“no need to prove the source of the money.”

 

 

It was a requirement to show that 800,000 transferred from overseas when got my 1st extension at Bangkok immigration (Chaeng Wattana), 

“Why do you regard Health Insurance as outrageous? It would seem a good idea if you are living in Thailand, there is no free Healthcare. What is outrageous is the size of hospital bills. “

 

 

 

That’s why we are required to keep 400,000 in bank at all time, 12 months a year if we are not on monthly transfer type. 

39 minutes ago, The Theory said:

 

That’s why we are required to keep 400,000 in bank at all time, 12 months a year if we are not on monthly transfer type

Or maybe that requirement (supposedly) makes it more complicated for "agents" to work their magic and/or generates more income for them.

On 5/15/2019 at 8:55 AM, allane said:

It is certainly possible, I know someone who did it. However, I doubt that will obviate this brand new requirement for health insurance, which is so new that we have very few details.  I renewed my annual Extension of Stay for Retirement in March, so won't be doing so again for another 10 months.

Agreed.. Already immigration have stated that 'on renewal' of the 'visa' which is all incorrect terminology and leads to massive confusion.. However as the visa doesnt get renewed, only the permission of stay, then logically it is going to apply incountry. 

 

Budget for the insurance or create other future plans. 

2 hours ago, xylophone said:

See this from the Phuket News..............It includes those applying to "renew" their one year permits to stay. Surely this refers to the retirement extensions we renew every year?

 

“The insurance policy must provide up to B40,000 coverage for outpatient treatment and up to B400,000 for inpatient treatment during their stay in the Kingdom of Thailand,” Dr Nutthawut said.

The requirement applies to all new applicants for one-year non-immigrant O-A visas, and for those applying to “renew” their one-year permits-to-stay, he said.

www.thephuketnews.com/cabinet-approves-mandatory-health-insurance-for-long-stay-visas-71424.php#kimf7zlHsmOva8Uu.97 

The link you provided includes the following text.

Col Kathathorn also confirmed that the new insusrance requirement applies only to Non-Immigrant O-A "retirement" visas.
 

Although this link also mentioned, http://hss.moph.go.th/show_topic.php?id=2808 certainly left it ambiguous.

 

Phuket News, as did 103FM, may have got the idea of the phrase renewing a visa (which is impossible) , is actually any extension obtained. We need to see this clearly stated before running around buying up insurance.

 

Edited May 16, 20197 yr by jacko45k

2 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

The link you provided includes the following text.

Col Kathathorn also confirmed that the new insusrance requirement applies only to Non-Immigrant O-A "retirement" visas.
 

Although this link also mentioned, http://hss.moph.go.th/show_topic.php?id=2808 certainly left it ambiguous.

 

Phuket News, as did 103FM, may have got the idea of the phrase renewing a visa (which is impossible) , is actually any extension obtained. We need to see this clearly stated before running around buying up insurance.

 

Yes I agree, however what "threw" me was his use of the words......and for those applying to “renew” their one-year permits-to-stay, he said.

 

Never heard that used before...........???????????

 

 

34 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Yes I agree, however what "threw" me was his use of the words......and for those applying to “renew” their one-year permits-to-stay, he said.

 

Never heard that used before...........???????????

 

 

There is also the opening paragraph...

Phuket Immigration Chief Col Kathathorn Kumthieng confirmed to The Phuket News today (May 14) that he has been informed of the new requirement but that he has yet to receive an order for his office to start applying it when processing applications for one-year Non-Immigrant O-A permits-to-stay.

 

I don't understand how an Immigration Chief in Thailand, would expect to receive an order relating to Visas which are vetted and issued at various Embassies and official consulates all over the world except in Thailand, unless he means at the airport. Suggesting he expects to check people entering with a Non Imm OA  for medical insurance. 
 

Edited May 16, 20197 yr by jacko45k

On 5/15/2019 at 10:11 PM, jacko45k said:

Currently there is no requirement for health insurance to obtain an Extension of Stay. Nor have any plans been announced. 

It appears an inaccurate news report is causing a lot of concerns. 

Thanks, I hope that you are right.

On 5/16/2019 at 8:49 AM, ubonjoe said:

No

It will have no effect. It is only for new OA visa application at a embassy or consulate.

