Health Insurance: Non-Imm O-A

[Max69xl]

20 minutes ago, lkv said:

Part of the country nature.

 

Each country that one travels to, has particularities, and some are third world corrupt countries run by Military, where preferred insurance companies have Army members in their shareholding structure and pay cuts all the way up in the pyramid.

 

Mix that concept with the "temporary stay" concept, i.e. they don't integrate well, and we get the picture.

 

In fact, they never wanted to integrate travellers. PR is only available if you had 3 continuous years of non B + WP

 

You don't need 3 years of Non-Immigrant B + wp. Any Non-Immigrant Visa is ok, and you don't need to have a wp. Even retirees can apply for a PR Visa. 

 

https://www.justlanded.com/english/Thailand/Thailand-Guide/Visas-Permits/Permanent-residence

[lkv]

12 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

You don't need 3 years of Non-Immigrant B + wp. Any Non-Immigrant Visa is ok, and you don't need to have a wp. Even retirees can apply for a PR Visa. 

 

https://www.justlanded.com/english/Thailand/Thailand-Guide/Visas-Permits/Permanent-residence

Instead of guiding ourselves after justlanded.com, why don't we better read the document from Immigration that defines the categories eligible for PR, updated June 2019. English available also, if one scrolls down.

1560937657542.pdf

Edited November 3, 2019 by lkv

[zaZa9]

On 11/1/2019 at 4:36 PM, Sheryl said:

 

Actually AETNA,  like BUPA Thailand before them,. guarantee lifetime renewal if you purchase before age 60. It is only when you don't take out the policy before that age that they cut you off at 70.

 

There are a couple of  insurers on the Imm  list that guarantee renewal for life or til age 99, though.

I concur.

I wasnt signing up at 58 unless BUPA ( now AETNA ) to be cut off at 70.

I have the condition in writing.

 

Of course they can make it REAL expensive ...

[Max69xl]

3 hours ago, lkv said:

Instead of guiding ourselves after justlanded.com, why don't we better read the document from Immigration that defines the categories eligible for PR, updated June 2019. English available also, if one scrolls down.

1560937657542.pdf 14.77 MB · 4 downloads

And it said exactly what I wrote. 

[lkv]

12 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

And it said exactly what I wrote. 

Ok good.

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by lkv

[jacko45k]

15 hours ago, pookondee said:

no, thats wrong"

-but instead people waffle on with a lot of hogwash, that still makes one second guess

You complain when people try to help you out?

I must admit the idea of killing visas is an odd thing to say...they 'expire'....

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by jacko45k

[britishjohn]

On 11/3/2019 at 10:55 AM, Sheryl said:

Yes.

 

No matter how things are interpreted it will not affect entry on a re-entry permit. It never does as no new permission to stay is involved. When you enter on a RE permit you have already met the conditions for permission to stay and are just leaving and coming back on that same, already granted, permission.

 

The entry stamp you receive coming in on a RE permit is different ftom a new entry stamp.

 

Any issues people may encounter will occur either (1) entering the country on a still valid OA visa and/or (2) getting a new in-country extension of stay when original visa was OA. There is confusion and differing IO interpretations around these but not around use of RE permits for already granted permssions/extensions of stay.

So I have a me re-entry permit which expires in Jan 2020. Is it safe to assume I can leave and re enter the country before that date without insurance ?

[ubonjoe]

9 minutes ago, britishjohn said:

So I have a me re-entry permit which expires in Jan 2020. Is it safe to assume I can leave and re enter the country before that date without insurance ?

if your OA visa was issued prior to October 31st you are not required to have insurance when entering the country.

[oslooskar]

18 hours ago, domdom said:

Hello,

 

Don t you think embassies/consulates of all countries who have OA retirees here should join and ask a meeting with 1me minister or who ever person in charge and try and find a solution ?

For me it would be better to obtain a deposit of 440.000 bahts more, or acceptance of foreign coverages, or other ways to avoid this health insurance issue..

