O/A visa and insurance experience today

[Sheryl]

21 minutes ago, La Migra said:

Question for all: Have their been reports of anyone actually signing up/buying the insurance at the airport/port of entry?

I have read of those given a choice of 30 day visa exempt entry or buy - but no one opting to buy. (Plus the original post being given the option then being stamped in for 12 months).

So again, any reports of someone signing up/buying insurance at the airport?

 

Yes, someone mentioned seeing 2 people do that.

 

Which means they got what I frankly would regard as virtually worthless policies. Any policy you can buy  on the spot has not been reviewed by underwriters. What those companies do is, instead of underwriting the insurance, wait until there is a claim and then start investigating and looking for any indication the problem was related to a pre-existing condition. Lots of denials result, sometimes on pretty tenuous grounds; even if not denied there will be long delays paying the hospital while they root around studying your medical history. This frankly shoddy practice is common here and along with the very low levels of cover.

 

A proper health insurance policy is issued after a careful review of your medical history by trained underwriters, sometimes asking for further information to help them in their assessment. It states up front what if any things are considered to be pre-existing and thus excluded. So you know from the start - before you even pay for it - what you are getting and what will be covered. This takes some time, typically a few weeks but in  pinch could probably be done in a few days. It cannot be done instantaneously.

 

 

[Martyp]

22 minutes ago, La Migra said:

Question for all: Have their been reports of anyone actually signing up/buying the insurance at the airport/port of entry?

I have read of those given a choice of 30 day visa exempt entry or buy - but no one opting to buy. (Plus the original post being given the option then being stamped in for 12 months).

So again, any reports of someone signing up/buying insurance at the airport?

I believe I’ve seen one report, very early on, of someone who bought a policy from the TGIA website. Probably using a smartphone.

[Rdrokit]

3 hours ago, Thaidream said:

Just the opposite- if they were attempting to apply the change retroactively, they would have specifically stated  it applies to all O-A Visa issued regardless of date and any susequent extensions.

The confusion appears to be in the wording. It could be interpreted either way depending on how it is read.

 

IMO- no law can or should be applied retroactively-  the concept is ex post facto. If something was not a crime 10 years ago- it can't be applied to what happened 10 yearss ago even if today it is a crime. 

  If I obtained an O-A Visa 10 years ago and there was no requirement for insurance and you kept succesively extending- the  rule should not logically be applied.  It should only be applied on or after the effective date.

 

 

But immigration does not think that way. I got my original O-A visa in 2007. When I did my 90 day report on Friday at Korat Immigration I showed them my passport and asked it I need health insurance when I renewed my visa in Feb. Their answer was yes so there is no grandfathering being done.

[La Migra]

23 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

44 minutes ago, La Migra said:

Question for all: Have their been reports of anyone actually signing up/buying the insurance at the airport/port of entry?

Yes, someone mentioned seeing 2 people do that. ...Which means they got what I frankly would regard as virtually worthless policies. Any policy you can buy  on the spot has not been reviewed by underwriters.

Thank you, that is what I was thinking, that any policy you could get instantly via your phone standing in secondary at the airport would be worthless...... if you could get it at all.

23 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

...seeing 2 people do that.

But no first hand reports?

Edited November 10, 2019 by La Migra
clarity

[Max69xl]

9 minutes ago, Rdrokit said:

But immigration does not think that way. I got my original O-A visa in 2007. When I did my 90 day report on Friday at Korat Immigration I showed them my passport and asked it I need health insurance when I renewed my visa in Feb. Their answer was yes so there is no grandfathering being done.

Just because the immigration office in Korat said you will need an insurance in February,doesn't mean they're right. Just wait and see what happens. It's just been 11 days so far. 

[lkv]

1 hour ago, Martyp said:

I believe I’ve seen one report, very early on, of someone who bought a policy from the TGIA website. Probably using a smartphone.

 

It's not that easy 1-2-3.

 

Once you buy the insurance, the insurance companies will register you on the tgia portal manually (likely takes some time) then immigration has to connect to that portal, check there etc.

 

I would not even be surprised if Immigration cannot even connect to the database as of today.

 

Plus, let's make it clear, you don't buy insurance from the tgia website, you buy insurance from the participating companies.

 

I don't believe insurance is sold online by these companies, like buying a plane ticket and paying with card here in Thailand, but I stand to be corrected.

 

Even if it was, they have to approve you, register you in the portal etc.

 

That report is most likely bogus.

Edited November 10, 2019 by lkv

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 minutes ago, lkv said:

 

It's not that easy 1-2-3.

