Compulsory Health insurance for 0-A visa applicants effective 31st October

[saengd]

I agree with poster rabas, my most recent passport contains the same details on the first page which are carried are across from passport to passport, mine currently shows I entered on an O-A visa.

[Sheryl]

I think all passports do. I know mine does.

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

[Peterw42]

27 minutes ago, rabas said:

Did immigration transfer your visa information from the old passport to the new one? Did you look?

 

I got a new passport 2 years ago. When they transferred my information they added 3 small blue boxes in the front. One clearly copies my original visa type (NON-O) and date of entry nine years ago (2010). Another copies a re-entry based on my 2010 visa. Clearly I'm still under the original visa type as I have not left in 9 years. I can post an image if it's of interest.

Yes they transferred the original visa information, but the point I was making is I am now on a marriage extension after originally entering on an OA visa. I am not tied to the visa I came on when it comes to extensions.

[BertM]

2 hours ago, Tuvoc said:

 

At this point the qualified Thai lawyers and English lawyer at Integrity Legal say otherwise. I'd take their opinion over the non-lawyers in this forum. However even they can't be certain, it is all down to how immigration officials interpret and apply it.

The attorney at agency I use said it is only for Non O-A Visas and "not" Non O visas and "not" for extensions of Non O visas. I trust him over any other law firm because he deals with Immigration in Bangkok every week and he would know if his clients would need to start having insurance next month. Having said that, the gov't could always add that requirement in the future to other classes of visas, but that would only be speculation at this point.

Edited October 13, 2019 by BertM

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, BertM said:

The attorney at agency I use said it is only for Non O-A Visas and "not" Non O visas and "not" for extensions of Non O visas. I trust him over any other law firm because he deals with Immigration in Bangkok every week and he would know if his clients would need to start having insurance next month. Having said that, the gov't could always add that requirement in the future, but that's anyone's guess and would only be speculation at this point.

Did you contact him in the last few days?

[BUSBY]

I personally do not understand why it is not reasonable to be expected to have medical insurance cover here in Thailand.

 

Everyone knows or should be aware of the non provisions for expats and should accept responsibility to make sure they have adequate cover.

 

I personally feel obliged to make sure, should I have need of it I am covered and carry a medical card around with me all the time.

 

I am now 75 and came here 27 years ago and have been covered from the day my initial 180 UK I had ran out.

 

Sure the premiums go up but I am safe in the knowledge I can depend on it should the need ever arise.

 

I'm not sure what the alternatives are but do know that without back up funds or M. Ins. your chances of getting free cover are zero as of the last time I read an article covering this important subject.

 

There could also be a massive bill being issued to your loved ones following the initial emergency treatment we are allowed ?????

 

Get insured you know it makes sense

 

Busby

 

 

[Tuvoc]

40 minutes ago, BertM said:

The attorney at agency I use said it is only for Non O-A Visas and "not" Non O visas and "not" for extensions of Non O visas. I trust him over any other law firm because he deals with Immigration in Bangkok every week and he would know if his clients would need to start having insurance next month. Having said that, the gov't could always add that requirement in the future to other classes of visas, but that would only be speculation at this point.

 

Just shows you what a muddle it all is. Even the lawyers don't agree. But that is very common, most court cases wouldn't happen if they did.

[Tuvoc]

4 minutes ago, BUSBY said:

I personally do not understand why it is not reasonable to be expected to have medical insurance cover here in Thailand.

 

Everyone knows or should be aware of the non provisions for expats and should accept responsibility to make sure they have adequate cover.

 

 

Some people who have a lot of money may just choose to self-insure knowing that they can pay the bills if they happen without bankrupting them.

[Martyp]

1 minute ago, BUSBY said:

I personally do not understand why it is not reasonable to be expected to have medical insurance cover here in Thailand.

 

Everyone knows or should be aware of the non provisions for expats and should accept responsibility to make sure they have adequate cover.

 

I personally feel obliged to make sure, should I have need of it I am covered and carry a medical card around with me all the time.

