Health Insurance: Non-Imm O-A

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, lkv said:

You are assuming people stay stuck in Thailand for 12 months?

 

I was just giving an example of why I had said in my prior post that someone in Al's current position MIGHT not have to worry about insurance for another one to two years -- obviously, depending on what he did with in/out travels in the meantime.

 

[Exploring Thailand]

5 minutes ago, lkv said:

However, because it's his second entry already, he must prove he has insurance, and will be granted a permission of stay according to the length of his insurance, not longer than 12 months.

That's your reading of it,  but, as far as I know,  none of that is confirmed. My situation is almost exactly the one in your hypothetical example. I haven't read anything definitive about a difference between a first and second entry.  There is much speculation about how it will play out, but no-one yet has any real-life experience of exiting and re-entering on an OA post 31st October.

[lkv]

5 minutes ago, britishjohn said:

I am on OA in my second year of permission to stay and I have a me re entry permit. 

What is to stop me leaving Thailand a few days before my re entry permit expires and then flying somewhere to apply to an O ? Surely my OA has been killed then ?

As long as you walk into the embassy past the expiry date of your reentry permit, otherwise they may start to moan.

 

But if next weekend you fly out for a short vacation and you want to come back, you may get a surprise upon returning from Immigration in the airport asking you for insurance.

Edited November 2, 2019 by lkv

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, rickudon said:

Udon Thani. Date not sure. Probably within the last  7 days. The person is now considering if he should return (with wife) to the USA in the long term. He already had health insurance, but not on the IO's approved list .....

 

Since today is Saturday and the new insurance requirement only took effect last Thursday (10/31), any extension of stay application to Immigration prior to last Thursday should not have triggered any insurance issue. Thursday or Friday, however, could have been a different matter.

 

[Peter Denis]

12 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

I believe, someone like SpokaneAl who just entered once the new policy took effect on a pre-Oct. 31 issued OA visa could remain in Thailand, if he wanted, for the entire initial one year permission to stay he received and not have to worry about insurance.

 

If he then left Thailand just prior to his one year permission expiring and then re-entered in order to activate a final additional one-year permission under his original pre-Oct. 31 O-A visa, I don't think it's at all clear yet what would happen with the insurance requirement on that subsequent entry.

Border immigration officers have been instructed to check for Embassy added health insurance notes on OA Visas, and limit the permit to stay to the validity of the health insurance according to those notes.  OA Visas issued before Oct 31 do not carry such notes, and imo will therefore be treated as usual, i.e. getting the full 1 year permission to stay.  The case of SpokaneAl who entered Oct 31 on a pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa (with no health insurance) and who was stamped in as usual (1 year permit to stay) is - at this moment and to my knowledge - the only first-hand reported proof of the above.

Also we do not have to wait a full year to see how it will work out for 2nd entries.  Anyone now leaving and re-entering Thailand with a non-expired Non Imm OA Visa issued before 31 Oct, that is stamped in again for a full year permission to stay, would be proof that border immigration officers only check for health insurance compliance on OA Visas issued after Oct 31 (which should carry the Embassy health insurance comment).

[Andrew Dwyer]

Another example of a “ denial “ for extension in the thread entitled:

Non O-A extension.

 

Presumably his actual extension date is after the 31st October deadline, hence the IO’s reaction.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2019 by Andrew Dwyer

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Just now, Peter Denis said:

 

Also we do not have to wait a full year to see how it will work out for 2nd entries.  Anyone now leaving and re-entering Thailand with a non-expired Non Imm OA Visa issued before 31 Oct, that is stamped in again for a full year permission to stay, would be proof that border immigration officers only check for health insurance compliance on OA Visas issued after Oct 31 (which should carry the Embassy health insurance comment).

 

The issue I was raising was not what happens with a 2nd or 3rd or 4th entry of a still valid O-A visa issued prior to Oct. 31.

 

The issue I was raising was what happens when someone with a pre-Oct. 31 OA visa is leaving the country before it expires and then re-enters at that point to get a final added one-year permission to stay. After that, the person has an expired visa and probably a valid re-entry permit to keep alive his one year permission.

