11 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

27 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

I have never understood these different abreviations: O, O-A;
I do not know what they mean.

The basic difference is an 'O' type Visa only allows a 90 day entry.

The O-A Visa allows a 1 year entry.

 

OA > "Annual"

OX > "X = 10 years"

?

10 minutes ago, john terry1001 said:

Can you not get a multi entry non O based on marriage from Savanakhet, or have they now stopped it?

Yes...

22 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I don't know. Possibly refers to spouse and children who piggyback onto an extension of stay for retirement.

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

Sheryl, what happened to post 278 that you wrote describing how things work in the Thai government. That was the best description I have ever seen and wanted to print it out and send to a friend but it was gone.  

44 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

Hope you can explain me what I have exactly and if I need to buy an health insurance.

And have you extended that Non-Imm-O yet.... based on what?

If you have an extension based on marriage to a Thai, absolutely no worries.

If you have one based on being retired and over 50, very likely no worries, as you started with a Non-Imm-O.

There is even a school of thought that ALL extensions will be excluded from insurance requirements, irrespective of initial Visa on first Extension.

Rest easy.

 

 

17 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

The wife of a friend,who has serious health problems,

panicked when my wife told her retirees may have to

get expensive insurance,(if they could).

 

So she was straight on the phone to Chiang Mai Immigration,

to get clarification, they told her OA visa holders have to have

insurance after the end of this month, and next year,other

retirees will also have to have insurance ! I don't know how

he could possible get cover,he's 73,had cover from BUPA,

but claimed a lot to get treatment for lung cancer,and treatment

on his eyes,I expect there are many more here,with families

that are in the same situation,over 70,existing conditions,

I wonder if the Government are sparing a thought for the likes

of them...........no i think not.

egards worgeordie

 

"So she was straight on the phone to Chiang Mai Immigration,

to get clarification, they told her OA visa holders have to have

insurance after the end of this month, and next year,other

retirees will also have to have insurance"

 

That's for sure and that's why making the jump from an O-A to an O is probably going to be a waste of time, it will be a temporary reprieve and nothing more.

16 minutes ago, griffon2011 said:

Sheryl, what happened to post 278 that you wrote describing how things work in the Thai government. That was the best description I have ever seen and wanted to print it out and send to a friend but it was gone.  

The post number may have subsequently changed since this thread was closed then re-opened after several posts with dubious/incorrect info were deleted.

7 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

If you have an extension based on marriage to a Thai, absolutely no worries.

Since 13 years I'm on that visa : " based on marriage to a thai "

 

I went out Thailand once to visit Laos on my MTBike ; I bought an Re-Entry Permit at Sakon Nakhon Immigration  for that .

 

Apart from this little trip to Laos I have never been out of Thailand

 

Thanks a lot to you and Tanoshi 

The policies list ages for acceptance of new members up to 80.. 
 
Someone posted that they can be extended up to 100 (not checked personally) can only imagine the costs of that tho.. Multi hundred k per annum I would think.

Thrte is a thread running in the Health Forum which goes into the details of these policies.

Most will not enrol people past age 65; some not even past 60.

Most will not provide lifetime renewal. Some do not guarantee renewal at all.

There are only 1 or 2 options for people over 70 and only 1 for people over 75.

However it remains unclear if policies from other than the companies listed can be accepted. If they can this will widen the options considerably and probably alliw most people with existing insurance to use the policies they already have (though they might have to upgrade to include OPD).





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

It isn't in effect yet. Come October 31/November 1 actual cases will be reported on. 
Dealing with personal interpretations of an English translation of a Thai language document.
 
My personal belief is this is on the order of "grandfathering" in the insurance regulation. Face it. Factual that persons over the age of 65/70 will find it impossible to procure insurance from the companies listed. The companies all seem to reserve the right to cancel, or not insure "certain" individuals. If these regulations are applied across the board there will be collateral damage in the form of "uninsurable" persons who have established families and dependents. These persons will be forced to leave their families.
 