 

On 5/16/2019 at 8:50 AM, wozza said:

Thank you 

 

Ubon Joe, 

Will this apply to extensions in Thailand too?

2 minutes ago, Deerculler said:

Will this apply to extensions in Thailand too?

No it will not.

I think I asked you before. Was not sure.
Thank you very much.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

On 5/16/2019 at 8:49 AM, ubonjoe said:

No

It will have no effect. It is only for new OA visa application at a embassy or consulate.

In the original thread with a news story about insurance being approved, there was a statement by a women in the news story part that did say extensions would require proof of insurance.

I don't know if that was accurate or not but the statement was there

Edited May 17, 20197 yr by AAArdvark

I read that too. That is why I asked Ubon Joe to confirm what I asked him before.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

2 minutes ago, AAArdvark said:

I don't know if that was accurate or not but the statement was there

I suggest you read the most recent article about it where it clearly states it only for OA long stay visa applications.

22 hours ago, jacko45k said:

There is also the opening paragraph...

Phuket Immigration Chief Col Kathathorn Kumthieng confirmed to The Phuket News today (May 14) that he has been informed of the new requirement but that he has yet to receive an order for his office to start applying it when processing applications for one-year Non-Immigrant O-A permits-to-stay.

 

I don't understand how an Immigration Chief in Thailand, would expect to receive an order relating to Visas which are vetted and issued at various Embassies and official consulates all over the world except in Thailand, unless he means at the airport. Suggesting he expects to check people entering with a Non Imm OA  for medical insurance. 
 

But, given that particular office's notorious reputation for rogue practices, it would, I think, be unwise to rule out altogether the possibility of them deciding to apply this requirement to annual extensions under the guise of a local rule change - regardless of whether or not they receive an order to this effect from the bigwigs in Bangkok.

Edited May 17, 20197 yr by OJAS

I’m wondering how many O-A visa holders at 50 or over 50 are out there. 

2 hours ago, OJAS said:

But, given that particular office's notorious reputation for rogue practices, it would, I think, be unwise to rule out altogether the possibility of them deciding to apply this requirement to annual extensions under the guise of a local rule change - regardless of whether or not they receive an order to this effect from the bigwigs in Bangkok.

Yes you have a point. I believe that office ignored an instruction to apply leniency wrt having a full year of transfers of 65,000 baht.

So, a person who decides to retire in Thailand and applies in his country of residence for a non imm OA (is there any real point to an OA apart from retirement?) must now present proof of medical cover valid, presumably, for the period covered by the visa i.e. one year. Thereafter, when the applicant applies for his extension(s) no insurance requirement is stipulated.

 

Government thinking can be very wooly and not helped by an excitable press, but can anyone really see any sense in this? It’s the extension(s) that require the insurance as age progresses, not the initial application.

 

There will be more on this, believe me....

So, a person who decides to retire in Thailand and applies in his country of residence for a non imm OA (is there any real point to an OA apart from retirement?) must now present proof of medical cover valid, presumably, for the period covered by the visa i.e. one year. Thereafter, when the applicant applies for his extension(s) no insurance requirement is stipulated.
 
Government thinking can be very wooly and not helped by an excitable press, but can anyone really see any sense in this? It’s the extension(s) that require the insurance as age progresses, not the initial application.
 
There will be more on this, believe me....

If the plan is to retire in Thailand, then you should apply for a Non-immigrant O visa. This gives you 90 days and then you can change to an Extension of Stay based on retirement, if you meet the financial requirements. An OA visa is for a long-stay (1 year, although longer you use your re-entries wisely) for over the 50s.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

On 5/16/2019 at 7:37 AM, jacko45k said:

Firstly it has not yet been announced that health insurance will be a requirement for Extensions. Simply for Non-Imm OA Visas obtained in your own country. 

A person can always get a new Visa, but it would not make any difference. An Extension originating on an OA is the same as that on a regular O Visa, actually both an Extension of the Permission to Stay. 

A retirement Extension would require you to show 800,000 in a Thai bank for 2 months prior to the application, no need to prove the source of the money.

 

Why do you regard Health Insurance as outrageous? It would seem a good idea if you are living in Thailand, there is no free Healthcare. What is outrageous is the size of hospital bills. 

Well it certainly is outrageous if it is discriminant and required for just one type of visa when others including tourists are excused from holding insurance. And this is how i see it. They are targeting O-A visas only. 