 

Once you buy the insurance, the insurance companies will register you on the tgia portal manually (likely takes some time) then immigration has to connect to that portal, check there etc.

 

I would not even be surprised if they cannot connect to the database as of today.

 

That report is most likely bogus.

 

 

I'm pretty sure there's no way to purchase any policy directly thru the TGIA website itself. It has no purchase functionality.

 

There may be ways to purchase policies online from the individual websites of some of the Thai insurers that are part of the O-A insurance program, though I suspect that wouldn't be easy.

 

But either way, to be accepted by Immigration -- apart from the database issue -- the visitor is going to need to show an O-A insurance certificate sent by their insurer specifying their compliance, coverage and policy duration. I understand, at least some of the involved insurers are gearing up to be able to send out those certificates via email after a policy is acquired.

 

Normally in such cases, but I'm just speaking generally now, the applicant also is required to fill out a medical history form and statement that would include any past medical issues and treatments going back for years.  Almost certain not easy to accomplish via any website on a mobile phone standing around the Immigration kiosks at Swampy. May be possible via voice phone call to the insurer in such a situation.

Edited November 10, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[LivinLOS]

4 hours ago, jackdd said:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1B2icrv51NImXmu-QrsEvLG6jbh2Ulwl8/view

 

For me this is quite clear, if you enter after 31.10. with an OA visa these rules apply.

If they wanted to make OA visas issued before 31.10. exempt from this they would have stated this

more than 'quite clear', I struggle to understand how any one could read it any other way.. 

 

It makes it absolutely clear that these are the rules for 'entry' to the kingdom from 31st Oct onwards. Not 'for visas issued after' as so many claim. 

[Ellis]

6 hours ago, La Migra said:

Question for all: Have their been reports of anyone actually signing up/buying the insurance at the airport/port of entry?

I have read of those given a choice of 30 day visa exempt entry or buy - but no one opting to buy. (Plus the original post being given the option then being stamped in for 12 months).

So again, any reports of someone signing up/buying insurance at the airport?

I was shown two receipts for insurance on the immigration officer's smartphone for policies sold earlier that day. One was for a full year of cover, the second was six months to cover the length of the proposed stay. 

[Ellis]

13 hours ago, saengd said:

14 hours ago, Thaidream said:

The O-A insurance project accordng to the info from the Health Ministery was to be a  pilot project and IMo the project isn't doing well.

Is that written somewhere, if so where, please, I thought the O-X project was a pilot for this?

It's described as a pilot project here. 

https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30377292

[lkv]

1 hour ago, Ellis said:

I was shown two receipts for insurance on the immigration officer's smartphone for policies sold earlier that day. One was for a full year of cover, the second was six months to cover the length of the proposed stay. 

 

1. It has been explained already by myself and couple of other members of this forum that the process of buying insurance is more complex than what you are describing. Yet, you are claiming it's as easy as booking a flight.

 

2. You claimed on page 5 of this thread that you have a non O-A and you were stamped for 30 days. What's the evolution of that situation by the way?

 

3. You joined 4 days ago, welcome to the forum. We hope to see you around in the future. Many members, they just post a little, then vanish.

Edited November 10, 2019 by lkv

[merijn]

What <deleted> me off big time is that they only except health insurances from Thai companies.

As i travel internationally a lot and i want to have a good insurance i have a world wide health insurance from Cigna (UK) which is good for 30 M Baht a year.

This insurance is in the Thai eyes not good enough and i have to buy a very expensive (more expensive then my ww Cigna insurance) Thai health insurance which is only valid inside Thailand and is basically worthless.

Luckily i started on a normal Non-O so it is at this time not applicable for me but you never know what they will do in the future.

 

[jacko45k]

18 hours ago, Thaidream said:

That maybe their initial intention but I believe they will back off

Wasn't that the consensus some months back, around July, when obligatory insurance was to be implemented for Non-Imm-OA and it never materialized. It just arrived, a bit late. We only have retirement extensions and Elite Visas remaining to close this huge claimed expense of non-paying sick Expats!  I expect old guys on Marriage Extensions to get away with it, although why I am unsure.

[KeeTua]

13 hours ago, Max69xl said:

13 hours ago, sappersrest said:

Try telling that to the IO in Chiang Mai who is refusing extensions for such as a case you have mentioned.That is a fact not hearsay.

It doesn't make it right when/if an IO interprets the police order in a wrong way. 

In these pages there have been reports from Jomtien, CW, Chiang Mai, Korat that insurance will be required for O-A extensions of stay. You suggest the IOs are not interpreting the police order correctly.  I can only assume you read Thai at a very high level and understand it's nuances better than the IOs at these various offices. Please direct me to the text in the Thai version of the police order that supports your position that they are all getting it wrong.