Again, my personal belief is the Thai Government intends to allow those who are already here to stay. And, I believe the Thai government will require "new" visa procurers to purchase and maintain insurance during their stay in Thailand.
 
Do not let your "permission to stay" expire.   
 

Permissions to stay are never for more than one year. When you extend it is a new permission to stay.

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

35 minutes ago, saengd said:

"So she was straight on the phone to Chiang Mai Immigration,

to get clarification, they told her OA visa holders have to have

insurance after the end of this month, and next year,other

retirees will also have to have insurance"

 

That's for sure and that's why making the jump from an O-A to an O is probably going to be a waste of time, it will be a temporary reprieve and nothing more.

If your married to a Thai switch to an extension based on marriage, then your no longer classed as a retiree.

You can imagine the 6 o'clock new, two years hence:

 

It was reported that year on year debt resulting from unpaid hospital bills has climbed to record highs, a spokesperson said, it's the small price we pay for having a buoyant tourist industry.

 

In other news, the Insurance industry has reported a bumper year for profits, the best since records began.

 

1 hour ago, griffon2011 said:

Sheryl, what happened to post 278 that you wrote describing how things work in the Thai government. That was the best description I have ever seen and wanted to print it out and send to a friend but it was gone.  

 

Actually it vanished because in it I had quoted the post with an image which we are now unsure is accurate and I could nto find a way to edit the quote out.

 

So Iw ill repeat my post here:

 

The problem I have with all the posts spouting conspiracy theories ("they want to drive us out...", "they want to make us all use agents" etc) as well as all those detailing supposed reasons/rationales for the new rules, is that they overlook the multi-level nature of the  process and very different agendas at each level, and the way this culture's very hierarchal orientation and rigid top-down approach affects implementation.

 

In simplified form:

 

1. At top level there is a policy decided upon, for whatever reason. The people who do this, do not develop the details. They pass it to underlings to do so.  And likely just say "Do X" without explaining the intent, because higher-ups aren't supposed to need to explain anything to people below them.

 

2. Mid-level staff  develop the actual regulation, in this case a police order. Quite possibly  without a full understanding of the actual intent of the policymakers. New agendas of the people at this level of the hierarchy may come into play that may have nothing at all to do with those of the original policy makers.  In this instance because it involved health insurance, mid-level people from different government departments along with private sector representatives from the insurance industry were involved in formative discussions. The last of these most definitely had their own agendas and vested interests.

 

3.  TI drafts and issues a police order.  For cultural reasons this is done without asking questions of the top officials who told them to do it, even when they really need to for clarification. Likewise it is done without any consultation with the people lower down the totem pole who will actually implement the order, which might  ensure the wording is clear and  identify and resolve in advance any potential issues with implementing it. 

 

3. Imm offices receive the, often by this time often  garbled or at minimum, confusedly written, directive. It does not come  to them with any context or explanation and they cannot seek clarification or ask questions.  Just like the TV members, they  may have differing beliefs as to what ti is supposed to do, which will influence how they apply it. Others may not care at all -- by now they have grown inured to seemingly pointless or inconsistent directives --  but just try to apply it literally to the best of their understanding, an understanding that may or may not be consistent with the intent of the order which in turn may or may not be consistent with the original intent of the policy makers. In some cases agendas and personal interests of the implementors  also come into play at this juncture, e.g. corruption, agents etc.

 

Between steps 1, 2, and 3 much gets lost, twisted or simply not well conveyed. By the time it gets to implementation it may well no longer serve the original purpose or even go directly against it. Frankly without a major change in institutional culture there is no way it can go otherwise.

 

I am personally not very interested in trying to figure out motives and intentions at different stages with multiple actors, especially since we can only speculate and all that affects us is what comes out at the final step.

 

The  only relevant question in my opinion is, will Imm do anything to clarify and resolve the very different interpretations now rife at the level of Imm offices in implementing this order.

14 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

I am really wondering where the immigration officers that say it applies to those on extensions are reading or getting their info.