On 5/16/2019 at 9:21 AM, Henryford said:

Yes i would much rather they upped the bank deposit figure to 1.2 million than make us throw away 100k a year on a useless policy.

How many do you think can afford that, how self centered can one get.

On 5/16/2019 at 9:45 AM, Laza 45 said:

I think I would go in June to be safe.. that gives you a year to sort out where you want to go from there..

 

So does this mean that they are not going to honour the terms in which they sold you the O-A visa

6 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

Well it certainly is outrageous if it is discriminant and required for just one type of visa when others including tourists are excused from holding insurance. And this is how i see it. They are targeting O-A visas only. 

Not O-A only. Non O-X already has this same requirement,

and other non-immigrant visas could follow (?, maybe, logical)

and travel insurance for tourists has been discussed in the past. They could come on it too.

Wait & See.

On 5/16/2019 at 10:12 AM, Reang said:

I initially received my first and only Non-Imm O-A visa 16 years ago.  Lived in Thailand ever since.  I have changed from retirement to support visas and back again over the years.  My current visa status is retirement, although I have a wife and child.  It is unclear at this point whether I will be required to have health insurance when I go for my visa extension later this year.  I am 72 years old.  A cursory review of Thai insurance companies show that I am above the age of insurance coverage.  Any comments or suggestions will be appreciated.

According to the Thai insurance terms, you will probably be unable to get cover because of your age. One would think that seeing as how you have a Thai family, they could make some kind of provision for this age group to become attached to the Thai hospital system for a reasonable subscription. This will avoid families being torn apart or deserted.

On 5/16/2019 at 10:37 AM, flexomike said:

Hope you are right Joe, there is so much confusion on this matter, I originally came here on an OA but since have been on extensions of stay, don't have to renew again until next April so hopefully by then it will be sorted out

UBON JOE is always right, he is a true expert relax.

1 minute ago, Pattaya46 said:

Not O-A only. Non O-X already has this same requirement,

and other non-immigrant visas could follow (?, maybe, logical)

and travel insurance for tourists has been discussed in the past. They could come on it too.

Wait & See.

OA and OX visas are "long-stay" visas, so there is some sense in requiring insurance.  Other Non-Immigrant visas are only for 90 days, so maybe health insurance is considered less relevant.  Requiring travel insurance for these visas, and Tourist visas, might be a good idea!

11 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

Well it certainly is outrageous if it is discriminant and required for just one type of visa when others including tourists are excused from holding insurance. And this is how i see it. They are targeting O-A visas only. 

Non-O A Visa holders will  now be treated the same as OX were, Tourists don't need a years insurance. PE Visa holders seem to have escaped. I suspect there is more to come. 

On 5/16/2019 at 11:29 AM, xylophone said:

See this from the Phuket News..............It includes those applying to "renew" their one year permits to stay. Surely this refers to the retirement extensions we renew every year?

 

“The insurance policy must provide up to B40,000 coverage for outpatient treatment and up to B400,000 for inpatient treatment during their stay in the Kingdom of Thailand,” Dr Nutthawut said.

The requirement applies to all new applicants for one-year non-immigrant O-A visas, and for those applying to “renew” their one-year permits-to-stay, he said.

www.thephuketnews.com/cabinet-approves-mandatory-health-insurance-for-long-stay-visas-71424.php#kimf7zlHsmOva8Uu.97 

So Nutthawut is NOT going to honour the terms offered when i applied for my O-A visa.  i.e. 1 year renewal after 1st year.

3 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

So Nutthawut is NOT going to honour the terms offered when i applied for my O-A visa.  i.e. 1 year renewal after 1st year.

Renewal means applying for a new OA visa.

According to an earlier post, there are 80,950 retirement visas. Each doing 42.2 hospital visits per year. And each leaves 8.4  hospital bills unpaid.  Can you believe that?   I have only used outpatients on about 3 occasions in 12 years and was pretty well arm wrestled to pay the bill before i could collect my meds and leave. So how the others got away without paying beats me, especially as we have to report every 90 days. Now if the motorcycling young tourists were included ( you know, the ones seen  zipping around Samui on  the back wheel) in these figures i just might understand. But they are excused insurance and are the ones most likely to skip paying and leave the country.

Edited May 18, 20197 yr by Huckenfell