 

My question was -- What happens then with the  insurance requirement if that person then needs to leave Thailand and re-enter with a pre-Oct. 31 expired O-A and a post Oct. 31 re-entry permit?

 

 

[Peter Denis]

6 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

Another example of a “ denial “ for extension in the thread entitled:

New O-A extension.

> Post #176

Yes, this looks like the 3rd reported case of OA Visa holders being denied Extension of stay, because of no thai approved health insurance.

Once again, it is not a first-hand report (like the other two) but I do not doubt that it is correct.

More evidence from other cases would be welcome, but it surely looks as if denial of Extension of stay is the current practice. ☹️

 

[lkv]

Deleted

Edited November 2, 2019 by lkv

[Peter Denis]

3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

My question was -- What happens then with the  insurance requirement if that person then needs to leave Thailand and re-enter with a pre-Oct. 31 expired O-A and a post Oct. 31 re-entry permit?

Very valid remark and question.

I am tempted to speculate that the re-entry permit keeps the original pre-Oct 31 issued Visa (and permit to stay) alive, but this is Thailand... and I guess we will have to wait for the first reports on such situation.

[lkv]

Deleted /Misunderstood the question/it's started to make me dizzy also ????

Edited November 2, 2019 by lkv

[Pib]

Can we all say "no grandfathering" as it's becoming obvious from reports a Non-OA Visa from Christmas past, present, or future and any ensuing Retirement extensions of stay from a Non-OA (old or new) will require insurance.   I'm not happy about it as I came over on a Non-OA visa in 2008 and now on my 11th retirement extension of stay.  

 

I'm hoping that come my next extension in late 2020 that since I'm married to a Thai that I will be able to do a Non-OA Marriage Extension of Stay without any insurance requirement since the latest police order did not change anything regarding a Marriage Extension of Stay.  If that don't work then it's obtain a Non-O visa time.

 

[Exploring Thailand]

2 minutes ago, lkv said:

You seriously believe that, on say, 20 October 2020, Immigration will allow entry without insurance to a person with a non O-A issued on 25 October 2019?

Edited just now by lkv

By the same token, I was issued a 1 year OA 3 days ago. If I exit and enter tomorrow, you seriously believe they won't let me back in if don't have insurance? It's rhetorical question, because the only way we will know is when someone tries it, or rather when several people try it because I wouldn't be at all surprised if different people are treated differently, especially in the early days.

[lkv]

2 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

By the same token, I was issued a 1 year OA 3 days ago. If I exit and enter tomorrow, you seriously believe they won't let me back in if don't have insurance? 

Basically yes. That is my concern the way I am reading the Police order.

[lkv]

24 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The issue I was raising was what happens when someone with a pre-Oct. 31 OA visa is leaving the country before it expires and then re-enters at that point to get a final added one-year permission to stay. After that, the person has an expired visa and probably a valid re-entry permit to keep alive his one year permission.

Apologies for the previous 2 posts, I misunderstood your question.

 

Yes, after he enters he has an expired visa. But he must enter the country first.

 

When he enters the country, he enters on a valid visa (obviously), and he gets granted a permission of stay, of duration according to the duration of the insurance.

 

What's the difference between entering on 25 October 2020 or 10 November 2019? It's a multiple entry visa, and the application of the order is in effect since 31 Oct 2019?

 

 

Edited November 2, 2019 by lkv

[Exploring Thailand]

1 minute ago, lkv said:

Basically yes. That is my concern the way I am reading the Police order.

And you might be right.

Or you might be wrong ????

There's no way to know.  I'm sure if we could take a poll of all of the IOs in Thailand right now, there would be no consensus, so what chance do we have?

[TheAppletons]

37 minutes ago, lkv said:

Very good question.

 

Immigration will likely refuse to issue a re-entry permit, since you have a multiple entry visa (to begin with).

 

Secondly, i feel that even through a re-entry permit mantains a permission of stay already granted, it's still considered a new entry and recorded as such in the computer.

 

If that makes sense.