Good evening

That would be too reasonable.

[Peter Denis]

PRESENT STATUS of the possible issue that holders of a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa will have their application for an extension of stay denied because of not meeting the thai-approved health insurance requirement.

 

It is now 5 days that the new health insurance requirement for Non Imm OA Visas came into effect.

Till now - and as far as I know - only 3 cases were reported of people whose application for a (re)-extension of stay based on their original Non Imm OA Visa was denied because of not meeting the new health insurance requirement.

- Post #71 (at Jomtien) in this thread

- Post #128 in this thread

- Post #276 in this thread

I do not doubt these reports, but note that none of them were first-hand reports.

 

So I think it is fair to say that more cases of OA Visa extension denial/acceptance are needed before we can make definite conclusions.

I expect that in course of this week more cases (be it denial or acceptance of the application) will come in.

The reports will probably also be skewed towards denial, because the OA holders whose applications were accepted might not even be aware of the new health insurance requirement and would have been taken by surprise with a denial (like the French guy in case #71).

Bearing in mind that warned/prudent OA Visa extension holders will probably have applied before Oct 31 in the 30-45 day window before the validity date of their extension of stay expired, it might take a while before the potential unlucky ones with expiration date after December 1 < 30 days after Oct 31 > will start doing their applications for an extension of their present OA Visa / extension of stay. 

 

I will post regular updates of the above, as I think it's a good idea to keep track of the denials/acceptances, until it is clear what the actual practice is.

Also I would not be surprised if there were differences in how this is handled at the different provincial IOs.

 

[Mango Bob]

20 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

PRESENT STATUS of the possible issue that holders of a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa will have their application for an extension of stay denied because of not meeting the thai-approved health insurance requirement.

 

It is now 5 days that the new health insurance requirement for Non Imm OA Visas came into effect.

Till now - and as far as I know - only 3 cases were reported of people whose application for a (re)-extension of stay based on their original Non Imm OA Visa was denied because of not meeting the new health insurance requirement.

- Post #71 (at Jomtien) in this thread

- Post #128 in this thread

- Post #276 in this thread

I do not doubt these reports, but note that none of them were first-hand reports.

 

So I think it is fair to say that more cases of OA Visa extension denial/acceptance are needed before we can make definite conclusions.

I expect that in course of this week more cases (be it denial or acceptance of the application) will come in.

The reports will probably also be skewed towards denial, because the OA holders whose applications were accepted might not even be aware of the new health insurance requirement and would have been taken by surprise with a denial (like the French guy in case #71).

Bearing in mind that warned/prudent OA Visa extension holders will probably have applied before Oct 31 in the 30-45 day window before the validity date of their extension of stay expired, it might take a while before the potential unlucky ones with expiration date after December 1 < 30 days after Oct 31 > will start doing their applications for an extension of their present OA Visa / extension of stay. 

 

I will post regular updates of the above, as I think it's a good idea to keep track of the denials/acceptances, until it is clear what the actual practice is.

Also I would not be surprised if there were differences in how this is handled at the different provincial IOs.

 

Have you had any that said they don't need insurance when doing their next extension of stay?

[Peter Denis]

11 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

Have you had any that said they don't need insurance when doing their next extension of stay?

Yes and no.

No > I did not see any reports yet of OA holders whose application for extension of stay (with no thai-approved health insurance) was accepted.

Yes > There is a report from a TVF member that contacted the Immigration Helpline, and was told that NO health insurance will be required for extensions of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visas.  He repeated the question several times and it was confirmed firmly NOT required.  Obviously, that flies in the face of the reports from provincial Immigration officers saying the opposite (and the 3 reported cases of denial).  So there is still hope those 3 cases and initial reports were incorrect and based on misunderstanding of the cryptic Police-Order. 

[Peter Denis]

10 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Yes and no.

No > I did not see any reports yet of OA holders whose application for extension of stay (with no thai-approved health insurance) was accepted.

