Etaoin Shrdlu

That's correct. It is the smaller Thai insurers that issued personal accident policies with a cash benefit upon testing positive for Covid that are in trouble. I have heard that some people took out multiple policies and then sought to get infected in order to claim. I'm not sure how true this is or whether it is just the insurance industry trying to blame their policyholders for the situation they put themselves in. In any event, these insurers really are in trouble. Those lobbying the OIC for relief from their obligations to pay Covid claims are stating the they offered these policies before the magnitude of the Covid situation was known. I don't have much sympathy for them because they could have taken note of how the pandemic was playing out in other countries early on. It is also a principle of insurance that a risk must be known and quantifiable before it can be the subject of insurance. Seems they missed out on this point, too. For those who rub their hands together in glee about the possibility of evil insurers going bankrupt, keep in mind that without insurance the transport system can grind to a halt and both individual and corporate borrowers can be placed in default on loans that have insurance covenants. The cost to replace the bankrupt insurers' coverage will likely be for the accounts of the policyholders and the insurers still standing will take advantage of this new demand. So, yes, the insurers created this problem themselves, but it is now potentially a much larger problem with broad impact. On another note, the OIC has been generally in favor of consolidation within the insurance industry as there are more insurers than the market the size and penetration level in Thailand can support efficiently. This may be the golden opportunity to remedy this situation. Let's see how adept the OIC is and how much attention this gets from the government.

I am not trolling: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/17/bitcoin-morgan-stanley-is-the-first-big-us-bank-to-offer-wealthy-clients-access-to-bitcoin-funds.html Investing in Cryptocurrency.pdf

Morgan Stanley has started to offer crypto-related investments to its clients. In order to be able to buy these securities, a client must have at least $2 million in assets invested with MS (twice the amount needed to be an accredited investor) and have a very aggressive risk tolerance based upon MS's metrics. Additionally, MS advisors are not allowed to sell crypto-related investments to their clients in excess of 2.5% of the value of their portfolios. MS goes to great lengths to try to describe the risks associated with investing in crypto, both those specific to technical issues such as a breakdown in the computer code underlying the system as well as the fact that there is no tangible asset or revenue stream underpinning the valuation. This tells me that MS does not believe that crypto is a Ponzi scheme, but that it is an extremely risky investment and only appropriate for certain investors. So far, crypto seems to be enduring longer than historical bubbles, but it may also be the first bubble to be able to draw upon a truly global pool of potential participants, thus extending its life compared to previous ones. But some other schemes have lasted a long time, too, such as those run by Bernie Madoff and, closer to home, Mae Chamoy Thipyaso. Perhaps if I were thirty years younger and had time to re-coup possible losses, I'd put some money in crypto. But for me right now it carries more risk than I am prepared to accept and that's discounting the question of whether it is a bubble like the Dutch Tulip Mania or South Sea Company.

Wagon of Fools by Hendrik Gerritsz Pot, 1637. Followed by Haarlem weavers who have abandoned their looms, blown by the wind and flying a flag emblazoned with tulips, Flora, goddess of flowers, her arms laden with tulips, rides to their destruction in the sea along with tipplers, money changers and the two-faced goddess Fortuna.

Dentistry is not one of the occupations reserved for Thai nationals, so being a foreigner by itself should not be an issue. However I understand that all prospective medical practitioners, including dentists, need to pass the licensing exams which are only administered in the Thai language.

I have heard elsewhere that some banking apps don't work properly if a phone connects via wifi instead of via the phone system. No idea if this is applicable to Kasikorn. I had a somewhat similar issue using the True website to pay my internet bill. Had to turn off the VPN on the computer.