Studied the memos in the police order announcement again and noted this in the first one in English.

 

That appears to say it does not apply to a extension of stay for a OA visa entry.

 

may be, but in this case, I would like to read at the end of the sentence " without need to have a Thai insurance ", because here they don't speak of health insurance , they just say that we can stay in Thailand after oct 31 th 

1 hour ago, Tanoshi said:

If your married to a Thai switch to an extension based on marriage, then your no longer classed as a retiree.

yes, but you are still a person of let's say 70-80 years old, same physical condition than a " retired": I am afraid ( I hope I am wrong ) that in the next years, every visa old people will be affected 

3 hours ago, worgeordie said:

they told her OA visa holders have to have

insurance after the end of this month, and next year,other

retirees will also have to have insurance !

 

I guess you could interpret that comment, coming translated thru a Thai, in at least two different ways....

 

1. would be they're applying the O-A visas rule now, and then will start applying it to O-A origin extensions of stay based on retirement when those come up for annual renewal.

 

or

 

2. would they're applying the requirement to O-As and retirement extensions now, and have plans to expand the insurance requirement to other visa classes in the future.

 

i'm wondering if it will be possible to meet the requirements with two policies, sort of an insurance combo method.

 

i have a policy with $1 million coverage, repatriation, lifetime renewal, and i've already passed the moratorium period for my cardiac condition.

 

to keep the premiums low, i've chosen a high deductible and $0 outpatient coverage.

 

i have no plans to cancel this policy, and if it comes down to being required to buy an additional full policy for a couple thousand dollars annually to meet yet another bureaucratic hurdle............no.

 

gosh, thailand is fun and all, but we eventually get to a point where it's no longer worth the hassle.

 

so short story long, is it possible to buy a policy that ONLY covers 40k baht outpatient, and would two policies be acceptable?

 

Just now, ChouDoufu said:

i'm wondering if it will be possible to meet the requirements with two policies, sort of an insurance combo method.

 

i have a policy with $1 million coverage, repatriation, lifetime renewal, and i've already passed the moratorium period for my cardiac condition.

 

to keep the premiums low, i've chosen a high deductible and $0 outpatient coverage.

 

i have no plans to cancel this policy, and if it comes down to being required to buy an additional full policy for a couple thousand dollars annually to meet yet another bureaucratic hurdle............no.

 

gosh, thailand is fun and all, but we eventually get to a point where it's no longer worth the hassle.

 

so short story long, is it possible to buy a policy that ONLY covers 40k baht outpatient, and would two policies be acceptable?

 

I bought 50,000 baht accident insurance at Kasikorn bank. I used it once. It was easy to make a claim and I got the money deposited into my account in 30 days. I wonder if something like that would qualify as outpatient coverage. I also have a high deductible on my Pacific Cross Maxima insurance policy.

5 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I wonder if something like that would qualify as outpatient coverage

Well I doubt it....it would never cover general illnesses that do not require hospitalization. 

45 minutes ago, Aforek said:

yes, but you are still a person of let's say 70-80 years old, same physical condition than a " retired": I am afraid ( I hope I am wrong ) that in the next years, every visa old people will be affected 

If you believe that "every visa old people will be affected" what about visa that fall under the tourist visa class? Hows that going to work? It cant

6 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I bought 50,000 baht accident insurance at Kasikorn bank. I used it once. It was easy to make a claim and I got the money deposited into my account in 30 days. I wonder if something like that would qualify as outpatient coverage. I also have a high deductible on my Pacific Cross Maxima insurance policy.

 

1. accident policies only cover accidents, not general medical conditions. So I seriously doubt any accident only policy would be acceptable.

 

2. the Immigration reg requires the Thai policies to be from the list of specific participating insurers or their proxies. An acceptable policy can't just be from any ole' Thai insurer...

 

But, if someone had two separate policies, they respectively, separately met the IPD OPD coverage amounts spelled out in the order, and were from participating insurers, you might think that would be OK...