Yes > There is a report from a TVF member that contacted the Immigration Helpline, and was told that NO health insurance will be required for extensions of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visas.  He repeated the question several times and it was confirmed firmly NOT required.  Obviously, that flies in the face of the reports from provincial Immigration officers saying the opposite (and the 3 reported cases of denial).  So there is still hope those 3 cases and initial reports were incorrect and based on misunderstanding of the cryptic Police-Order. 

For sake of completeness/clarity, I copy/pasted the above confirmatory post as well as UbonJoe's reaction on it.

The post dates from last Thursday - October 31.

 

On 10/31/2019 at 7:55 AM, Pib said:

Back on 18 Oct 2020 post #330 I described the results of my 10-15 minutes face-to-face conversation with a CW immigration officer where I asked repeatedly since I originally entered on a Non-OA visa in 2008 and have since got retirement extensions of stay 11 times, do I need insurance when I apply to extend again in 2020.  The answer was Yes.  Click on above date and post number to review my earlier post.  

 

Today just for the heck of it I called the immigration hot line at 1178 to ask the same question again.  Was only listening to elevator music for about 10 minutes before I got a rep....a rep that spoke good English.  The answer I got was I would "not" require insurance. 

 

I repeated the question to ensure the rep understood.  I stressed the point that I originally started with an OA visa.  The answer was no again.  Of course this goes against the majority of reports from immigration offices where they are saying insurance will be required if you have an old Non-OA....that is, what you originally got your ensuing retirement extensions of stay from.

 

I then asked has something changed over the last few days as a CW immigration told me Yes approx 10 days ago.  The hotline rep put me on hold to get some additional info and came back online about two minutes later and said again insurance would not be required but I should contact CW immigration at 02-141-7884 or 02-141-7890.  When calling those numbers they do not work....they immediately hangup....do not even ring once.

 

So, I'm left with what a CW immigration officer told me 10 days ago in a 10 minute face-to-face conversation that insurance would be required and what an immigration hotline 1178 rep just told me today in that insurance would not be required.  At this point in time I'm going to believe what the immigration office told me face-to-face 10 days ago vs the immigration hotline.  Plus I remember at least one post in this thread where someone called 1178, asked the question I asked, and was told Yes insurance will be required to renew your retirement extension of stay.

 

During the call today I also asked a second question that since I'm married to a Thai if I switch to a marriage extension of stay from a retirement extension of stay would insurance be required and keeping in mind my original Non-OA Retirement visa from 2008?  The answer was no insurance would be required.

 

Regarding the marriage extension of stay with a Non-OA from Christmas past involved, I wonder if it's really true that if you originally started with an OA visa, then got one or many retirement  extensions of stay over the years, but then decide to switch to a marriage extension of stay will insurance be required?  I know the police order section that deals with marriage extension of stay was not affected like the 2.22 Retirement section.

 

Gosh, how I wish we could all get solid, non-conflicting answers from the various immigration authorities.

On 10/31/2019 at 8:32 AM, ubonjoe said:

It seems you finally got the correct answer.

Maybe the Immigration Bureau has gotten involved and is sorting out all the offices giving out the wrong info.

[pookondee]

7 hours ago, jacko45k said:

You complain when people try to help you out?

I must admit the idea of killing visas is an odd thing to say...they 'expire'....

 

No, of course not. Certainly appreciate all the free help. 

I was commenting on when asking a simple yes or no question..

People will tend not to just say yay or nay..

instead they go on with a lot of

un-decipherable claptrap that indeed proves how much they know, but still doesn't really answer the original simple question.

 

we are not all immigration experts!!

 

 

[Max69xl]

2 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

PRESENT STATUS of the possible issue that holders of a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa will have their application for an extension of stay denied because of not meeting the thai-approved health insurance requirement.

 

It is now 5 days that the new health insurance requirement for Non Imm OA Visas came into effect.

Till now - and as far as I know - only 3 cases were reported of people whose application for a (re)-extension of stay based on their original Non Imm OA Visa was denied because of not meeting the new health insurance requirement.