 

I am now 75 and came here 27 years ago and have been covered from the day my initial 180 UK I had ran out.

 

Sure the premiums go up but I am safe in the knowledge I can depend on it should the need ever arise.

 

I'm not sure what the alternatives are but do know that without back up funds or M. Ins. your chances of getting free cover are zero as of the last time I read an article covering this important subject.

 

There could also be a massive bill being issued to your loved ones following the initial emergency treatment we are allowed ?????

 

Get insured you know it makes sense

 

Busby

 

 

I don't think anyone thinks it is a bad idea. However, there are lots of dimensions to the issue. For some people, they simply cannot afford it. For people over 75 years of age it is essentially unavailable if you don't already have it. For people who come from countries with universal government provided health care it is a shock to have to buy it. The particular policies the Thai government is pointing to for new O-A visas are overpriced and inadequate and can hardly be called insurance. Then there are young people who think they will be healthy and live forever and don't need insurance. Everyone thinks it makes sense but that doesn't make the requirement palatable to all.

[Genericnic]

3 minutes ago, BUSBY said:

I personally do not understand why it is not reasonable to be expected to have medical insurance cover here in Thailand.

 

Everyone knows or should be aware of the non provisions for expats and should accept responsibility to make sure they have adequate cover.

 

I personally feel obliged to make sure, should I have need of it I am covered and carry a medical card around with me all the time.

 

I am now 75 and came here 27 years ago and have been covered from the day my initial 180 UK I had ran out.

 

Sure the premiums go up but I am safe in the knowledge I can depend on it should the need ever arise.

 

I'm not sure what the alternatives are but do know that without back up funds or M. Ins. your chances of getting free cover are zero as of the last time I read an article covering this important subject.

 

There could also be a massive bill being issued to your loved ones following the initial emergency treatment we are allowed ?????

 

Get insured you know it makes sense

 

Busby

 

 

I fully agree about the need for insurance in Thailand - or anywhere else for that matter - and would not live without it. And like you, I am fully covered by my US based health insurance that has unlimited inpatient and outpatient coverage and does not expire. What I resent is that Thailand is now telling me that in addition to my high quality coverage, I have to buy over priced, second rate insurance from a Thai company just so I can get an O-A visa. The required coverage would not have been sufficient to cover my last hospital visit but my US insurance did so with no problem.

 

David

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 hours ago, Sheryl said:

The police order specifies O-A (issuance of O-X already had an insurance requirement). Some people think despite this that extension of stay under a regular O also falls under this order. Makes no sense to me, otherwise why specify O-A? But we shall see. I would advise anyone on an extension of stay for retirement that ends soon to ho talk to their local IO.

 

I see it this way, Sheryl:

 

--The current order clearly applies to OA visa holders.

 

--The inclusion of the OA insurance language in the newly revised requirements for retirement extensions language (section 6) creates at least a reasonable likelihood (not not yet settled) they're going to enforce it against extensions of stay that date back to prior OA visas....

 

--And then earlier today, we have poster "LoveThailandElite", who correctly posted on the arrival of the OA requirement, posting to say that the authorities have plans in the works to extend the insurance requirement to all non-immigrant visa holders and extensions.

 

 

Ask yourself, which way does the wind appear to be blowing?

Edited October 13, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[BertM]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Did you contact him in the last few days?

Yes. I called him on Friday because I am leaving this week and wanted to make sure I wouldn't have any problems when I return.

[Thaidream]

3 hours ago, Tuvoc said:

Well, he does state that they have to wait until they see how Immigration will interpret it and apply it. We don't know for sure. But crucially he says that the Thai Lawyers on his staff have also been through the original Thai language Order. How many here have done that ? There could be something subtlety different with the English translation.

 

In any case - so when I retire next year I'll be getting the Marriage Visa. I was wondering which to get - marriage or retirement. Now the decision is easy for me.

\there is no inconsistency bewtween English and Thai- ONLY- means only and that is what the Thai Police order says- applies only to an O-A Visa iissued after 31 October  19.  The order is clear.