[Peterw42]

2 minutes ago, KeeTua said:

In these pages there have been reports from Jomtien, CW, Chiang Mai, Korat that insurance will be required for O-A extensions of stay. You suggest the IOs are not interpreting the police order correctly.  I can only assume you read Thai at a very high level and understand it's nuances better than the IOs at these various offices. Please direct me to the text in the Thai version of the police order that supports your position that they are all getting it wrong.

Yes lots of "will be required" reports and just as many not required reports.

I started a specific thread trying to get some first hand reports of actually being asked for insurance for an extension, so far there are no reports.

 

 

[ThailandRyan]

I return to Bangkok on the 22nd with my new OA issued from the Thai Consulate Los Angeles on October 3rd.  I hope by then its played out in one direction or the other.  The Consulate indicated on Friday that they have only issued 1 OA since the 31st with the showing of insurance.  The Visa officer I spoke to indicated that they were not stamping anything into the Visa different than they had before indicating whether the person had an approved insurance policy.  He stated that why would they put those notes into the Visa if after the 31st it was a requirement to obtain the Visa in the first place.  This was a confirmation call I made based upon my first call earlier in the week.  He did pass on my earlier information and they were waiting to hear back from Bangkok regarding the Visas issued prior to the 31st which did not require insurance to be shown in order to obtain them.  My current HI policy is an Anthem Worldwide policy which I have used many times in the past at Bangkok Hospital in Udon Thani, with no problems.  Anthem has indicated that they can not get the directors signatures or a signatory on the form required by the Thai Government as it does not comply with the type of policies they issue. Even though the limits are far above the requirements, each incident is covered at different amounts based upon the procedures, and thus as the agent explained is why they will not sign the form as they do not issue insurance within Thailand.

Edited November 11, 2019 by ThailandRyan
Update

[Momofarang]

47 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I expect old guys on Marriage Extensions to get away with it, although why I am unsure.

This is one of the dumbest baits I have seen on this thread. Especially from someone who must be over 50 himself...

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

This is one of the dumbest baits I have seen on this thread. Especially from someone who must be over 50 himself...

You misinterpret. The subject was that of who will be required to show medical insurance to stay in Thailand. People arriving with O-As are required, people making retirement extensions with O-A originating Permits to Stay are 'rumoured' to need it... and some expect all retirement extensions to eventually need it. Marriage extensions, which of course includes younger people and those who may well be working, have yet to be mentioned. 

To be honest, I have no idea what you are trying to say. I know many on marriage extensions, without insurance, who are quite old, and would be in dire straits if they got sick. 

[Momofarang]

8 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

You misinterpret. The subject was that of who will be required to show medical insurance to stay in Thailand. People arriving with O-As are required, people making retirement extensions with O-A originating Permits to Stay are 'rumoured' to need it... and some expect all retirement extensions to eventually need it. Marriage extensions, which of course includes younger people and those who may well be working, have yet to be mentioned. 

To be honest, I have no idea what you are trying to say. I know many on marriage extensions, without insurance, who are quite old, and would be in dire straits if they got sick. 

Ok, I have overreacted.

 

I am in the O-A/ marriage and will switch to O as soon as I leave to country for a holiday. If the refuse my next extension I'll just ask for a 2 months visa for family support so that I can wait until the summer school holiday.

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

Ok, I have overreacted.

 

I am in the O-A/ marriage and will switch to O as soon as I leave to country for a holiday. If the refuse my next extension I'll just ask for a 2 months visa for family support so that I can wait until the summer school holiday.

At the moment it is not necessary, but you seem to be planning ahead and have covered the bases. How about insurance, do you carry it? 

[merijn]

1 hour ago, KeeTua said:

In these pages there have been reports from Jomtien, CW, Chiang Mai, Korat that insurance will be required for O-A extensions of stay. You suggest the IOs are not interpreting the police order correctly.  I can only assume you read Thai at a very high level and understand it's nuances better than the IOs at these various offices. Please direct me to the text in the Thai version of the police order that supports your position that they are all getting it wrong.

Phuket Immigration will also require the health insurance if the extension is based on a O-A visa, If the extension is based on a other visa NO insurance is required.

[brianj1964]

13 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

You misinterpret. The subject was that of who will be required to show medical insurance to stay in Thailand. People arriving with O-As are required, people making retirement extensions with O-A originating Permits to Stay are 'rumoured' to need it... and some expect all retirement extensions to eventually need it. Marriage extensions, which of course includes younger people and those who may well be working, have yet to be mentioned. 

