RedPill

Just now, luckyluke said:

Not all,

I and many others don't,

as we don't have to,

if we don't wish to.

Please explain in more detail

2 minutes ago, Tagged said:

For tourist visas yes, but not for permament stays. 

 

 

Good point, and i.e. for the UK, there is free basic health care thereafter

22 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

"Each of us in particular has to decide to what level he is prepare to abide to Thai rules, and to decide what are his priorities."

 

Do you really think there are a huge amount of expats with O-A Visas compared to others with O based on retirement and 1 year extensions plus those who are married with 1 year extensions? 

Max69 ... the point is not about only 'now'.

New rules start somewhere, and have a good chance to get the ripple effect starting.

Why is there no required Health Insurance for O visas? Well, we got a clear explanation and answer from Ubonjoe yesterday. 

People on O extend into 'extensions' within 90 days, have financial requirements fulfilled, i.e. those 400/800k in the bank.

That counts as a 'protection' for the Thai gov / hospitals with unpaid bills.

But if you think about it, with extension based on marriage, the 400k in the bank, that doesn't even match up the new required 'inpatient' amount for the O-A.

As of today and 2 days into this discussion, everybody is clear on the fact that it only effects the O-A.

I hope it stays like this ... but if you think that complete thing through, I see no valid reason why this could not easily get extended into other, if not all extensions, regardless of the visa they are based on. 

You think for marriage extension the only protection Thai gov has, the 400k, it's enough to cover hospital bills? 

12 minutes ago, Lacrimas said:

I really hope so but from the look of things it will apply to all extensions soon. See the more recent news.

Especially since there is even less money deposited in the bank account, 400k vs. 800k.

So letting the retirement extensions (whether coming from O or O-A) off the hook just because they have 800k, and not applying it to marriage extensions with less deposit, wouldn't make any sense. 

Also, the 400k deposit in the bank doesn't cover up the required min. of the new health insurance inpatients amount,.

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

If true, this backs up the point a lot of us have been making about the fact that Immigration included the insurance requirement language for O-A visa holders in their regulations on retirement extensions.

 

The implication of that was they intended to apply the requirement not only against current and future O-A visa holders, but also at least against people on retirement extensions who previously had O-A visas.

 

Exactly, if you dig a bit deeper, more and more info comes out. Will be interesting to follow, not only interesting, these things are required to know what's going on around us with Visa changes and how far it goes/will go.

50 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

I was coming in Thailand from europe with an OA visa 5 years ago

it was my only one visa i have ever had to come here

and i am staying here since 5 years with each year a 1 year extension of stay based on retirement.

Anyway I have to renew my 1 year extension of stay based on retirment at Jomtiem immigration office next  tuesday, so i can ask the question for 2020 when i have to renew again,if i have to show an insurance proof and i'll let you know here the IO answer given to me.

Yes, do this, would be good info to know.

You know this all sounds to me like that:

It's like buying a car and you have to have car insurance for the first year (O-A) ... for the second year, if extended into retirement, you don't need to have car insurance anymore, it's enough you have a deposit in the bank (400k/800k) 

I would put a bet in that this will get further lined up in future

1 minute ago, ubonjoe said:

The OA visa is a multiple entry visa that allows unlimited one year entries for a year from the date of issue and it can only be issued in your home country or country of legal residence. 

A Non-o visa only allows a 90 day entry.

I think they think that people with OA visas may not have the intention of staying her nearly full time. Plus no funds are needed in a Thai bank or proof of income coming into the country.

People staying here on extensions of stay tend to settle in to the country and do have to show financial proof here. And would not be likely to just bail of the country to avoid paying a medical bill.

Thanks, yes ... I can follow this and understand. That makes sense.

What doesn't make sense is that the financial proof, 400k/800k can hardly get taken out to cover emergencies, especially with the recent changes of how many month it has to stay on the account. 

People say, these funds are not for medical emergencies ... but in a way, they are ... otherwise Immi would also ask for required Health Insurance, to their terms, for retirement / marriage extensions.

Thanks Ubon! Cleared it up for me.

3 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

You can get a single 1 year extension on an "O-A" visa and at the end of that extension you must either return to your home country and apply for a new "O-A" visa or you can cross the border and obtain a Non-Imm "O" visa for 90 days and then as long as you meet the financial requirements then you can apply for your extension based on retirement

Good, and then you don't need the health insurance requirements anymore for the retirement extension, only for the O-A which opened the door to it?

This doesn't make sense to me ???? 

It makes only sense if the health insurance is then also required for subsequent extensions ... and I think this will come.

How can they ask or have a requirement for the first year, but not for the second, third etc. on extensions?

4 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

So you think you can't extend the O-A Visa? Of course the extension is based in the O-A retirement visa,but it will still be an O-A extension with a required health insurance, and you need the 800k in the bank. You must learn how to read. There's no other terminology. 

Ok, so that was what I've been asking yesterday. 

I didn't care so much whether it's an O or O-A after you got it into an retirement extension. That was just the base to get an extension.

What I was wondering about is this:

- To get O-A, you need to fulfill the health insurance requirement for the first year

then you extend into a retirement extension, and then you don't need this health insurance requirement anymore?

That doesn't make much sense to me ????

So why not the same requirement for an O, where you also can stay a year?

What's the difference or reason why this only applies to O-A?

21 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

That seems to be unfounded speculation not a fact to me.

I would not believe it until I saw a police order stating it was needed.

ubonjoe, what's the difference between O-A and O, in respect to why the requirement only for O-A?

