stay up until the date of expiry of the Insurance certificate

That's good news.

On the face of it, this seems to imply that the O-A can no longer be used for two years. But what happens if you renew your insurance? If you renew your insurance in the eleven month, and exit and return in that month, will you then be granted another year?

26 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

There is IMO nil chance that they will force someone to get insurance when they arrive on an O-A Visa, but then allow them to cancel it after 12 months when they get an Extension. And IMO there is very little (if any) chance that they will not also extend this requrement to all other 12 month Visas for 50+ Expats, and also to all Extensions under those Visas. 

 

Agreed. The alternatives will be money in the bank or insurance. Everyone over 50 will have to have one or the other.

12 minutes ago, AussieBob18 said:

If that overseas insurance company completes the Thai Govt certificate - which is extremely unlikely.

 

Yes. I guess the wording will frighten them off. If the certificate just indicated the inpatient and outpatient sums insured, they might be prepared to sign it. But they would no doubt be reluctant to sign a document that states they are proving insurance that complies with a Thai Cabinet resolution.

I thought the insurance had to be from one  of these companies, but looking again, I see there is an overseas insurance certificate, that can be downloaded. Does that mean they will accept insurance from any company?