The policies marketed by many Thai insurers as "Covid insurance" were personal accident policies that provided a death benefit, typically thb 1 million, along with medical expense coverage for Covid treatment with a limit of thb 100,000 or sometimes less. Some also provided a cash benefit if one simply tested positive for Covid. If you paid only thb 850 for a year's coverage, then you probably have one of these personal accident policies. The benefits under your policy may differ somewhat from what I've described above. A number of Thai insurance companies have lobbied the Office of the Insurance Commissioner to be allowed to cancel their Covid policies mid-term and refund premiums pro-rata. So far, the OIC has refused to allow them to do so. The projected payouts under these policies supposedly present an existential threat to some of them and now with a wave of Omicron looming, things look even more dire to them. Given that so many insurers were trying to obtain permission to cancel mid-term, I suspect few, if any, will be offering renewal of these products.

Before you raise a complaint with the Insurance Commissioner's office, check the cancellation provisions of your policy. Many policies only provide for what is called "short-rate" cancellation if the policy is cancelled by the policyholder. Short-rate is considerably less favorable than pro-rata, but it is entirely within the permit of existing regulations and general insurance practice in almost all countries. I don't think the travel ban issue will overcome the short-rate penalty provision of the policy, but no harm in trying. Just be aware that the policy wording is probably going to prevail in this instance.

Our dog's cushion is outside on the front steps. We put a small fan next to it that keeps the air moving enough to make it difficult for mosquitos to land on him. Some mornings there are lots of dead mosquitos on the steps that were killed as they passed through the fan.

I had a similar issue and called the mobile phone company. I was told that I had probably clicked on a link that caused the website in question to bill my account for something. When I advised that I had never knowingly subscribed to any additional services either directly with the phone company or with any website, they stopped the charges and reversed the prior three months' worth. Good luck.

I don't think it would be expensive or time-consuming to have a lawyer or other competent person review the chanote to make sure there is no mortgage or other encumbrance. Also the lawyer could advise whether the seller makes the appropriate representations in the sale and purchase agreement regarding having clear title to the property without any obligations outstanding. Lastly, the lawyer could check with the relevant sections in the Land Department office to make sure that there is no lien or mortgage that is in process but has not yet been entered onto the chanote.

I was waiting to see what you found out. My youngest still receives benefits.

Insurers have been lobbying the Office of the Insurance Commissioner for permission to cancel existing Covid policies mid-term due to expected losses which have the potential to seriously affect their risk-based capital. This was reported in the newspaper we're not allowed to link to. This being the case, I very much doubt that many Thai insurers will be offering renewals of the personal accident policies that they sold as "Covid cover" and which had lump-sum payouts in the event of a positive Covid test in addition to some limited medical expense coverage..

The OP definitely needs to appeal. As you suggested, the first stop should be to escalate internally with the insurance company. I would at least initially believe that it is a junior staff member making a simple mistake due to lack of knowledge. If it gets to management level and still no positive result, then filing a complaint with the OIC is warranted. But at least give the insurance company a chance to fix their mistake before going to the OIC. This situation highlights the need for a good insurance broker as this is exactly the type of situation in which a broker can be of help.

Very good advice.

A material fact is anything that would cause an underwriter to either deny coverage or increase the premium charged. This is of course not something that the applicant would normally know in any great detail and in that respect it is indeed unfair. This is basically what the law says, however on proposal forms insurers may limit this risk to the proposer by stating that they only require that the questions be answered completely and truthfully. You are correct in this respect. I would hope that an insurer would have designed a proposal form in a manner that would essentially preclude the ability to deny a claim or void a policy if the proposal form were to be answered truthfully and completely. I am not sure that is always the case and my concern is that the insurer has a get-out-of-jail-free card in the form of section 865 of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code and precedent under common law in other countries. I am not a medical expert or a medical insurance underwriter so I don't know if there are pre-existing conditions that could have required surgery or a procedure more than ten years prior to application that would remain a material fact for underwriters at application time that would not otherwise trigger disclosure under other questions on a proposal form.

The Thai civil and commercial code does not apply to foreign insurers, but the same principle does apply in other countries including the UK and the US. Intentional non-disclosure of material fact would allow insurers in most countries to either deny a claim or void a policy from inception. This isn't something unique to Thailand.