- Post #71 (at Jomtien) in this thread

- Post #128 in this thread

- Post #276 in this thread

I do not doubt these reports, but note that none of them were first-hand reports.

 

So I think it is fair to say that more cases of OA Visa extension denial/acceptance are needed before we can make definite conclusions.

I expect that in course of this week more cases (be it denial or acceptance of the application) will come in.

The reports will probably also be skewed towards denial, because the OA holders whose applications were accepted might not even be aware of the new health insurance requirement and would have been taken by surprise with a denial (like the French guy in case #71).

Bearing in mind that warned/prudent OA Visa extension holders will probably have applied before Oct 31 in the 30-45 day window before the validity date of their extension of stay expired, it might take a while before the potential unlucky ones with expiration date after December 1 < 30 days after Oct 31 > will start doing their applications for an extension of their present OA Visa / extension of stay. 

 

I will post regular updates of the above, as I think it's a good idea to keep track of the denials/acceptances, until it is clear what the actual practice is.

Also I would not be surprised if there were differences in how this is handled at the different provincial IOs.

 

Of course there will be differences depending on offices. There's been differences all the time, but maybe this time the consequences comes with a higher price. What I want to know is, how many O-A Visa holders are there? 

[Max69xl]

9 hours ago, jacko45k said:

You complain when people try to help you out?

I must admit the idea of killing visas is an odd thing to say...they 'expire'....

 

Yes,they normally expires,but when we're talking about killing an O-A without a re-entry permit the second year, we're talking about "killing" it before it officially expires on purpose. Do you know what I mean? 

[The Man Who Sold the World]

10 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

What I want to know is, how many O-A Visa holders are there? 

 

Not certain - but, figure Non-Imm O's would be the "stay with; Thais, Resident Family, Thai Spouse" and the Non Imm OX's and OA's would be the "Retirement"

 

Expect that these figures refer to Visas and not to extensions (but - do not know for certain)

 

https://thailand.iom.int/sites/default/files/document/publications/Thailand%20Report%202019_22012019_HiRes.pdf

 

 

From Table Table 1.1: Estimated non-Thai population residing and working in Thailand (November 2018) on Page 12 of Thailand Migration Report 2019       

 

Temporary Stay

Stay with Thais                     37,822 stay                                       

Stay with a resident family    23,640 stay                                       

Stay with Thai Spouse           16,276 stay                                       

Retirement                           72,969 stay                                       

Special – Investment            45,882 stay and work

Special – Industrial Estates     2,331 stay and work

Special – Petroleum               1,190 stay and work

 

 

 

 

[Max69xl]

3 minutes ago, The Man Who Sold the World said:

 

Not certain - but, figure Non-Imm O's would be the "stay with; Thais, Resident Family, Thai Spouse" and the Non Imm OX's and OA's would be the "Retirement"

 

Expect that these figures refer to Visas and not to extensions (but - do not know for certain)

 

https://thailand.iom.int/sites/default/files/document/publications/Thailand%20Report%202019_22012019_HiRes.pdf

 

 

From Table Table 1.1: Estimated non-Thai population residing and working in Thailand (November 2018) on Page 12 of Thailand Migration Report 2019       

 

Temporary Stay

Stay with Thais                     37,822 stay                                       

Stay with a resident family    23,640 stay                                       

Stay with Thai Spouse           16,276 stay                                       

Retirement                           72,969 stay                                       

Special – Investment            45,882 stay and work

Special – Industrial Estates     2,331 stay and work

Special – Petroleum               1,190 stay and work

 

 

 

 

In retirement stay they incl. 1 year extensions based on retirement. There are more 1 year extensions than O-A Visas in my opinion. I might be wrong,but then I want to see proof. 

[lkv]

1 hour ago, Max69xl said:

how many O-A Visa holders are there? 

You mean current non O-A visa holders, issued within the last 12 months, or including the ones that applied at foreign consulates in previous years and are now on an extension of stay?

 

Because those stats would be complicated to get or calculate.

