O/A visa and insurance experience today

[Ellis]

45 minutes ago, brianj1964 said:

Do you have to leave Thailand within the 30 days once you purchase the insurance?

my case is slightly different, I already have been stamped in for 1 year so presume if I want to avoid a world of pain sometime in the future I only need to buy the cheapest policy available and show it if I am asked 

According to the airport staff, yes I'd need to reenter with insurance to get a year stamp. But I've not actually spoken to any officials yet about this who haven't either been either confused or blinkered. Although I can extend the 30 days in town I doubt it'd be possible to re-enter and just get another 30 day stamp, though arriving again without insurance there would still be the option of buying it on the spot. Not clear at this point if insurance can be purchased to directly facilitate a stamping change at Chaengwattana.

 

This new hard line by airport officials is causing a lot of drama and I think immigration is going to be forced to clarify the rules before too long. Not least by the front line airport staff who can't be happy about the vagueness of the rules they've been forced to implement and the fact that practically everyone they call out on it is going be complaining. 

[Skallywag]

7 minutes ago, saengd said:

It's only been in relatively recent years that people have used the first two years of an O-A visa to get full time residence here, without needing to put funds on deposit in Thailand, at the end of those two years, those people then got a new O-A.

Why does it say  (not exceeding one year) then?

And if you have money in the bank why not apply for Non-O

12 minutes ago, saengd said:

in 2004 I went to the RTE in London and they recommended the O-A visa

Not sure how one recommendation from the UK in 2004 has any relevance to Thailand Immigration rules in 2019?  Yes times change

Again - if you do NOT want to purchase the required health insurance under the O-A, apply for Non-O seems simple enough for someone with 800K in bank here

[saengd]

2 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

Why does it say  (not exceeding one year) then?

And if you have money in the bank why not apply for Non-O

Not sure how one recommendation from the UK in 2004 has any relevance to Thailand Immigration rules in 2019?  Yes times change

Again - if you do NOT want to purchase the required health insurance under the O-A, apply for Non-O seems simple enough for someone with 800K in bank here

"Why does it say  (not exceeding one year) then?"

 

Because that's how the O-A works, leave and reenter before the end of the first year and you get a second year automatically.

 

"Not sure how one recommendation from the UK in 2004 has any relevance to Thailand Immigration rules in 2019?  Yes times change".

 

This is funny....what are retirees supposed to do, check every year to see if the 2004 advice is still sound! I've extended my visa fifteen times, that's 15 opportunities for IO's and visa agents to suggest hey, saengd, you really should change your O-A for a whatever visa, because....! Even on Thaivisa Forum there has never been a thread previously to suggest an O-A visa was not the right one for a retiree. Those conversations never happened because there was never any need, even to day there's no need, the O-A remains a valid option for retirement purposes, it's a more expensive option but it's still a valid one.

 

Yes I could change to an O visa, I know I have options, fortunately. But my visa options was not the point of this exchange.

[Ellis]

Here's another report. 

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Ellis
Image unclear

[saengd]

6 minutes ago, Ellis said:

Here's another report. 

 

Can you supply a link please, I at least can't view what you've posted. 

[Ellis]

1 minute ago, saengd said:

Can you supply a link please, I at least can't view what you've posted. 

Image was unclear, I edited it now in the post above yours. 

[brianj1964]

6 minutes ago, Ellis said:

Image was unclear, I edited it now in the post above yours. 

Sadly I was under the same impression as this chap, I thought that if the O-A was applied for and granted then it did not apply to the new rules, had I known I could have flown in a week earlier, now at a minimum it will cost me 14000, then it's getting binned , I'm married to a Thai so can get the O based on marriage, less money to tie up 

[TheAppletons]

2 hours ago, brianj1964 said:

Do you have to leave Thailand within the 30 days once you purchase the insurance?

my case is slightly different, I already have been stamped in for 1 year so presume if I want to avoid a world of pain sometime in the future I only need to buy the cheapest policy available and show it if I am asked 

  You were stamped in for a year, you got lucky.  I see no reason for you to purchase insurance from the mandated list of Thai insurers unless you intend to leave the country and attempt to re-enter on the same O-A visa.  You may be asked for it then.  The person who told you via PM that you were going to be on overstay is misinformed as your permission to stay stamp clearly shows you are admitted until 3 November 2020.    

[jacko45k]

17 hours ago, Searat7 said:

Obvious solution is to cancel Vietnam trip, take a loss and just return to USA in February. But I would really like to go there.  Any other ideas ? 

