Mandatory health insurance for retirees falls flat as ‘Non-Imm O’ visa loophole exposed

[gk10002000]

On 10/28/2019 at 2:27 AM, DogNo1 said:

I suggest that you enter on a visa waiver and bring with you 400,000 if you are legally married or 800,000 if you need to do a retirement visa. Put your money in a Thai bank right away, then convert your visa waiver to a ninety-day Non-O about fifteen days in.  Near the end of the ninety days, apply for a one-year extension of stay.  Avoid the O-A confusion.

 

BTW, nobody has posted the financial requirements for extending an O-A visa in-country.  If they are the same as for a Non-O, then the basis for your stay should be changed to Non-O. There is no logic to requiring people who are satisfying the requirements for a Non-O to buy insurance.

I would strongly caution about putting any significant money on deposit into Thailand.  If the latest insurance rules changes haven't convinced you that there are ever changing rules, policies, interpretations, risks, than so be it. 

[lkv]

2 hours ago, elviajero said:

If you had a Non B they would have been in their rights to send you out of the country for a Non O. And had they insisted on you having a Non O you couldn’t have changed your visa category from B to O at immigration.

Why? Have you heard of any other country on this planet (apart from Cambodia maybe), where people have to exit the country (translation: do a visa run -???) to get a new type of visa and it cannot be changed in country? Or is Thailand a little bit more special?

Or maybe they are not following their own laws?

Or they have no laws?

Which one is it?

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[elviajero]

1 hour ago, lkv said:

3 hours ago, elviajero said:

If you had a Non B they would have been in their rights to send you out of the country for a Non O. And had they insisted on you having a Non O you couldn’t have changed your visa category from B to O at immigration.

Why?

Because a Non B is issued specifically for someone to enter the country to work.

 

1 hour ago, lkv said:

Have you heard of any other country on this planet (apart from Cambodia maybe), where people have to exit the country (translation: do a visa run -???) to get a new type of visa and it cannot be changed in country? Or is Thailand a little bit more special?

It doesn't really matter what other countries do, we have to accept Thailands rules.

 

1 hour ago, lkv said:

Or maybe they are not following their own laws?

Or they have no laws?

Which one is it?

Immigration - under the rules - are only supposed to issue an extension of stay based on the category of visa used to enter the country. 

 

e.g.

O = Family, retirement, volunteering, etc.

B = Work

ED = Study

 

When someone wants to change the reason for their stay from the reason they entered the country immigration will not change the category of the visa in the applicants passport. Either they ignore the category or they send the applicant out for the correct category visa. More often than not it's the latter.

 

So the only way for immigration offices to waive the compulsory insurance requirement for an O-A visa holder would be to ignore the category and treat it as a O visa. As I've already said there is no procedure that enables them to change the category of visa in the passport, or to issue a new Non-Imm O visa.

[lkv]

27 minutes ago, elviajero said:

When someone wants to change the reason for their stay from the reason they entered the country immigration will not change the category of the visa in the applicants passport

We've agreed that Immigration issues visas of type non O or non B locally, for people entering with a different purpose, i.e. tourism, with a TR visa or no visa.

 

So your statement is incorrect. 

 

John entered the country as a tourist, he then changed the reason of his stay from tourism to say work or retirement, and the local Immigration happily issued him with a brand new non B/non O visa locally.

 

Immigration CAN issue visas, not only extensions of stay. Perhaps they want to throw the workload on the Consulates etc.

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[lkv]

There you go. Non-Immigrant visa category "O", issued by the Immigration office of Chiang Mai. Must be used on the date of its issuance.

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

We've agreed that Immigration issues visas of type non O or non B locally, for people entering with a different purpose, i.e. tourism, with a TR visa or no visa.

Yes but only to people that do not already have a Non Immigrant Visa. You cannot enter the country with a Non O and then apply for a Non B in-country. You can enter as a tourist and apply for a Non-Imm O/B in-country.

 

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

So your statement is incorrect. 

No it's not.

 

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

John entered the country as a tourist, he then changed the reason of his stay from tourism to say work or retirement, and the local Immigration happily issued him with a brand new non B/non O visa locally.

Yes. But only because he doesn't already have a Non-Imm visa.

 

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

Immigration CAN issue visas, not only extensions of stay. Perhaps they want to throw the workload on the Consulates etc.

Yes they can issue visas, but only in certain circumstances. And a change of category isn't a reason they'll issue one.

[lkv]

.

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

There you go. Non-Immigrant visa type "O", issued by the Immigration office of Chiang Mai. Must be used on the date of its issuance.

Yes, and?

 

Your claim is/was that someone can apply for a new Non-Imm (category Y) that enters the country with a Non-Imm (category X). They can't.