 

  This is an interesting scenario.  I re-entered 22 October (second entry) on an O-A visa issued in April 2019.  Because I entered to prior to 31 October, I was given permission to stay until October 2020 with no proof of Thai insurance required.

 

  I like to travel.  My sense is that, from what we've seen so far (yes, it's early), if I leave the country I'll be asked to provide proof of insurance upon re-entry.

 

  However - it's my understanding that a re-entry permit supercedes a visa.  So even though I have multiple entries remaining on my original O-A visa, if I could obtain a re-entry permit then I would be re-entering on an already granted permission to stay (October 2020.)

 

  The question is will Thai Immigration sell me a re-entry permit if I still have multiple entries remaining on my original visa.  

 

  I'll need to see more data points before I try this work around.  

Edited November 2, 2019 by TheAppletons

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 minutes ago, Pib said:

Can we all say "no grandfathering" as it's becoming obvious from reports a Non-OA Visa from Christmas past, present, or future and any ensuing Retirement extensions of stay from a Non-OA (old or new) will require insurance. 

 

Not sure why you're saying that re pre-Oct. 31 still valid O-A visa holders... From SpokaneAl's report, he was able to enter the country on Oct. 31 with a pre-Oct. 31 issued O-A and not have any health insurance demanded at airport immigration.

 

Pre-Oct. 31 O-A visas that have transitioned to extensions of stay, however, seem to be heading in the opposite direction in terms of insurance enforcement.

 

[Mango Bob]

If you are on an extension of stay and your original visa was a Non O/A you leave Thailand with a reentry permit after 31 Oct 19 and return using the reentry permit that you would need insurance?  How would that person even know this?

[lkv]

1 minute ago, Mango Bob said:

How would that person even know this?

How many found out about TM30 at the Immigration office when forking out fines?

 

They were supposed to know about TM30 since 1979 apparently.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, lkv said:

When he enters the country, he enters on a valid visa (obviously), and he gets granted a permission of stay, of duration according to the duration of the insurance.

 

 

You're still misunderstanding my question. I wasn't talking about someone with a still valid O-A. I was talking about someone with a pre-Oct. 31 O-A that has subsequently expired and they're now entering the county with an expired O-A and a post-Oct. 31 re-entry permit that's keeping alive their prior final one-year permission to stay....

[Pib]

4 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Not sure why you're saying that re pre-Oct. 31 still valid O-A visa holders... From SpokaneAl's report, he was able to enter the country on Oct. 31 with a pre-Oct. 31 issued O-A and not have any health insurance demanded at airport immigration.

 

Pre-Oct. 31 O-A visas that have transitioned to extensions of stay, however, seem to be heading in the opposite direction in terms of insurance enforcement.

 

You are correct.  My post was meant towards OA-Visas of Christmas past...like mine of 2008...or other dates like 2012...2015...that is, with one or more retirement extensions of stay issued.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

3 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

If you are on an extension of stay and your original visa was a Non O/A you leave Thailand with a reentry permit after 31 Oct 19 and return using the reentry permit that you would need insurance?  How would that person even know this?

 

The early posts would seem to be answering yes, a person with an extension of stay of a past O-A visa is likely to face the insurance requirement post Oct. 31 at least when applying again at Immigration in the future.  Who knows about airport entries in the meantime. But the posts on this are early and few at this point... awaiting further confirmation/clarification.

Edited November 2, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[Maestro]

32 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

...I haven't read anything definitive about a difference between a first and second entry.  There is much speculation about how it will play out, but no-one yet has any real-life experience of exiting and re-entering on an OA post 31st October.

 

I believe the answer is in the Memorandum 0029.161/W 4603 dated 27.09.2019 but as you say, we can but wait and see how it plays out.

 

[Sheryl]

5 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

You're still misunderstanding my question. I wasn't talking about someone with a still valid O-A. I was talking about someone with a pre-Oct. 31 O-A that has subsequently expired and they're now entering the county with an expired O-A and a post-Oct. 31 re-entry permit that's keeping alive their prior final one-year permission to stay....

 

Entry on a re-entry permit does nto generate a new permission to stay nor does it extend existing permission to stay. There is no way that one would be required to show insurance for the same reason you do not have to show at entry your 800k in the bank: you are not applying for an extension nor getting  a new permission to stay.