If you do indeed get a 30 day Visa Exempt entry, that can be extended for a further 30 days at immigration. If you are still worried about the extra couple of days and do not want to overstay for them, choices are obviously..extra coupe of days in Vietnam.... apply for a further extension and receive 7 days to leave the country... leave for USA earlier. 

Edited November 8, 2019 by jacko45k

[brianj1964]

6 minutes ago, TheAppletons said:

  You were stamped in for a year, you got lucky.  I see no reason for you to purchase insurance from the mandated list of Thai insurers unless you intend to leave the country and attempt to re-enter on the same O-A visa.  You may be asked for it then.  The person who told you via PM that you were going to be on overstay is misinformed as your permission to stay stamp clearly shows you are admitted until 3 November 2020.    

I planned to leave at a land crossing in a year, move to an O visa and I saw no reason why they would ask to see the insurance at the exit point however 2 or 3 people have stated section 4 where they could revoke the original date and replace it with the new date

[TheAppletons]

2 minutes ago, brianj1964 said:

I planned to leave at a land crossing in a year, move to an O visa and I saw no reason why they would ask to see the insurance at the exit point however 2 or 3 people have stated section 4 where they could revoke the original date and replace it with the new date

  You should do whatever you think is best for you.  I have yet to see a police order or cabinet resolution that mandates that one must demonstrate proof of insurance as a requirement for exiting Thailand.  IMO, the paranoia is getting a little thick around here.  

[ThailandRyan]

As I have yet to enter Thailand on my October 3rd issued OA Visa, and with what I am hearing from folks as well as on here, I placed a phone call to the Thai Consulate Los Angeles and spoke to one of the Visa Officers who reviews the applications to ensure everything that is needed for the requested Visa is in place.  He had only heard rumors regarding this issue until he spoke directly to me.  He indicated that the consulates and embassy's are not putting any notations on the O-A Visa or within the passport other than the stamp indicating the visa is for O-A long stay.  He did not understand why if as a condition for obtaining the O-A visa insurance needed to be shown at the time of initial processing, why the IO's at the airport were requesting to see the insurance certificate as well, and if one did not have it refusing entry on the Visa, and instead giving the individual a 30 day stamp and telling them they needed to buy insurance, leave the country and return in order to activate the OA Visa which had been issued by the consulate following the issuing guidelines.  He was very apologetic and understood that the way things are currently, this would cause the individual to incur extra costs when they had already shown proof of insurance, or in my case have a certificate from a company not on the list the IO's have. He has made notes per our conversation and kicked it upstairs to the Actual Visa Officer to look into this issue as it is now causing confusion for individuals it should not be and causing people with valid Visas to be denied entry.

 

I hope that by starting this on my end here in the States that somehow things might get reconciled.  He also did not understand why they were not making the insurance policy certificate be shown at a 90 day report or make the first report at 30days.

 

Just info for everyone.

[GeorgeCross]

3 hours ago, Ellis said:

This new hard line by airport officials is causing a lot of drama and I think immigration is going to be forced to clarify the rules before too long. Not least by the front line airport staff who can't be happy about the vagueness of the rules they've been forced to implement and the fact that practically everyone they call out on it is going be complaining. 

 

seems to me they have clarified the rules and its expats that are in denial.

 

they are saying: if you want to enter on a non-oa you will need the mandated insurance.

 

sorry but everybody in immigration is telling you this, you said so yourself.

 

Edited November 8, 2019 by GeorgeCross

[GeorgeCross]

45 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

He indicated that the consulates and embassy's are not putting any notations on the O-A Visa or within the passport other than the stamp indicating the visa is for O-A long stay

 

maybe this is what is mentioned in the police memo about checking notations and we have over thought it (again)

 

maybe what it means is: IO will check the visa for OA notation and if there asks for insurance?

 

[Olmate]

6 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

seems to me they have clarified the rules and its expats that are in denial.

 

they are saying: if you want to enter on a non-oa you will need the mandated insurance.

 

sorry but everybody in immigration is telling you this, you said so yourself.

 

Agree 100%, what’s the motive tho, certainly not unpaid hospital bills!

[Sheryl]

8 hours ago, britishjohn said:

And do you consider insurance will be needed on entry even if the OA holder has a re entry permit ? 

I still don't know if I dare take trip out of this place... quite absurd !

This question has been answered multiple times.