 

Majority of reports indicate there are about 80K people on "retirement", but it's unclear if they refer to locally issued extensions or they include non o-a visas issued overseas in the current year.

 

If you want the number of people affected by this, it's likely impossible (or very hard) to calculate. Even if we had all the stats for how many non O-A's have been issued in the last say 10 years, it could be that John applied 10 years ago for a non O-A then got 9 extensions, or it could be that James applies every 2 years in his home country, counting as 5 people in 10 years. Or Mike on year 5 forgot to get a re-entry permit, then had to "switch" (visa run) to a non O for convenience purposes, so he does not count today, but was a non O-A holder at some point in the last 10 years.

Edited November 4, 2019 by lkv

[Peter Denis]

1 hour ago, The Man Who Sold the World said:

From Table Table 1.1: Estimated non-Thai population residing and working in Thailand (November 2018) on Page 12 of Thailand Migration Report 2019       

 

Temporary Stay

Stay with Thais                     37,822 stay                                       

Stay with a resident family    23,640 stay                                       

Stay with Thai Spouse           16,276 stay                                       

Retirement                           72,969 stay                                       

Special – Investment            45,882 stay and work

Special – Industrial Estates     2,331 stay and work

Special – Petroleum               1,190 stay and work

 

The figure highlighted above provides an indication of how many people might be affected by the new health insurance requirement.

Even if some retirement on temporary stay would have been counted double or triple, and we deduct the O Visa holders for retirement, a very conservative estimation would be that at least 15.000 OA Visa holders / permissions to stay under OA would be affected.

In reality it would most probably be a lot higher than 15.000, but for sake of argument let's assume 15.000.

That means on average 300 applications per week for extension of stay based on an original OA Visa.

Let's also take into account that:

- Those holders of OA Visas / extensions of stay, aware of the upcoming requirement, with Dec 1 as due date for their extension of stay, will probably have done their application prior to Oct 31 to dodge the upcoming requirement;

- Those holders of OA Visas / extensions of stay, aware of the upcoming requirement, with a later date than Dec 1 as due date for their extension of stay, will probably wait with their application till it has crystalized out whether the upcoming requirement would indeed be applicable for their pre Oct 31 originally issued OA Visa / permission to stay application.

> So that leaves those holders of OA Visas / extensions of stay, blissfully unaware of the possibility that the new health insurance requirement could be applicable for their application.

Let's conservatively assume that would amount to about 50 of the average 200 applicants, which could be taken be surprise by the new requirement when it is indeed applicable.

If their application is denied, they would surely be in a panic and look for help.

So, if that would be the case, it's strange that for the 6 days that the new health insurance requirement is already in effect, that - as far as I know - only 3 cases have been reported of applicants whose application for an extension of stay based on their original OA Visa, have been denied for not meeting the health insurance requirement.  And those 3 cases aren't even first-hand reports.

 

Imo it's still too early to draw conclusions, but there is a glimmer of hope that the new health insurance requirement will NOT be imposed retro-actively, and therefore that holders of an OA Visa / extension of stay based on an original OA Visa issued before Oct 31, are NOT required to meet the new health insurance requirement.

That would mean that the 3 reported hear-say cases and the statements of provincial IO's that after Oct 31 health insurance would be a requirement for extension of stay applications based on an original OA, are not correct.

... Maybe I am a dreamer ... but I am eagerly awaiting 'acceptance' reports in course of coming days. 

 

[The Man Who Sold the World]

39 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Imo it's still too early to draw conclusions...

... Maybe I am a dreamer

Good overview.

 

In my case, Non Imm O, Thai spouse, annual extensions based on retirement. Not overly concerned because there is absolutely nothing I can do to change the outcome, irregardless of what the outcome will be.

 

Regardless of how this plays out. The fact remains that I, along with many others, will comply with the Thai  Immigration requirements. Not necessarily by choice, but by necessity.