 

in addition the police order specifically states that existing permissions of stay will be unaffected. It is only new permissions to stay/extensions,.

 

Entering on a re-entry permit is a non-issue. If there will be issues it will be at the next extension.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 minute ago, Sheryl said:

 

Entry on a re-entry permit does nto generate a new permission to stay nor does it extend existing permission to stay. There is no way that one would be required to show insurance for the same reason you do not have to show at entry your 800k in the bank: you are not applying for an extension nor getting  a new permission to stay.

 

in addition the police order specifically states that existing permissions of stay will be unaffected. It is only new permissions to stay/extensions,.

 

Entering on a re-entry permit is a non-issue. If there will be issues it will be at the next extension.

 

Makes sense to me, Sheryl. Just hope Immigration ends up enforcing it that way.

 

[Exploring Thailand]

7 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Entry on a re-entry permit does nto generate a new permission to stay nor does it extend existing permission to stay. There is no way that one would be required to show insurance for the same reason you do not have to show at entry your 800k in the bank: you are not applying for an extension nor getting  a new permission to stay.

 

in addition the police order specifically states that existing permissions of stay will be unaffected. It is only new permissions to stay/extensions,.

 

Entering on a re-entry permit is a non-issue. If there will be issues it will be at the next extension.

So, if I'm reading the above correctly, you're saying that any OA granted before 31st October without insurance will allow re-entries in the first year, because it has implicit multi-entry and it will also allow entries in the second year if you get a re-entry permit before exiting at the end of the first year. Is that correct?

Edited November 2, 2019 by Exploring Thailand

[Peter Denis]

7 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

... I was talking about someone with a pre-Oct. 31 O-A that has subsequently expired and they're now entering the county with an expired O-A and a post-Oct. 31 re-entry permit that's keeping alive their prior final one-year permission to stay....

So there are actually 2 possibilities:

1. Exiting and re-entering Thailand with a non-expired OA Visa issued pre Oct 31

   > That Visa will not carry any Embassy notes related to health insurance, and will most likely be handled as usual, i.e. stamped in for a full year permit to stay.

2. Exiting and re-entering Thailand with an expired OA Visa issued pre Oct 31, but still within the permit to stay period (2nd year) and carrying a valid re-entry permit

   > The re-entry permit is meant to keep the OA Visa 'alive', so in theory there should be no difference with 1.

 

Time and reported cases for both situations will tell...

[Andrew Dwyer]

20 minutes ago, Pib said:

Can we all say "no grandfathering" as it's becoming obvious from reports a Non-OA Visa from Christmas past, present, or future and any ensuing Retirement extensions of stay from a Non-OA (old or new) will require insurance.   I'm not happy about it as I came over on a Non-OA visa in 2008 and now on my 11th retirement extension of stay.  

 

I'm hoping that come my next extension in late 2020 that since I'm married to a Thai that I will be able to do a Non-OA Marriage Extension of Stay without any insurance requirement since the latest police order did not change anything regarding a Marriage Extension of Stay.  If that don't work then it's obtain a Non-O visa time.

 

My OA expired 2017 and am now on retirement extension, next renewal Sept 2020.

 If things go the way they look like they are going ( insurance required for extension off an OA irrespective of vintage ) then my plan will be to take my biannual trip over to the uk in April 2020 without a re-entry permit ( I don’t have a valid one now ).

Either obtain a non O visa in uk ( they seem to have complicated the visa acquisition process now ☹️ ) or travel back and enter on visa exempt (although that would require an onward journey ticket ☹️ ).

 

Either way it’s a PITA and who knows what might happen in the near future ??

Maybe come April 2020 another police order regarding non - imm O visas might appear !!

[lkv]

Just now, Peter Denis said:

 

   > The re-entry permit is meant to keep the OA Visa 'alive', so in theory there should be no difference with 1.

No, it just keeps a permission of stay alive, the last one you received, not the visa.

 

Sheryl has addressed it well, let's hope it plays out like that in practice.