 

The police order explicitly states that permissions to stay issued prior to the effective date can remain until the end of the existing permission to stay period without insurance.

 

The order talks only about insurance as a requirement for new permission to stay or extension. Coming in on a RE permit is neither.

 

However when your current permission to stay is up and assuming you originally entered on an OA looks like you would need one of the "approved" insurance policies to get an extension.

[chubby]

On 11/6/2019 at 11:27 PM, Martyp said:

Well, as you know, in the first year an OA is multiple entry. In the second year you are using a re-entry permit and I might expect those people to be questioned about insurance but that is definitely a case that needs to be reported on and certainly would be of interest to some people. After that are people, like myself, who arrived on an OA and are now on 1-year extensions. I don't expect to be questioned about insurance at the airport but I don't really know. If an IO were to flip through my passport they would see the big OA visa sticker from 2017 there. Then finally there is the case of applying for a new 1-year extension whether it is your first extension or your 10th. I would like to see reports on all these cases.

I am the 1st instance, 2nd year (after visa expiry, but stamped till Aug 2020, using re-entrys), I crossed via central lao -> thai  nov 1st ,  IO  asked nothing re: insurances,(which is good cause I wasn't aware of the new regs) IO  seemed a bit confused enough to see an O-A/Re-entry as to how many days to stamp (which seems to happen, as few years back they stamped me for 2 years, and I ended up going back to CW to fix it  55)

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, TheAppletons said:

  You were stamped in for a year, you got lucky.  I see no reason for you to purchase insurance from the mandated list of Thai insurers unless you intend to leave the country and attempt to re-enter on the same O-A visa.  You may be asked for it then.  The person who told you via PM that you were going to be on overstay is misinformed as your permission to stay stamp clearly shows you are admitted until 3 November 2020.    

The person may have been misinformed about whether the permission to stay for 12 months was valid or not, but if it's not, it doesn't matter what the stamp in your passport says, you are on overstay.

 

E.g. Lets say you came in on a 30 day exempt & the IO accidentally stamps you in for 90 days, that doesn't mean you have permission to stay for 90 days & you will be on overstay from day 31 onward (Same if you came in on a 90 Day Non-O & got stamped in for a 1 year Non-OA, you'd be on overstay from day 91 onward) irrespective of what the stamp says.

 

It's your/our responsibility to check the permission to stay date & if you/we have any queries (as the OP had), it's your/our responsibility to follow it up with Immigration, ignorance (not meant as an offence, I can't think of a better word to use) is no defense.

 

[Martyp]

3 hours ago, saengd said:

"Why does it say  (not exceeding one year) then?"

 

Because that's how the O-A works, leave and reenter before the end of the first year and you get a second year automatically.

 

"Not sure how one recommendation from the UK in 2004 has any relevance to Thailand Immigration rules in 2019?  Yes times change".

 

This is funny....what are retirees supposed to do, check every year to see if the 2004 advice is still sound! I've extended my visa fifteen times, that's 15 opportunities for IO's and visa agents to suggest hey, saengd, you really should change your O-A for a whatever visa, because....! Even on Thaivisa Forum there has never been a thread previously to suggest an O-A visa was not the right one for a retiree. Those conversations never happened because there was never any need, even to day there's no need, the O-A remains a valid option for retirement purposes, it's a more expensive option but it's still a valid one.

 

Yes I could change to an O visa, I know I have options, fortunately. But my visa options was not the point of this exchange.

I agree with what you are saying. In addition to that, we are not on an O-A visa. We are on 1-year extensions of stay. I'm looking at the extension I got at CW last month. It doesn't say anything on the stamp that I originally came on an O-A. You could find that information flipping back through my passport and, of course, Immigration can see it on their computer. I just assume the O-A was expired and I was past that. I'm guessing that an extension of stay from someone who started on a non-O would look exactly the same as mine. However, strangely, it might be the case that if I try to switch to a non-O and then yearly extensions my insurance requirements magically disappear even though my extension stamps would look the same as they do now.

[Martyp]

7 hours ago, brianj1964 said:

Can you confirm that deductible is acceptable to immigration? If I take the pacific Cross minimum cover then add maximum deductible it comes to little over 13000 baht. I don’t want to buy any but If it saves me a problem later I will bite the bullet then bin the O-A after 12 months 

what paperwork is required to get the non-immigrant O in Laos these days and is it the best place to obtain it 

I have Pacific Cross insurance with a deductible. I contacted them through their website and the local agent replied. He is very helpful. I have to renew next month. At that time I will inquire about my deductible but basically what we both want is the "certificate" to show to Immigration. Talk to the agent. If they can sell you insurance with a deductible and price you like AND provide you with the certificate then you are good to go. That would be the best route to getting confirmation on this issue.