 

1.   Since the OA can only be issued in your home country  Thai Embassy/Consulate- they will want to see the proof on Insurance just like they would for the O-X Visa.  Once the visa is issued- there would be no reason to check the requirement again upon entry at the airport. The Airport Io's do not check the financials or the  medical- why would they even consider checking for insurance?

 

2.  The Insurance requirement applies to any O-a issued after 31 October 2019- so any extension within Thailand would involve making sure the  Insurance is valid for the extension period.

 

3.  Anyone with an O-A dated prior to 31 October 2019- is exempt from the requirement-  They are grandfather and all extension thereafter are issued based upon the original date of the Vsa.  IMO Grandfathering is approved.  There is a letter issued by Immigration that indicstes the same.  One can extended their stay off the original visa add infinitum based on the requirements in force upon issuance of the original Visa. No requirements are applied retroactive hence the 200K requirement for financials prior to a certain date.

 

4,  The only possible thing an airport Io would be interested in is the date in one's original O-A.  Any  date after the  31st october 2019 may  cause further questions.  I cannot imagine- an airport IO asking for insurance verification for each person entering- they don't do it for financials; medicals or other.  Why would they do it for an O-a when the Embassy has already verified all the requirements.

 

[lupin]

25 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I see it this way, Sheryl:

 

--The current order clearly applies to OA visa holders.

 

--The inclusion of the OA insurance language in the newly revised requirements for retirement extensions language (section 6) creates at least a reasonable likelihood (not not yet settled) they're going to enforce it against extensions of stay that date back to prior OA visas....

 

--And then earlier today, we have poster "LoveThailandElite", who correctly posted on the arrival of the OA requirement, posting to say that the authorities have plans in the works to extend the insurance requirement to all non-immigrant visa holders and extensions.

 

 

Ask yourself, which way does the wind appear to be blowing?

If the stated goal is to have 50+ long stay visitors in Thailand covered by health insurance. Then I agree it makes no sense at all to limit this specifically and only to O A visas obtained outside the kingdom and then possibly extensions of only those OAs,  then ignore all others on other types of NON O,  and in doing so,  create a clear loophole for those over 50 to skirt the stated goal.

[Tuvoc]

14 minutes ago, lupin said:

If the stated goal is to have 50+ long stay visitors in Thailand covered by health insurance. Then I agree it makes no sense at all to limit this specifically and only to O A visas obtained outside the kingdom and then possibly extensions of only those OAs,  then ignore all others on other types of NON O,  and in doing so,  create a clear loophole for those over 50 to skirt the stated goal.

 

Yes you would think they want to be consistent across the board. But yet, what about marriage extensions ? Someone over 50 married to a Thai and living in Thailand possibly with children. Would they break up a family and insist that the spouse leaves the country if he or she is unable to get or afford insurance ? I think I know the answer to that, they might well do.

 

[lupin]

2 minutes ago, Tuvoc said:

 

Yes you would think they want to be consistent across the board. But yet, what about marriage extensions ? Someone over 50 married to a Thai and living in Thailand possibly with children. Would they break up a family and insist that the spouse leaves the country if he or she is unable to get or afford insurance ? I think I know the answer to that, they might well do.

 

I'm dubious as to whether they give a monkeys left testicle about the effect their policies have on us farang or those in our nexus.

[Thaidream]

16 minutes ago, lupin said:

If the stated goal is to have 50+ long stay visitors in Thailand covered by health insurance. Then I agree it makes no sense at all to limit this specifically and only to O A visas obtained outside the kingdom and then possibly extensions of only those OAs,  then ignore all others on other types of NON O,  and in doing so,  create a clear loophole for those over 50 to skirt the stated goal.

It makes perefect sense if you are thai- they may  eventually want to force insurance coverage on everyone but they are afraid it will drive many  long stayers away-  they started with the Non X- it failed- now they are trying the non O-A- if  the  long stayers buy in to this it will most likely be extended to all Nonm Os and that will include the Elite and Education Visa-  they will find out that Thailand will not be the prefered destination of anyone and people will vote with their feet-

 

  I would suspect if they do  eventually include all Non Os- they will 'grandfather' anyone who has a current entry and extension.   IMO the police order change is clear-  ONLY (their words not mind) applies to the Non O-A and it only applies to those visa holders issued after 31 October 2019. 

