Jump to content

Mandatory health insurance for Non O-A visa effective from 31 October


webfact

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, sometimewoodworker said:

You are dead wrong. It is specifically required and people who have gone into immigration offices are being told that the insurance WILL be required, police order 548/2562 section 2.22 item 6

E28ED0F7-C021-4BB1-85DE-EA27AF35E2F9.jpeg.cf104a4aafdcbb427d904bd20b41b72b.jpeg

 

I also think the rules do not strictly apply to O-A visas granted (bought) after Oct 30, 2019. Note page 5 of the English translation of the new orders. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1B2icrv51NImXmu-QrsEvLG6jbh2Ulwl8/view

 

Reading the first paragraph and clause 2 (my highlight), how does it not apply to someone already here on a valid O-A visa before Oct 31, 2019 when they exit and re-enter after Oct 30, 2019? (that is a question).

 

Therefore, when an alien, who has been granted Non-immigrant Visa Class O-A from an overseas Royal Thai Embassy with the purpose of retirement (not exceeding one year), enters the Kingdom, an immigration officer shall abide by the following practices for permitting an alien to stay in the Kingdom, effective from October, 31, 2019. (enforcement starts 31/10/19, nothing about when visa was granted)

 

1.   An alien, who has been granted Non-immigrant Visa Class O-A for single entry or multiple entry and enters the Kingdom for the first time, will be permitted to stay in the Kingdom for a coverage period of health insurance for not exceeding 1 year. An immigration officer shall check any remarks on a visa issued by and overseas Royal Thia Embassy for consideration and approval.

 

2.   An alien, who has been granted Non-immigrant Visa Class O-A for multiple entry and enters the Kingdom from the second time onwards, will be permitted to stay in the Kingdom for the remaining coverage period of health insurance for net exceeding 1 year. (nothing about when alien first entered Thailand)

 

3.   An alien, who has been granted Non-immigrant Visa Class O-A for multiple entry but the coverage period of health insurance has already expired, even if the visa is still valid, will not be permitted to enter the Kingdom. However, the said alien can buy a health insurance in Thailand in order to be permitted to enter the Kingdom for a coverage period of health insurance for not exceeding 1 year.

 

4.   In case the permission of stay in the Kingdom exceeds the coverage period of health insurance, an immigration officer shall apply mutatin mutandid to Order of the Immigration Bureau no. 115/2553 dated June 29, 2919 concerning the Amendment of an immigration stamp in a passport and the Order of the Immigration Bureau no. 79/2557 dated April 1, 2014 concerning the Guideline in case of an alien's granted permission of stay in the Kingdom is not meet a visa class or visa exemption.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 378
  • Created
  • Last Reply
22 minutes ago, sometimewoodworker said:

You are dead wrong, and have confused the OA visa and an extension of stay.

 

what I said was "At the moment the best choice for most people who have had an OA that has been extended”

note if you have an extension you DO NOT have a visa it has expired 

 

It is specifically required for an extension of stay and people who have gone into immigration offices are being told that the insurance WILL be required, police order 548/2562 section 2.22 item 6

E28ED0F7-C021-4BB1-85DE-EA27AF35E2F9.jpeg.cf104a4aafdcbb427d904bd20b41b72b.jpeg

I did not address the point of current visa holders before.
 

However if you currently have a valid Non-OA VISA entry during it’s validity is being stated as not requiring insurance so you may well have a grace period, that depends on the date it expires, of up to 2 years. Though if you have to extend it you WILL need insurance.

 

 

 

Your last sentance is quite bold,

making a statement of what WILL happen, when your talking about Thai immigration! 

 

Since itseems nothing coming from individual officers or even IMMs itself is even clear or consistent as yet.

 

No offence, but as i said, i would wait to see what happens before taking any strategic action. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, niebla said:

The big question is if and when this will apply to Non-O retirement extensions. Some of us already have Thai policies for inpatient and or international policies that cover Thailand medical expenses. Outpatient coverage is just not cost effective as the outpatient costs are low, the policy prices are high and the coverage is minimal.

Just to make a point, outpatient costs are not always as low as you might think.  i can speak here from personal experience.

 

When I was having radiotherapy at Chula, in Bangkok, which is a Thai Red Cross hospital, each session cost 4000 Baht and I had 30 sessions over the space of six weeks.  The sessions were all done as an outpatient and the total cost was far in excess of the 40kBaht that would have been provided by the mandated insurance scheme.

 

In the same year, I also had eight hormone suppression treatments, again as an outpatient, at a cost of 20kBaht  per session so the 40kBaht insurance cover would not have gone very far at all.

 

I think that this points out two things:  outpatient treatment is not necessarily cheap and also the cover offered by the mandated insurance scheme might well be woefully inadequate in some cases.  I'm not defending the scheme in any way - seems like a nice little earner for the insurance companies and of little practical value.

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, rabas said:

4.   In case the permission of stay in the Kingdom exceeds the coverage period of health insurance, an immigration officer shall apply mutatin mutandid to Order of the Immigration Bureau no. 115/2553 dated June 29, 2919 concerning the Amendment of an immigration stamp in a passport and the Order of the Immigration Bureau no. 79/2557 dated April 1, 2014 concerning the Guideline in case of an alien's granted permission of stay in the Kingdom is not meet a visa class or visa exemption.

I take it this section means that Non-OAs will no longer be automatically given a 1-year stamp but will be stamped in for the remainder of their Insurance Policy, e.g. 

  1. Arrive in Thailand on 1st November with a Non-OA & an Insurance Policy that starts on 1st November - Get stamped in for 1 year
  2. Leave Thailand & re-enter on 1st May with same Non-OA/Insurance - Get stamped in for 6 months

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, niebla said:

The big question is if and when this will apply to Non-O retirement extensions. Some of us already have Thai policies for inpatient and or international policies that cover Thailand medical expenses. Outpatient coverage is just not cost effective as the outpatient costs are low, the policy prices are high and the coverage is minimal.

 

They can't apply it to Non-O without first either amending the Immigration Law or issuing a new Cabinet resolution as the one issued in April was specific to OA.

 

Doesn't mean they can't, but does mean we'd have some advance warning. 

 

Also seems unlikely they have plans to do so now or they'd have made the recent Cabinet Resolution broader in the first place.

 

I have excellent international expat cover up to 1 million year, with direct billing arrngements at all the major hospitals here,, and no intention of dropping it in favor of the higher-priced, lower value  policies specified by Immigration.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, doctormann said:

Just to make a point, outpatient costs are not always as low as you might think.  i can speak here from personal experience.

 

When I was having radiotherapy at Chula, in Bangkok, which is a Thai Red Cross hospital, each session cost 4000 Baht and I had 30 sessions over the space of six weeks.  The sessions were all done as an outpatient and the total cost was far in excess of the 40kBaht that would have been provided by the mandated insurance scheme.

 

In the same year, I also had eight hormone suppression treatments, again as an outpatient, at a cost of 20kBaht  per session so the 40kBaht insurance cover would not have gone very far at all.

 

I think that this points out two things:  outpatient treatment is not necessarily cheap and also the cover offered by the mandated insurance scheme might well be woefully inadequate in some cases.  I'm not defending the scheme in any way - seems like a nice little earner for the insurance companies and of little practical value.

Would outpatient insurance cover these treatments? I agree outpatient treatments can be expensive but the Bupa and Aetna polices that I have had would only cover part, not all of these costs. My concern is the cost of the outpatient insurance vs. what they would pay for. Self insuring should be considered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

40/400 is by far not enough and the costs are way too high. Here again, governmental incompetence shows its ugly face. Targeted are foreigners on long stay visas, those who retire in Thailand. Means, older people with higher probability to need medical care. Not required are all other visitors. So they just force all high risk customers to take out the insurance while no low risk customers are required to do so. How on earth should that work? The idea of an insurance still is to distribute costs to the whole group of insured members. It only can work if there are bad and good risks.
Reportedly there are 80 000 retirement visa appliactions per year. They all are above 50 years old !