[Mike Teavee]

1 hour ago, brianj1964 said:

I planned to leave at a land crossing in a year, move to an O visa and I saw no reason why they would ask to see the insurance at the exit point however 2 or 3 people have stated section 4 where they could revoke the original date and replace it with the new date

I think you're getting confused (not difficult given how many threads/posts there are about this).

 

On leaving Thailand, the IO will not do anything to your original OA Visa / Extension dates, if (s)he's friendly. (s)he may warn you that you need insurance when/if you come back on an OA, but that's it.

 

Different kettle of fish if your original NON-OA Visa is still valid (I don't know how you would cancel it to get a new Non-O) or if you have a Re-Entry permit (You should have no problems coming back on the terms of that), but if your leaving without a Re-Entry permit and your original Visa is passed it's "Enter By Date" then your permission to stay effectively cancelled on exit and your free to come back on any visa option open to you.

 

Good Luck, do let us know how you get on.

 

 

[saengd]

I have been told by a large trusted agent that a transfer from an O-A based on retirement, to an O based on marriage, is dooable without leaving the country, exactly why it a transfer based on marriage is not, escapes me.

[Langsuan Man]

54 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

As I have yet to enter Thailand on my October 3rd issued OA Visa, and with what I am hearing from folks as well as on here, I placed a phone call to the Thai Consulate Los Angeles and spoke to one of the Visa Officers who reviews the applications to ensure everything that is needed for the requested Visa is in place.  He had only heard rumors regarding this issue until he spoke directly to me.  He indicated that the consulates and embassy's are not putting any notations on the O-A Visa or within the passport other than the stamp indicating the visa is for O-A long stay.  He did not understand why if as a condition for obtaining the O-A visa insurance needed to be shown at the time of initial processing, why the IO's at the airport were requesting to see the insurance certificate as well, and if one did not have it refusing entry on the Visa, and instead giving the individual a 30 day stamp and telling them they needed to buy insurance, leave the country and return in order to activate the OA Visa which had been issued by the consulate following the issuing guidelines.  He was very apologetic and understood that the way things are currently, this would cause the individual to incur extra costs when they had already shown proof of insurance, or in my case have a certificate from a company not on the list the IO's have. He has made notes per our conversation and kicked it upstairs to the Actual Visa Officer to look into this issue as it is now causing confusion for individuals it should not be and causing people with valid Visas to be denied entry.

 

I hope that by starting this on my end here in the States that somehow things might get reconciled.  He also did not understand why they were not making the insurance policy certificate be shown at a 90 day report or make the first report at 30days.

 

Just info for everyone.

Once again typical over reach by IO's at the airport.  When I present a valid O-A upon entry into the Kingdom I don't have to provide another Medical Certificate, or proof of funds and monthly income, or proof of where I am staying.  I provided all that when I applied for the Visa.  If MFA, Immigration, or the Police don't trust the system for issuing Visa's, why bother with them.  They should force everyone to get Visa on Arrival, that way they can check everything upon arrival and have really long lines upon entry 

 

And the OP should take what LA told him with a grain of salt, since I find it hard to believe that they "He had only heard rumors regarding this issue until he spoke directly to me" since LA is clearly stating the documentation requirements for the insurance as required for issuance of an O-A 

https://thaiconsulatela.org/en/visa/visa-type/non-immigration-category-o-a/

 

Finally,  to those posters that state that other countries require long stay visitors to have adequate insurance. I know of none that will only accept insurance policies written in their own country.  This police order once again doesn't pass the smell test since only Thai insurance companies can participate 

[saengd]

1 minute ago, Langsuan Man said:

Once again typical over reach by IO's at the airport.  When I present a valid O-A upon entry into the Kingdom I don't have to provide another Medical Certificate, or proof of funds and monthly income, or proof of where I am staying.  I provided all that when I applied for the Visa.  If MFA, Immigration, or the Police don't trust the system for issuing Visa's, why bother with them.  They should force everyone to get Visa on Arrival, that way they can check everything upon arrival and have really long lines upon entry 

 

And the OP should take what LA told him with a grain of salt, since I find it hard to believe that they "He had only heard rumors regarding this issue until he spoke directly to me" since LA is clearly stating the documentation requirements for the insurance as required for issuance of an O-A 

https://thaiconsulatela.org/en/visa/visa-type/non-immigration-category-o-a/

 

Finally,  to those posters that state that other countries require long stay visitors to have adequate insurance. I know of none that will only accept insurance policies written in their own country.  This police order once again doesn't pass the smell test since only Thai insurance companies can participate 

This is the real problem.