 

Anyone implyinf or suggesting anything differnet is speculating- When you show me in writing via a change in the police order specifying it applies to all long stay people I will believe it. Otherwise- I will continue to plan my financials  and other documentation for my next marriage extension based upon the police order that is in force.

[Thaidream]

8 minutes ago, Tuvoc said:

Yes you would think they want to be consistent across the board. But yet, what about marriage extensions ? Someone over 50 married to a Thai and living in Thailand possibly with children. Would they break up a family and insist that the spouse leaves the country if he or she is unable to get or afford insurance ? I think I know the answer to that, they might well do.

They will NOT do it as they know full well that making it imposible for families to be together is in violation of the universal declaration of humn rights-  hence they provide a Non O Visa good for 90 days to those married to a Thai and they do not limit these type of Visas.

 

Retirees are in a separate category and they can make  their own regiulations to either restrict or encourage  these categories of people just like other countries do.

All Western countries have a special visa cateories for those married and these are always different that the other categories.  There is not a quota on entry numbers and the requirements are very similar across the board between countries.

[lupin]

3 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

It makes perefect sense if you are thai- they may  eventually want to force insurance coverage on everyone but they are afraid it will drive many  long stayers away-  they started with the Non X- it failed- now they are trying the non O-A- if  the  long stayers buy in to this it will most likely be extended to all Nonm Os and that will include the Elite and Education Visa-  they will find out that Thailand will not be the prefered destination of anyone and people will vote with their feet-

 

  I would suspect if they do  eventually include all Non Os- they will 'grandfather' anyone who has a current entry and extension.   IMO the police order change is clear-  ONLY (their words not mind) applies to the Non O-A and it only applies to those visa holders issued after 31 October 2019. 

 

Anyone implyinf or suggesting anything differnet is speculating- When you show me in writing via a change in the police order specifying it applies to all long stay people I will believe it. Otherwise- I will continue to plan my financials  and other documentation for my next marriage extension based upon the police order that is in force.

you lay down 2 paragraphs of pure speculation... only to then say "Anyone implying or suggesting anything different is speculating"

 

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, lupin said:

you lay down 2 paragraphs of pure speculation... only to then say "Anyone implying or suggesting anything different is speculating

I am not speculating about the current police order for  Insurance- it clearly says ONLY, ONLy, ONLY for O-A type Visa.  Read the police order-  you people are going on and on about every doomsday scenarion on earth-  

 

My speculation comes in when I comment on whether it  will ever apply to the rest of the Visa catories-  My specualtion is based upon many decades of having every Visa category there is except an immigrant Visa and how the authorities have handled these issues in the past.  Most times- regarding these issues- they have 'grandfathered' holders of the their current Visa except when they raised the income requirements for those  married to a Thai from 250K to 400K but they allows a one year phase in.

 

According to you- your speculation is better than mine- give me  the number of the police order that states you are right and I am wrong. You can't because it doesn't exist.

[lupin]

3 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I am not speculating about the current police order for  Insurance- it clearly says ONLY, ONLy, ONLY for O-A type Visa.  Read the police order-  you people are going on and on about every doomsday scenarion on earth-  

 

My speculation comes in when I comment on whether it  will ever apply to the rest of the Visa catories-  My specualtion is based upon many decades of having every Visa category there is except an immigrant Visa and how the authorities have handled these issues in the past.  Most times- regarding these issues- they have 'grandfathered' holders of the their current Visa except when they raised the income requirements for those  married to a Thai from 250K to 400K but they allows a one year phase in.

 

According to you- your speculation is better than mine- give me  the number of the police order that states you are right and I am wrong. You can't because it doesn't exist.