[lkv]

2 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Yes, and?

 

Your claim is/was that someone can apply for a new Non-Imm (category Y) that enters the country with a Non-Imm (category X). They can't.

http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84508-Non-Immigrant-visas.html

 

At Non O-X.

 

Foreigners who enter Thailand with Non-O-X visa may change from Non-O-X type of other type of visa by submitting request to Immigration Bureau. Spouse and child’s visa approval will be changed according to status of the main applicant. However, spouse can apply for Non-O-X by himself/herself if he/she meets the qualifications.

 

Is this statement false?

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

.

TR and O are not both categories.

 

TR is a type (Class) of visa.

O is a category of a Non Imm visa.

 

You can change the type of visa in-country, but you cannot change the category of visa.

[spidermike007]

On 10/27/2019 at 12:34 AM, Samui Bodoh said:

Then why is there insurance for a Non-O-A either? Both have the same financial requirements...

 

Has this all been (yet another) exercise in nonsense? Like the nosy information form? Or, is this even more wrong information?

 

If Thailand wants to be taken seriously, then it needs to be serious; at the moment, it seems to be a third-world, banana republic spouting nonsense entity.

 

It is not a good look...

 

 

At the moment? Try the past 10 years. And a special award goes to Prayuth and his merry army. 5 1/2 years of gross malfeasance, utter incompetence and destruction of the tourism industry. 

[lkv]

10 minutes ago, elviajero said:

TR and O are not both categories.

 

TR is a type (Class) of visa.

O is a category of a Non Imm visa.

 

You can change the type of visa in-country, but you cannot change the category of visa.

Yeah, I did not use the correct terminology in some of my posts, but how about a visa of class "non Immigrant", category "O-X" to a visa of class "non Immigrant", category "something else"?

 

This one, O-X, is more "VIP", and suddenly things can be done at the Immigration office...or....?

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[elviajero]

4 minutes ago, lkv said:

http://www.thaiembassy.org/london/en/services/7742/84508-Non-Immigrant-visas.html

 

At Non O-X.

 

Foreigners who enter Thailand with Non-O-X visa may change from Non-O-X type of other type of visa by submitting request to Immigration Bureau. Spouse and child’s visa approval will be changed according to status of the main applicant. However, spouse can apply for Non-O-X by himself/herself if he/she meets the qualifications.

 

Is this statement false?

The statement doesn't make any sense. I assume they are talking about changing at the end of the 10 years. It may be given the special "scheme" nature of the visa will allow the person to apply for a Non O at the end of the 10 years.

 

19 minutes ago, lkv said:

This one, O-X, is more "VIP", and suddenly things can be done at the Immigration office...or....?

Yes, that is entirely possible. It's effectively a promotional scheme and may have been given special dispensation. I don't know anyone thats bought one, I doubt they've sold many, and I doubt they will sell many in the future.

[lkv]

 

25 minutes ago, elviajero said:

The statement doesn't make any sense

It does in some situations, non O-X is employment prohibited, one can go for non B.

 

See...non O-X to non B...easy peasy...in theory. ???? Same class.

 

In practice, they might also end up in Kuala Lumpur etc.

 

Anyways, back to reality.

 

18 hours left. Tick tock.

 

I wonder if the smiley girls with the booths from the insurance companies arrived at Suvarnabhumi yet, to welcome the new non O-A arrivals past midnight today, with the option to purchase insurance on the spot? ????

Edited October 29, 2019 by lkv

[elviajero]

11 minutes ago, lkv said:

It does in some situations, non O-X is employment prohibited, one can go for non B.

Yes your probably right. Also, they can revoke the visa at the annual "examination of the qualifications and supporting documents.", in which case they might allow the person to change in-country.

[lkv]

4 minutes ago, elviajero said:

Yes your probably right. 

Actually, reading the benefits of O-X, I am partly wrong. Says you can work on it as a volunteer (maybe without WP, not too sure how that plays out, or the labour dept issue a WP for volunteering on this category no idea).

But yeah, for any other type of work, non B would be the appropriate one.

 

Then again, it would not be the first time we see inaccurate info on the Embassy's website, one previous poster just told us London had no clue what Immigration will do tomorrow with non O-A visas issued prior to the 31st...so...yeah.

 

[Olmate]

11 minutes ago, lkv said:

Actually, reading the benefits of O-X, I am partly wrong. Says you can work on it as a volunteer (maybe without WP, not too sure how that plays out, or the labour dept issue a WP for volunteering on this category no idea).

But yeah, for any other type of work, non B would be the appropriate one.

 

Then again, it would not be the first time we see inaccurate info on the Embassy's website, one previous poster just told us London had no clue what Immigration will do tomorrow with non O-A visas issued prior to the 31st...so...yeah.