When both could be for a year stay and get extended into even longer term extensions (retirement or marriage extension)?

I'm still a bit puzzled to get this all straight or understand the detailed in & outs of it????

Just now, Jingthing said:

Of course it's possible!
Also it's very common. 

You can enter the retirement extension system in Thailand with either an O visa or an O-A visa.

Cheers.

Ok, that was my point yesterday in a different thread.

If the new health insurance requirements as 'pre-requirement' for O-A .... then why not the next stop to make it also a requirement for the retirement extension thereafter. 

And then we would already be in the extensions, too  ... it's not that crazy of a thought this could easily happen.

It would even make sense. Why only for the O-A for the first year, but not for the extension which opened the door to it?

1 minute ago, doctormann said:

My O-A visa expired back in 2006 and I've been doing annual extensions based on retirement ever since

I don't really see the relevance of initially having an O-A visa, rather than a non-O.  Once the visa has expired you just do the same extension thereafter for either type.

Really? So it is possible to extend an O-A into a retirement extension?

Yesterday I had a few posts with someone who stated that this is not possible. 

On 10/10/2019 at 8:42 AM, robblok said:

I like it in this country and I don't think this country owns me anything. You chose to take care of your wife (or that guy did) Nobody forced you why would Thailand own you anything.

 

I already got health insurance seems like a logical thing to do in this country. Its because of people defaulting and flaunting the rules that things get harder yet you see people advocating for it all the time. 

 

The only thing i think is crazy is the 40k outpatient thing. 

40k outpatient is not the only crazy thing ... the other one is that it must be a Thai Insurance company, even if one has a better international insurance, but not accepted.

Things like this is what makes it so quirky. I guess most of us have insurances, no big issue or thing to debate, but you still have to be up to date to new regulations which keep coming, to keep compliant ... to often very silly rules which makes no sense.

11 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

40 pages in which many important members don't stop posting

insisting that this Insurance rule does NOT concern Retirement  Extensions... 

What to expect? Big headlines on TVF: BREAKING NEWS Long Term stayers required to have health insurance ...

... of course there is going to be a lot of discussions about it. First the need to fiddle out what exact visas etc.

Everybody here knows and sees how things are drilled down and is getting more enforced over the years. 

There is nothing too crazy when people think ahead and can see this coming for extensions, too. 

I certainly would not be surprised.

But we will see ... for now it's not. Ok ...!

2 hours ago, Almer said:

Nothing makes any sense, 

 

is it when you first apply O-A

is it only over 50 

is it for elite visa only

will it be for O

will it be for O for first year 

will it be for O extension

WHAT WILL IT BE ???????????   

 

 

Que será, será .... ????

A guy is positively impressed with a shopping mall and takes the time to take pictures and share ... for the ones who are interested. The ones who are not could just skip the thread and move on.

But he get's shot down for posting ... what you mean "negative Farangs?" ????

4 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

 

 

I had a Cataract removed at Bumrumgrad  a few years ago  and there was a hell of a lot of Arabs moving around in the hospital.

Of course, the hospitals love international health insurance cards of medic tourists from Arab countries ... I had one before and you should have seen the bill for a 4 day hospital stay without surgery ... hilarious. 

But, that's not really the topic, these Arabs you talk about don't live or stay here long term on a O-A or O visa ...

2 minutes ago, wisperone said:

You contradict yourself.

Yes, in quality of food ways, I know ... but I think it's not worth arguing about, until you go and eat PH food yourself.

Maybe some like it, some not.

As good as the variety of Thai food is, I certainly can't eat it day in / day out.

8 minutes ago, wisperone said:

Really?

I guess that depends on your tolerability of poor quality food. To each their own.

Why argue about food? It's very subjective ... it's always each to their own. And the quality of Thai food is also very often very questionable, many times.

Thai food is great, but honestly, after a few years, I don't know what take or buy anymore when walking through the markets ... maybe just me personally. 

... there are times I'm happy the Pizza Company started to deliver to my house ????

I definitely need the balance.

21 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

You can not change from an O-A to an O by doing an extension. You have to start all over.

Great, that was the final piece of my puzzle I wanted to know.

If you can't get an O-A extended into either a marriage or retirement extension, then the chain is broking.

No need to carry on the health insurance requirements into O.

That is a good thing, then I'm more relaxed about it now.

Thanks!

20 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

You normally extend an O-A visa another year,and same with the O visa extension based on retirement or marriage. When in Thailand the O-A and O with 1 year extension based on retirement are the same. When having the O-A from back home, you have 1 year from day one. When arriving with a 90 days Non-Immigrant O visa, you can extend it after 60 days. That's how you start the 1 year extension.

The financial requirements differ a bit. 

Yes, you extend a O-A with another year, same as a O visa.

The O-A after 1 years minimum. The O you can extend after 3 month already. Both have this ability. 

That's only about the timing, but you can put in the 'extension' for both.

My point was ... if a pre-requirement for a 'possible longer term O-A type extension', into marriage or retirement exists ... why not then apply the same minimum health insurance rules the the extensions as well?

And that's where my suspicion and thinking comes from. 

If you could 'not' extend an O-A to an O marriage/retirement extension ... then it's ok, the chain is broken!

But it's not .. you can extend an O-A to O extension ... so why not apply the same minimum health rules later to O as well?

That's my point, if you understand or makes sense, I don't know. That's my logical thinking forward and expect Thai immi go to ... wouldn't surprise me.