I wasn't speculating.... I said "if the stated goal is etc... then it makes sense that... " I've always maintained in this thread and others that at present the only thing that is clear and relevant is what is in the police order.

Edited October 13, 2019 by lupin
gram

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

\there is no inconsistency bewtween English and Thai- ONLY- means only and that is what the Thai Police order says- applies only to an O-A Visa iissued after 31 October  19.  The order is clear.

 

1.   Since the OA can only be issued in your home country  Thai Embassy/Consulate- they will want to see the proof on Insurance just like they would for the O-X Visa.  Once the visa is issued- there would be no reason to check the requirement again upon entry at the airport. The Airport Io's do not check the financials or the  medical- why would they even consider checking for insurance?

 

2.  The Insurance requirement applies to any O-a issued after 31 October 2019- so any extension within Thailand would involve making sure the  Insurance is valid for the extension period.

 

3.  Anyone with an O-A dated prior to 31 October 2019- is exempt from the requirement-  They are grandfather and all extension thereafter are issued based upon the original date of the Vsa.  IMO Grandfathering is approved.  There is a letter issued by Immigration that indicstes the same.  One can extended their stay off the original visa add infinitum based on the requirements in force upon issuance of the original Visa. No requirements are applied retroactive hence the 200K requirement for financials prior to a certain date.

 

4,  The only possible thing an airport Io would be interested in is the date in one's original O-A.  Any  date after the  31st october 2019 may  cause further questions.  I cannot imagine- an airport IO asking for insurance verification for each person entering- they don't do it for financials; medicals or other.  Why would they do it for an O-a when the Embassy has already verified all the requirements.

 

 

You're making a bunch of presumptions there, including some that are clearly at adds with the rules and procedures for OAs that Immigration has already spelled out, such as them checking all OAs for insurance coverage compliance after the Oct. 31 policy change date.

 

[Isaanbiker]

On 10/9/2019 at 2:44 PM, ubonjoe said:

Yes

That is what the order states.

With all respect, they only have to make a new law/regulation. 

 

 And all of a sudden are all non-immigrant permissions, be it a visa or an extension of stay, included. 

 

  Let's hope not, but when I see how things are changing here, it wouldn't surprise me. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

21 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

They will NOT do it as they know full well that making it imposible for families to be together is in violation of the universal declaration of humn rights-  hence they provide a Non O Visa good for 90 days to those married to a Thai and they do not limit these type of Visas.

 

There's nothing in the current announcements or documents coming out of Immigration or other parts of the government, as yet, pertaining to marriage extensions of stay.

 

However, there is this warning that surfaced today:

 

 

Believe it, or choose to disregard it, at your own peril.

 

[Thaidream]

1 minute ago, lupin said:

wasn't speculating.... I said "if the stated goal is etc... then it makes sense that... " I've always maintained in this thread and others that at present the only thing that is clear and relevant is what is in the police order.

Good. then we agree that the current  police order states O-A visa for insurance. 

 

Could they ahnge the requirments in the future- they could and they probably want to and they are using the O-A as a test to see how it will be accepted.  If it is accepted by most- they will go forward but if it fails (as I think it will) just as the O-X has failed they will think twice about  applying the requirement broadly.   In the last several years since the O-X has been available- I know of only 1 person who has this Visa.  It is an abject failure. The requirements are too high.

 

As I mentioned- the marriage Visa is a separate category and  a single entry has no financial or other  requirements other than proof of marriage- keeping a husband and wife apart are in violation of the UN Declaration of Human Rights and even Thailand has agreed to abide by its provisions

 

.  There is also the question of reciprocity-  Both the Us and UK  have  an approximate financial requirement of around $21,00 for an Immigrant Visa with the insurance requirment niot stated but implies that a spouse in the UK becomes eligible for  the NHS and in America the spouse is added to the applicants policy. In either event- the sponsor is responsible for their spouse and the paperwork states the same.

 

The OA Visa applies to retirement only and  has no bearing on marriage extensions. If we are speculationg- the powers to be can increase the  money in the bank or monthly income requirements- increase the insurance coverage- ask for  complete medical examintions and on and on but they know at some point- long stayers simply won't do it.