 

Except, the MoPH certificate form right now has an insurer specify that their policy meets the 40K AND 400K requirements, not one or the other...  So trying to get a half certification from two different insurers would be interesting...

 

9 minutes ago, Martyp said:

... I also have a high deductible on my Pacific Cross Maxima insurance policy.

I received a mail from this compagny, but what means this story of " deductible", I am not use to this 

thanks 

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I guess you could interpret that comment, coming translated thru a Thai, in at least two different ways....

 

1. would be they're applying the O-A visas rule now, and then will start applying it to O-A origin extensions of stay based on retirement when those come up for annual renewal.

 

or

 

2. would they're applying the requirement to O-As and retirement extensions now, and have plans to expand the insurance requirement to other visa classes in the future.

 

No, it was as I reported, other retirees next year  !, on 0 .

I just hope it never happens as it's going to create many

problems for the older Farangs over 70,with existing

conditions.

I just want to live a quiet life,like many here,but in last

few years it's one thing after another,after great improvements

at Chiang Mai Immigration,no having to que in middle of the night

now to get an extension, they really are enforcing the TM30,and

now the mandatory insurance,I thought they said keeping 800,000 Thb

in the bank,was for that reason.

regards Worgeordie

 

4 minutes ago, lupin said:

If you believe that "every visa old people will be affected" what about visa that fall under the tourist visa class? Hows that going to work? It cant

They did say they were going to take 100 thb off 

every tourist entering Thailand,to cover any that

don't have cover,and maybe skip from Thai hospital

without paying,plus if they have accidents.

regards Worgeordie

 

6 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

No, it was as I reported, other retirees next year  !, on 0 .

I just hope it never happens as it's going to create many

problems for the older Farangs over 70,with existing

conditions.

I

 

You never mentioned the term O visa in your prior post. You just said "other retirees." 

 

There are "retirees" here on either retirement or marriage extensions of stay now whose actual last/most recent visas aren't necessarily O-As or Os...

 

1 hour ago, Aforek said:

yes, but you are still a person of let's say 70-80 years old, same physical condition than a " retired": I am afraid ( I hope I am wrong ) that in the next years, every visa old people will be affected 

The difference is your wife is your medical Insurance Policy.

If nothing else, a good Thai wife will take extremely good care of you wellbeing.

 

If, and pure speculation that the medical Insurance requirement was extended to extensions based on retirement to those who entered on a Non O class Visa, then I believe Thailand would see the biggest exodus of retirees ever.

Some wouldn't qualify for the Insurance based on age, current health status or affordability.

Many would just refuse to be exploited to an overpriced policy offering minimum cover.

It would signal the appropriate time to vote with your feet.

5 hours ago, Assurancetourix said:

have never understood these different abreviations: O, O-A;
I do not know what they mean.

 

Just as the B in a Non-immigrant B visa stands for business, and the ED for education, the O in a Non-immigrant O means other. The A in an O-A means annual. 

Curious how, if it's ever needed, do I prove what visa type I am getting extensions on? I am being granted extensions based on retirement on a Non-Imm B visa but that original visa is in an old passport that has been renewed twice  since then.

1 minute ago, kilt said:

Curious how, if it's ever needed, do I prove what visa type I am getting extensions on?

Usually on the first visa-page of your passport. AFAIK Thai Immigration always reports on a new passport the Visa information of the previous one.

30 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

Usually on the first visa-page of your passport. AFAIK Thai Immigration always reports on a new passport the Visa information of the previous one.

I was wondering the same. My old passport had a couple of stamps for the visa type, started with Non-O, then went to Non-RE. When I recently got a new passport and had everything transferred, there was no stamp of that type in the new passport stating what type of visa I have, just the RETIREMENT stamp with the expiration date.

4 hours ago, Aforek said:

may be, but in this case, I would like to read at the end of the sentence " without need to have a Thai insurance ", because here they don't speak of health insurance , they just say that we can stay in Thailand after oct 31 th 

Not needed since everything else states insurance is only needed for OA visas applied for on/or after the 31st and when entering the country.