The key to this issue is materiality. You are correct that some issues do resolve and failure to disclose would likely not be material and underwriters would probably not seek to deny a claim based upon this type of non-disclosure. But section 865 of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code stipulates that a policy is voidable if an applicant knowingly omits to disclose facts that could cause an insurer to deny coverage or increase premium. This requirement seems to be broader than simply requiring an applicant to truthfully and completely answer the questions in the application and I have seen at least one health insurance proposal form that refers to this section of the law. My concern is that insurers have implied a time limit for disclosure of material fact that is not supported by the Thai Civil and Commercial Code and their reference to this section of the law on an application form could be used to deny a claim based upon material non-disclosure of something that fell outside the 10 year timeframe. I am not sure why some insurers ask for details of surgeries and procedures going back only ten years and others seem to leave the disclosure requirement open ended. I certainly do not doubt your statements regarding the low level of competence displayed by claims department staff of local insurers.

I think Dr. Panya at Bumrungrad is considered very good. He's treated my knee with Synvisc injections, but I haven't bitten the bullet and gotten a replacement yet. I know someone who has and that person was satisfied with Dr. Panya's work.

This isn't just a Thai thing. International insurers have the same rights to deny claims or void policies for non-disclosure in most jurisdictions. I would not rule out the possibility that some countries may limit insurers' ability to do so, but I am not aware of any that do. It is a fundamental principle in the formation of a contract of insurance.

There isn't enough information from the OP to understand the reason for the insurer's denial of the claim, but the reference to the agent stating that things should be ok if something happened more than five years prior gives a possible hint. Some medical insurance application forms ask the applicant to disclose any surgeries or medical procedures they have undergone during a specific time period, typically five or ten years. The intent of this question is to elicit more information regarding the proposer's medical history than may have otherwise been provided based upon the standard request to disclose pre-existing conditions. Some applicants might believe that this means that their duty to disclose the medical condition for which the surgery or procedure was performed does not apply if the surgery or procedure occurred prior to the time period mentioned. This isn't the case. The applicant's duty to disclose material facts is without time limitation and the time period mentioned in the question regarding surgeries or procedures does not over-ride it. An insurer is also entitled to deny a claim and cancel a policy from inception if the nature of the condition that had not been disclosed would have caused the insurer to reject the application based upon its underwriting guidelines, even if the non-disclosed condition had nothing to do with the immediate claim at hand. It would not surprise me if an insurance agent here also misunderstood this issue and gave bad advice.

Many medical insurance policies don't cover routine screenings or check-ups. Under such policies there would have to be a medically necessary reason to perform a colonoscopy for cover to apply and would likely require prior written approval from the insurer based upon a doctor's report. Your policy should explain when approval is needed and how to obtain it. What does your policy say?

Muang Thai is a life insurance company. The medical benefits are provided via an endorsement to a whole life policy. This means that in addition to paying for medical insurance, you will be paying for life insurance and also part of your annual premium is going towards building cash value in the policy. This is not necessarily a bad thing if you want life insurance and a policy with cash value, but it is probably going to be a very expensive way to get health insurance. For Americans, whole life insurance policies generate tax reporting requirements and compliance issues.

WRLife appears to be an insurance broker, not an insurance company. From their "policy": "WRLIFE POLICY The Insured becomes a member and a shareholder when selecting any Module of WrLife participative community or simply when buying shares only, without buying any insurance. WrLife is a master broker which has a binding authority with: One or several licensed Insurance(s) Company(ies)" Not sure about the member and shareholder bit. Seems odd for in insurance broker to sell or give their clients shares in anything. I was also unable to find out which insurance companies they place their clients' coverage with from the website.

When you exit Thailand with a re-entry permit in your passport and an endorsement in your residence certificate, you need to return within the one-year validity of the permit and endorsement, otherwise PR lapses. There is no minimum stay upon returning in order to retain PR. You could fly in, , go straight to immigration and obtain new stamps, and go right back out for another year.