[lupin]

1 minute ago, Thaidream said:

Good. then we agree that the current  police order states O-A visa for insurance. 

 

Could they ahnge the requirments in the future- they could and they probably want to and they are using the O-A as a test to see how it will be accepted.  If it is accepted by most- they will go forward but if it fails (as I think it will) just as the O-X has failed they will think twice about  applying the requirement broadly.   In the last several years since the O-X has been available- I know of only 1 person who has this Visa.  It is an abject failure. The requirements are too high.

 

As I mentioned- the marriage Visa is a separate category and  a single entry has no financial or other  requirements other than proof of marriage- keeping a husband and wife apart are in violation of the UN Declaration of Human Rights and even Thailand has agreed to abide by its provisions

 

.  There is also the question of reciprocity-  Both the Us and UK  have  an approximate financial requirement of around $21,00 for an Immigrant Visa with the insurance requirment niot stated but implies that a spouse in the UK becomes eligible for  the NHS and in America the spouse is added to the applicants policy. In either event- the sponsor is responsible for their spouse and the paperwork states the same.

 

The OA Visa applies to retirement only and  has no bearing on marriage extensions. If we are speculationg- the powers to be can increase the  money in the bank or monthly income requirements- increase the insurance coverage- ask for  complete medical examintions and on and on but they know at some point- long stayers simply won't do it.

you understand we're saying the same damn thing right?

[Thaidream]

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

You're making a bunch of presumptions there, including some that are clearly at adds with the rules and procedures for OAs that Immigration has already spelled out, such as them checking all OAs for insurance coverage compliance after the Oct. 31 policy change date.

What reason would an IO at an airport check for insurance covereage after 31 October when the Embassy/Consulate would be required to  verify the financials; the police report' the medical and the insurance.  The IO at the aiprot never checks the financials again- why would they check for jnsurance. Makes no sense-  

 

The intent of the police order is to have the IO at immigration in Thailand check the insurance along with the financials etc when a person applies for extension of stay.

 

I may be wrong but it is totally illogical to check the insurance at the aiprot and never check the other elements. IMO it will not be done. Howevere, if one wants to plan for the worst- get your insurance policy- have it translated to Thai speifuing the requirements are met and present it to the IO if asked,  I won't be doing it- but others may want to do it.

Edited October 13, 2019 by Thaidream

[Tuvoc]

42 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

I would suspect if they do  eventually include all Non Os- they will 'grandfather' anyone who has a current entry and extension.   IMO the police order change is clear-  ONLY (their words not mind) applies to the Non O-A and it only applies to those visa holders issued after 31 October 2019. 

 

 

That would be fair and sensible, i.e. don't move the goalposts for existing retirees, but apply the changes to new retirees.

Edited October 13, 2019 by Tuvoc

[Huckenfell]

On 10/9/2019 at 3:08 PM, ubonjoe said:

At this time I would assume it is for those issued after the order goes into effect.

A bit hard to enforce it for a visa that was issued this month for example since the insurance was not required. Would immigration deny entry in that case.

I think immigration will have to clarify that. 

As of today insurance is still not required for a OA according to the MFA or Consular Affairs website and two embassies I checked.

Thanks Joe, but i am confused as to whether i can use my second entry on my O-A which expires in Jan., without the insurance,which i know i cannot get.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

12 minutes ago, Huckenfell said:

Thanks Joe, but i am confused as to whether i can use my second entry on my O-A which expires in Jan., without the insurance,which i know i cannot get.

 

I believe it was member SpokaneAl who posted the other day that he's planning to return to Thailand on Oct. 31 or so with a previously issued O-A visa, and hopefully he'll post back with what he encounters.

 

I'm assuming we'll start hearing pretty quickly after Oct. 31 on whether or not the insurance requirement is being enforced against previously issued OAs that make entries after the effective date of the insurance requirement.

 

Not that Immigration thus far has been a whit of help in clarifying that rather significant question...

 

Edited October 13, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK