Jomtien says extensions need to show Insurance

[ubonjoe]

2 hours ago, hereforgood said:

He was told by the staff at desk 8 that he not need this time but he WOULD have to provide the insurance when he extended next year.

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.

[RedPill]

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?

 

 

 

 

[doctormann]

1 minute ago, RedPill said:

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. 

 

 

 

 

Well, it certainly was back in 2006 and i don't think that anything has changed.

I obtained my original O-A in 2004 and entered Thailand on that visa in October that year.  I took a break to the UK in July 2005 and then re-entered Thailand using the same visa,  You can do this and you get another year's stay so this took me up to July 2006.  I then obtained a one-year extension and have been extending annually ever since.

 

[hereforgood]

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.

I'm guessing we won't have to wait long just till the end of this month and we'll start to see reports coming back of others extending this will have an effect on me as well unless they recognized the government insurance that I continue to have having been an employee here and continued it myself

Sent from my LG-H990 using Tapatalk

[jacko45k]

1 hour ago, Pattaya46 said:

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

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

At this time it doesn't. I think pool lounger gossip has as much value as bar-stool gossip. Particularly so early in the furor. 

I am due to renew late November, perhaps I will find out then or before.

[Momofarang]

4 minutes ago, doctormann said:

I also don't see the relevance of differentiating between retirement and marriage extensions - if they do so.  Are there no married foreigners here that are over 50 years of age?  

I certainly do. On one hand you have a group of "gentlemen" whose sole purpose for coming and staying in Thailand was to stretch their pension Pound in a third world country and indulge in the various pleasures on offer. On the other you have men who support families, sometimes extended families some are already struggling and may be coerced to leave their loved ones behind without livelihood.

Now, from what I have been reading I cannot be certain that people on marriage extensions are/will be spared the requirement to bribe the Thai insurance business in order to stay with their families. Selfishly, as I am financially resilient, I just hope their are pushing way to far and the whole scam will blow up in a puff of face saving within a year or two.

[Pilotman]

Speculation is just that, speculation, but one thing is fairly clear, if it doesn't come this year, it will come at some point in the not too distant future. When it does come, I am hoping for a 'self insuring provision', whereby, for example, the presently required 800K bank 'bond'  can be increased (1.5 million?) to cater for unexpected medical costs, if expats applying for an extension of stay wish to self insure. 

[RedPill]

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????

 

 

 

[jacko45k]

5 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

On the other you have men who support families, sometimes extended families some are already struggling and may be coerced to leave their loved ones behind without livelihood

And I thought marriage extensions for over 50s were just for people who couldn't afford retirement extensions and would tolerate being humiliated to enjoy the saving! It's like buying a Boxster because you can't afford a 911. 

(This is called a joke)

[doctormann]

3 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

I certainly do. On one hand you have a group of "gentlemen" whose sole purpose for coming and staying in Thailand was to stretch their pension Pound in a third world country and indulge in the various pleasures on offer. On the other you have men who support families, sometimes extended families some are already struggling and may be coerced to leave their loved ones behind without livelihood.

Now, from what I have been reading I cannot be certain that people on marriage extensions are/will be spared the requirement to bribe the Thai insurance business in order to stay with their families. Selfishly, as I am financially resilient, I just hope their are pushing way to far and the whole scam will blow up in a puff of face saving within a year or two.

You are missing the point, I think.

If you are over 50 then you are a 'risk' apparently so what does it matter if you are married or single?

You should also be aware that not all married foreigners are on marriage extensions.  The retirement extension is less of a hassle - but does need twice the finance, of course.

[MJKT2014]

9 minutes ago, doctormann said:

If you are over 50 then you are a 'risk'

A risk to what? I'm over 60 and still doing and passing bi annual medicals for working offshore. Everyone has a different physiology, lifestyle and genealogical lineage, it isn't simple math.

[kingofthemountain]

2 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

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

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

Agreed, particularly Emptypockets and Simonsomething (Around 100 posts or more together

in the thread) repeating non stop ''relax guys extensions are not concerned...''

I was more for waiting to see in which style the differents immigration offices 

are going to deal with all the ''subtilities'' of the new requirment,but i am not surprised

they took a big bag and put all of us inside, because it's much more convenient and easy for them.

If it's confirmed, it's unfortunately my last year here, i am not going to subscribe at this obvious scam.

[doctormann]

1 minute ago, MJKT2014 said:

A risk to what? I'm over 60 and still doing and passing bi annual medicals for working offshore. Everyone has a different physiology, lifestyle and genealogical lineage, it isn't simple math.

Agree totally but this is not how Thailand sees it.

[ubonjoe]

15 minutes ago, RedPill said:

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

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.

[RedPill]

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.

 

 

 

 

[overherebc]

Use an O-A visa the right way and you don't need to go near an Imm' office for two years.

[Peterw42]

1 minute ago, overherebc said:

Use an O-A visa the right way and you don't need to go near an Imm' office for two years.

Thats right but it is unclear how the insurance will work for the 2nd year stay after the visa has expired.

[overherebc]

1 minute ago, Peterw42 said:

Thats right but it is unclear how the insurance will work for the 2nd year stay after the visa has expired.

Get your second year entry two days before the visa use by date then fly out/in (90 days) for the second year with a re-entry multi from the airport.

[kingofthemountain]

54 minutes ago, RedPill said:

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?

 

 

 

 

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.

[jacko45k]

1 minute ago, overherebc said:

Get your second year entry two days before the visa use by date then fly out/in (90 days) for the second year with a re-entry multi from the airport.

When you fly in 2 days before Visa expiry you will be required to show insurance  for one year to qualify for  1 year permission of stay. If insurance is less, permit will be less accordingly. 

[Sheryl]

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.

@Ubonjoe , isn't it also the case that O is no longer offered by Emassies/consulates for retirement and as beenreplaced by the O-A and O-X? In which case part of the thinking may be to focus on newly arriving retirees since over time the older arrivees will die offanyhow?

 

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

 

 

 

[kingofthemountain]

56 minutes ago, Pilotman said:

Speculation is just that, speculation, but one thing is fairly clear, if it doesn't come this year, it will come at some point in the not too distant future. When it does come, I am hoping for a 'self insuring provision', whereby, for example, the presently required 800K bank 'bond'  can be increased (1.5 million?) to cater for unexpected medical costs, if expats applying for an extension of stay wish to self insure. 

The thai bank system can already ''play'' with 400 000 all year long and 800 000 during 5 months

with my money, why on earth do you want now allowed them to ''play'' with 1 500 000??

Do you never have enough of the scams? Or have you illimited funds?

[overherebc]

10 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

@Ubonjoe , isn't it also the case that O is no longer offered by Emassies/consulates for retirement and as beenreplaced by the O-A and O-X? In which case part of the thinking may be to focus on newly arriving retirees since over time the older arrivees will die offanyhow?

 

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

 

 

 

Sheryl, that sounds so morbid.

Meant in a nice way, but you could be right.

[barryofthailand]

I did my retirement extension last month and their was no mention of insurance. I was given a document to read of requirements for next time I renew and no mention of any insurance requirements 

[jacko45k]

4 minutes ago, barryofthailand said:

I did my retirement extension last month and their was no mention of insurance. I was given a document to read of requirements for next time I renew and no mention of any insurance requirements 

Likely not, all quite new. My neighbour did his Wednesday and also no mention.

[Pilotman]

8 minutes ago, kingofthemountain said:

The thai bank system can already ''play'' with 400 000 all year long and 800 000 during 5 months

with my money, why on earth do you want now allowed them to ''play'' with 1 500 000??

Do you never have enough of the scams? Or have you illimited funds?

I don't want it, I just prefer that to paying some rip off premium to an insurance company, for next to no return that I can use at my age.  I dont accept your premise that the 800K is a scam. Its my money, sitting in a Thai bank and getting interest.  Its not disappearing into a black hole as a premium would.  No I don't have unlimited finds, but I do have enough to self insure.  if I didn't have that, I would still be in the UK, sponging off a free NHS. Any expat who is here who doesn't have either medical insurance, or sufficient funds to self insure is heading for trouble. Some are going to have to face that reality sometime soon, so best recognise that and plan for it now.  

[kingofthemountain]

4 minutes ago, Pilotman said:

I don't want it, I just prefer that to paying some rip off premium to an insurance company, for next to no return that I can use at my age.  I dont accept your premise that the 800K is a scam. Its my money, sitting in a Thai bank and getting interest.  Its not disappearing into a black hole as a premium would.  No I don't have unlimited finds, but I do have enough to self insure.  if I didn't have that, I would still be in the UK, sponging off a free NHS. Any expat who is here who doesn't have either medical insurance, or sufficient funds to self insure is heading for trouble. Some are going to have to face that reality sometime soon, so best recognise that and plan for it now.  

you are right

the word ''scam'' it's not accurate for the 800 000 because yes the money don't disappear 

and some interests are paid BUT you can not dispose of it anyway you want or you could 

not hit the financial requirments.

And yes of course i agree with you about to have enough funds to auto insure

and it's better than paid a huge anual fee for an insurance which cover you for with a ridiculous amount

[ubonjoe]

34 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

@Ubonjoe , isn't it also the case that O is no longer offered by Emassies/consulates for retirement and as beenreplaced by the O-A and O-X? In which case part of the thinking may be to focus on newly arriving retirees since over time the older arrivees will die offanyhow?

Only at some embassies and official consulates in some of the home country of the person applying.

The embassy and honorary consulates in the UK will issue a single entry non-o for retirement with financial proof.  One cannot be applied for anywhere in the USA or Australia.

There are also a few honorary consulates that can still issue them.

[RedPill]

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

 

 

 

[Lumbini]

Soon possibly you will need to show this proof of health insurance when you fo your 90 day check in ( just watch [emoji102]