 

So glad you two have sorted that out , now let’s see!

[GeorgeCross]

2 hours ago, lkv said:

Then again, it would not be the first time we see inaccurate info on the Embassy's website, one previous poster just told us London had no clue what Immigration will do tomorrow with non O-A visas issued prior to the 31st...so...yeah.

 

hahahahha ONE day to go and still NO-ONE knows what the hell is going to happen

 

its like we're living in the twilight zone 

 

[AAArdvark]

On 10/28/2019 at 6:55 PM, Thaidream said:

I say the only logical way for the whole scheme to work is

"Logical", therein lies the problem.

[roobaa01]

i think possible inside the country

 

1. non-oa to non-o to visit my wife/thai kids

2. non-ox to non-o to visit my wife/thai kids

 

3. non-oa to extension of stay married to a thai/kids

4. non-ox to extension of stay married to a thai/kids

 

none requires health insurance.

 

wbr

roobaa01

[LivinLOS]

14 hours ago, rabas said:

So i don't agree that one always needs to exit.  My experience is you dont' need to exit as long are you are still hear legally and qualify for the new visa type. How this apples to non O-A is still unknown at least to me.

 

Thats the point.. 

 

I think any IO who looks at an OA application he is going to refuse, and then is offered the suggestion to just at the flick of his pen, change it to one he will accept, based on the exact same applicant with the exact some funds etc, from retirement to retirement, is going to need some strong persuasion ????

[Skallywag]

8 hours ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

hahahahha ONE day to go and still NO-ONE knows what the hell is going to happen

 

its like we're living in the twilight zone 

 

Pretty simple - all 18 pages say the same thing. 

Switch your Non O-A to a Non-O if you want to stay retired here without Thai health insurance.

[zaZa9]

On 10/27/2019 at 3:20 PM, smedly said:

it is a huge difference - for an extension of stay the money needs to be in Thailand and other rules apply to that money 

 

So they are NOT THE SAME

You are incorrect.

For Extensions both O and O-A , the money needs to be in Thailand.

[SpokaneAl]

For what it is worth, I arrived in Bangkok on the evening of October 31 with my non imm o-a multi entry visa that I purchased in June.

 

The process worked exactly the same as it has in a number of previous years - little or no conversation and I was stamped in until October 2020.

[Enki]

On 10/28/2019 at 4:23 AM, carbon007 said:

I am getting seriously tired of all this nonsense. Only motive to please insurance company partners. Maybe Southern Spain or France should be seriously considered for me as an EU citizen

Would not help you, In southern France or in Spain you are required to have a mandatory health insurance, ooooops.

[Enki]

On 10/28/2019 at 4:28 AM, Mango Bob said:

I have  life insurance.  Better than this <deleted> that is being offered here and I pay nothing for it except a deductible of $150.  I pay 25% of the bill and if I pay $3,000 in a year everything after that is at no cost to me.  Now beat that or shut up.

 

No idea what you want to say. Especially as you quoted me. Life insurance and health insurance are not the same thing. So what do you have?

[Enki]

On 10/28/2019 at 5:06 AM, Genericnic said:

I really get a laugh out of the insurance requirement threads. Supposedly, the mandatory insurance it to make sure the government is not stuck with paying for uninsured retirees. Even for those of us with insurance, payment can be an interesting exercise.

 

I am living here on an extension of stay to my original O-A retirement visa. My US based insurance provides way more coverage (IPD and OPD) than the upcoming required Thai insurance. About 6 weeks ago, I had stents put in at a leading hospital here in Chiang Mai. The cost was just under 600k baht. The hospital received a letter of guarantee from my insurance carrier, just as they would have done for coverage through a Thai carrier. I went by the hospital today for a post surgery follow-up and decided to check on the status of the claim. It seems the hospital has yet to submit the claim to the insurance company for payment. One would think that the bill would have been submitted the day I was discharged or at least a couple of days later at least. Truly, TIT. ????

 

David

Most companies, and that includes a hospital, process bills at the end of the month, and not at the moment the "incident" happens. Has nothing to do with TiT, it is the same in Germany ... or France. I once got a hospital bill with 2 years delay, no idea why, though.

[Bournville]

I'm running out of paracetamol! 555. And popcorn! 555

[Enki]

On 10/28/2019 at 6:33 AM, SteveK said:

Surely it should be money in the bank OR insurance?

Erm ... no? What has health insurance to do with money in the bank? Do you think the hospitals get build, maintained and paid for from your money in the bank?

[jayceenik]

10 hours ago, Enki said:

Erm ... no? What has health insurance to do with money in the bank? Do you think the hospitals get build, maintained and paid for from your money in the bank?

He meant money in the bank to pay the hospital bills!