[Sheryl]

13 hours ago, Lovethailandelite said:

You seem very certain you was entered in to the Immigration database with a leave to remain date of 12 months, when the I/O's in front of you told you 30 days? IMO, you have a stamping error in your passport.
And why you would think a land crossing would be any different in applying the Police order regarding an O-A visa, I really cannot begin to imagine. That just isn't going to happen.

 

Re=read his post. The IO in front of him who stamped his passport was not the IO who told him he would be given 30 days.

 

Different IO stamped him in.

[Mike Teavee]

4 minutes ago, saengd said:

I have been told by a large trusted agent that a transfer from an O-A based on retirement, to an O based on marriage, is dooable without leaving the country, exactly why it a transfer based on marriage is not, escapes me.

I think you can only do that where your extension is due (i.e. when your Non-OA Visa/Extension is up you can change the reason for the extension to be on the basis of being married, obviously as long as you meet the criteria ???? ), I don't believe you can transfer mid-year.

[Sheryl]

4 minutes ago, Langsuan Man said:

Once again typical over reach by IO's at the airport.  When I present a valid O-A upon entry into the Kingdom I don't have to provide another Medical Certificate, or proof of funds and monthly income, or proof of where I am staying.  I provided all that when I applied for the Visa.  If MFA, Immigration, or the Police don't trust the system for issuing Visa's, why bother with them.  They should force everyone to get Visa on Arrival, that way they can check everything upon arrival and have really long lines upon entry 

 

 

Actually the people reporting here had not shown proof of insurance when they applied for their visa, as they received their visas prior to the effective date. That is the whole issue in this thread.

 

Embassies/consulates were informed this system was effective 31 October and they quite logically took that to mean they had to see proof of insurance before issuing any visa from that date forward and none of them (as far as we have heard)  required it prior to that date. But  people issued visas prior to that date and entering now are being asked to show proof of insurance; they are asked because there is no Embassy notation next to their visa and there is no notation because the Embassy did not check for it.

We have not yet had any reports of entry by people whose OA was issued after the effective date of 31 October.

[Ellis]

28 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

seems to me they have clarified the rules and its expats that are in denial.

 

they are saying: if you want to enter on a non-oa you will need the mandated insurance.

 

sorry but everybody in immigration is telling you this, you said so yourself.

On the contrary, most officials I've spoken to admitted they didn't really understand the rules and wound up either referring things up the line, or making a phone call. They've been instructed how to play this by the senior mid ranking levels who've made a judgment call. The way hierarchy works here, this means that one person misinterprets it at a senior level and dozens of junior officers start repeating it. The only clarification I've seen of the rules is one directing officials to check remarks on a visa, which came after the original police order, which suggested that older visas and extensions would be unaffected as no remarks would be present.

 

No expats are in denial and unless you're personally affected by this issue right now you're out of line in criticising people for taking issue with it.

[Sheryl]

Important info for Canadians: I have been in touch with a member issued an OA before the 31st but not yet departing for Thailand who has a foreign policy (Allianz) and could nto get them to issue a certificate. He contacted the Vancouver Consulate and they agreed to provide notation in his passport of insurance requirement met based on a review of his actual policy documents which he mailed them.

 

No guarantee other Consulates/Embassies will do the same but worth trying if you have a foreign policy and are having trouble getting the approved "certificate" signed (as most will).

 

And, of course, this will help only for the first 1 year entry. Still, worth exploring if in the same situation.

[Sheryl]

3 hours ago, Ellis said:

Here's another report. 

 

 

Just to clarify - AETNA Thailand most definitely is on the approved list, as anyone can see on the website (they will not newly insure you if you are over 65 though, and will not guarntee lifetime renewal unless you enroll before age 60, though, which makes them a viable option only for younger retirees).

 

I can only suppose this person had a policy with AETNA International (or an AETNA branch  based in another country).

 

If his policy was with AETNA Thailand they would have issued him a certificate for immigration.

 

If by some chance he did have an AETNA Thailand policy he needs to contact AETNA at once, report the problem and get the certificate from them then return to Immigration with it.