 

However, that being said, in any regulation change there is collateral damage. A broad brush stroke of insurance requirements will affect persons who are "Uninsurable". And, there will be disruptions, some severe, in quite a few families.

 

My sympathy goes out to those are affected.  

 

 

I would like to hear from anybody who has challenged an IO's decision. Successfully or not.

Edited November 4, 2019 by The Man Who Sold the World

[LivinLOS]

Been busy for a few days.. Here we are, 4th Nov. 

 

Do we seriously not have a single first hand report of an acceptance or refusal of a OA extension ?? Anywhere in the kingdom ?? 

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, The Man Who Sold the World said:

In my case, Non Imm O, Thai spouse, annual extensions based on retirement. Not overly concerned because there is absolutely nothing I can do to change the outcome, irregardless of what the outcome will be.

As a Non Imm O holder, the new health insurance requirement does not apply to you.

Some have hinted that in future the HI requirement might also be imposed on extensions of stay for Non Imm O holders.  Hope that won't be true, as that would mean the only escape route for this ill-conceived health insurance requirement would be blocked.

[Aforek]

On 11/3/2019 at 11:59 AM, Peter Denis said:

Since you have been living in Thailand on the correct Visa, there is absolutely no issue letting you in again on Visa exemption or on a Tourist Visa.  

In a such case, coming form an  o-a visa, if we ask a tourist visa to come back, they don't ask a plane ticket out of Thailand ( knowing that you will ask for a O visa )?

[Peter Denis]

12 minutes ago, Aforek said:

In a such case, coming form an  o-a visa, if we ask a tourist visa to come back, they don't ask a plane ticket out of Thailand ( knowing that you will ask for a O visa )?

I remember that a TVF member - possibly UbonJoe - answered a similar question previously.  The answer being that when asked for a return flight ticket, you can state that you want to apply for a Non Imm O Visa in Thailand, and that's why you did not buy such a flight ticket nor a re-entry permit before leaving Thailand.  And you do have your Non Imm OA Visa history in your passport to back up that statement.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Peter Denis

[lkv]

45 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Been busy for a few days.. Here we are, 4th Nov. 

 

Do we seriously not have a single first hand report of an acceptance or refusal of a OA extension ?? Anywhere in the kingdom ?? 

2-3 is weekend

4-5 is closed BKK and Nonthaburi

 

And the 15,000 number estimated above, I would say 5,000 -8,000 max if I was to guess.

 

For extensions at least.

 

Entries, maybe not enforced.

Edited November 4, 2019 by lkv

[Peter Denis]

8 minutes ago, lkv said:

2-3 is weekend

4-5 is closed BKK and Nonthaburi

And the 15,000 number estimated above, I would say 5,000 -8,000 max if I was to guess.

For extensions at least.

 

Entries, maybe not enforced.

The weekend/closure dates might explain the lack of acceptance/denial reports of OA VISA extensions.

Re entries > there we have at least 1 first-hand report (SpokaneAl) who entered Oct 31 with an OA Visa (no health insturance) and was stamped in for a full year, no questions asked.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Peter Denis

[LivinLOS]

43 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

The weekend/closure dates might explain the lack of acceptance/denial reports of OA VISA extensions.

Re entries > there we have at least 1 first-hand report (SpokaneAl) who entered Oct 31 with an OA Visa (no health insturance) and was stamped in for a full year, no questions asked.

Not sure how that confirms much about a law to start Nov 1.

However I would imagine we would have heard much more noise about denials of entry by now. 

[ourdon]

Any info about acceptance or denial of an OA (no health insurance) would be appreciated.

 

I have a new Non OA visa issued in October but will not be reaching the Kingdom till

Dec 1.

 

I can buy a good travel policy here but would like to know how necessary it is.

 

Thanks

Edited November 4, 2019 by ourdon

[britishjohn]

There's been talk about killing off ones OA and applying for an O. I know nothing about the O,  but I just read it's for people married to a Thai citizen or staying with Thai family. Is this correct ? And if so since I have no Thai family here I assume I can forget this option.