And how about those who already have international insurance coverage with far higher standards? Or those who are already insured in their home countries and keep travelling between home country and Thailand? Do they still have to buy a useless rubbish plan for big money in addition to their own plans?
I don't want to have to buy an insurance just to fulfill requirements while still need a good insurance when travelling abroad.
What a nonsense

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am struggling to understand the situation so can someone please explain what a non O visa is as opposed to a non OA. Non is what? O is what? A stands for what?

I have a non O issued nearly twenty years ago and extend on a retirement basis every year. I am married and used to extend on a marriage basis until it became too much of a hassle.

Will I need insurance to extend next time or when I return from a trip abroad?

Anyone in the know please explain in simple terms what the latest situation is.

Thanking you in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, somo said:

I am struggling to understand the situation so can someone please explain what a non O visa is as opposed to a non OA. Non is what? O is what? A stands for what?

I have a non O issued nearly twenty years ago and extend on a retirement basis every year. I am married and used to extend on a marriage basis until it became too much of a hassle.

Will I need insurance to extend next time or when I return from a trip abroad?

Anyone in the know please explain in simple terms what the latest situation is.

Thanking you in advance


Don’t worry you are not affected if you are not on an OA visa.

 

You are an extension of your permission to stay based on retirement from a Non Immigrant O visa.

 

Only people who hold a current OA visa and possibly those on extension from an OA visa are subject to the mandatory health insurance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On October 9, 2019 at 6:25 PM, Thaifriends said:

Do EU allow long stay foreigners without a mandatory health insurance?  No. Even for a non EU visitors, need travel insurance.

 

So why TH should not implement? Comments in the thread are similar to suggesting that a govt should have first taken their permission. 

 

This discussion is around a year old so there was enough time.

But many people DO have insurance, just not insurance from some dubious Thai insurer. That isn't good enough for immigrations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Suradit69 said:

But many people DO have insurance, just not insurance from some dubious Thai insurer. That isn't good enough for immigrations.


Exactly the point, it's the Thai insurance that is the problem.  The fact that they will not accept any foreign health insurance policy is the real problem and shows the true purpose of the new policy, not to insure that expats have insurance, but to insure that they have insurance that benefits a Thai Company

 

How long till I have to fly Thai International to come to Thailand ? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
1 hour ago, gazzabkk said:

Over 80s..

Does anyone here know what are the requirements for Nonb O-A people here who are over 80 and so unable to obtain insurance?

Any ideas, please?

You obtain a non o.

If you are on extension exit country without a reentry permit. That kills off your O-A. Then you have 2 options. Obtain a non-O at Thai consulate. Or re-enter Thailand on visa exempt and do conversion to non -O at immigration.

Prior to its expiry (90 day's) obtain 12 month extension. No insurance required.

@Peter Denis ....OP, this guy can help you

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

You obtain a non o.

If you are on extension exit country without a reentry permit. That kills off your O-A. Then you have 2 options. Obtain a non-O at Thai consulate. Or re-enter Thailand on visa exempt and do conversion to non -O at immigration.

Prior to its expiry (90 day's) obtain 12 month extension. No insurance required.

Thank you very much, as I expected.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gazzabkk said:

Thank you very much, as I expected.

Just PM-ed you a comprehensive Roadmap outlining all details/options on how to apply for / convert to a Non Imm O - retirement Visa and subsequent extension.

>> To access your PM-messages just click the letter-icon next to your Profile when logged in to the Forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Foreigners were recently told to fxxk off by a Thai minister, and now they ask foreginers, brave enough to remain in toyland, to pay even more money for the pleasure of racism.

 

Lost soles, seeking attention in a land that hates them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just love the frothing over this 

 

Nothing gets a UK expat seething more than the thought of foreigners coming into the U.K. and abusing the NHS system yet think they should be able to abuse the Thai system (which has been repeatedly stated is the reason for the changes for all you conspiracist theorists) 

 

I’m not sure you’re going to find many countries that will want people that cannot or will not cover themselves. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Sonhia said:

Foreigners were recently told to fxxk off by a Thai minister, and now they ask foreginers, brave enough to remain in toyland, to pay even more money for the pleasure of racism.

 

Lost soles, seeking attention in a land that hates them.

Pure paranoia 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...