To be honest, I have no idea what you are trying to say. I know many on marriage extensions, without insurance, who are quite old, and would be in dire straits if they got sick. 

I was explaining just this exact scenario only yesterday with my former boss in the uk, I'm 55 on an O-A and require insurance, yet an 80 year old on a Non-Imm O married to a 24 year old doesn't require insurance, it doesn't make sense. I suggest everyone migrates to a Non-Imm O. I believe in insurance but not being forced into overpriced policies that probably have poor coverage

[UncleFesterNightmare]

17 minutes ago, brianj1964 said:

I was explaining just this exact scenario only yesterday with my former boss in the uk, I'm 55 on an O-A and require insurance, yet an 80 year old on a Non-Imm O married to a 24 year old doesn't require insurance, it doesn't make sense. I suggest everyone migrates to a Non-Imm O. I believe in insurance but not being forced into overpriced policies that probably have poor coverage

Or go the 400k route for taking care of a Thai.  That seems easier.

[Mango Bob]

41 minutes ago, brianj1964 said:

I was explaining just this exact scenario only yesterday with my former boss in the uk, I'm 55 on an O-A and require insurance, yet an 80 year old on a Non-Imm O married to a 24 year old doesn't require insurance, it doesn't make sense. I suggest everyone migrates to a Non-Imm O. I believe in insurance but not being forced into overpriced policies that probably have poor coverage

Not everyone is married to some 24 year old.

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, ThailandRyan said:

I return to Bangkok on the 22nd with my new OA issued from the Thai Consulate Los Angeles on October 3rd.  I hope by then its played out in one direction or the other.  The Consulate indicated on Friday that they have only issued 1 OA since the 31st with the showing of insurance.  The Visa officer I spoke to indicated that they were not stamping anything into the Visa different than they had before indicating whether the person had an approved insurance policy.  He stated that why would they put those notes into the Visa if after the 31st it was a requirement to obtain the Visa in the first place.  This was a confirmation call I made based upon my first call earlier in the week.  He did pass on my earlier information and they were waiting to hear back from Bangkok regarding the Visas issued prior to the 31st which did not require insurance to be shown in order to obtain them.  My current HI policy is an Anthem Worldwide policy which I have used many times in the past at Bangkok Hospital in Udon Thani, with no problems.  Anthem has indicated that they can not get the directors signatures or a signatory on the form required by the Thai Government as it does not comply with the type of policies they issue. Even though the limits are far above the requirements, each incident is covered at different amounts based upon the procedures, and thus as the agent explained is why they will not sign the form as they do not issue insurance within Thailand.

Thanks for the post.     The LA Consulate makes perfect sense- why indeed would they mark a passport after 31 Oct 2019 indicating insurance when they have already checked one has it as it is a requirement.   In the past they never marked apassport indicating one  had fullfilled the other requirements.  If one did not fullfill the requirements they wouldn't have the visa.

 

IMO the police order is unclear and shows a lack of professonalism and co-ordination with other necessary ministries.  IMO there is no reason to check if a person has insurance at the airport at all. If one has an O-A prior to 31 October 2019 there is no insurance reuirement.  If one has an O-A issued after 31 Oct 2019- the Embassy/Consulate alread checked the insurance.  Why check again =they don't check the income requirement again/

 

What is not clear to me is what happens when someone with an O-A dated prior to 31 October 2019 goes into an Immigration Office and seeks an extension.  Logic tells me- there is no requirement- yet we have had reports that several offices are teling people it is required.  In fact, there is a note posted at Jomtien  office indicating it may be required but even the note is incomplete and is questionable.

 

We can only hope common sense plays out and is prodded by inquiries made by Thai Embassies/Consulated back to the Ministry of Foreign Afairs and the local US/British and others send diplomatic notes to the Ministry.

[brianj1964]

3 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

Not everyone is married to some 24 year old.

It was an example

[merijn]

4 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

What is not clear to me is what happens when someone with an O-A dated prior to 31 October 2019 goes into an Immigration Office and seeks an extension.  Logic tells me- there is no requirement- yet we have had reports that several offices are teling people it is required.  In fact, there is a note posted at Jomtien  office indicating it may be required but even the note is incomplete and is questionable.

 

We can only hope common sense plays out and is prodded by inquiries made by Thai Embassies/Consulated back to the Ministry of Foreign Afairs and the local US/British and others send diplomatic notes to the Ministry.

When the extension is done on a O-A visa the insurance is required regardless when the O-A was issued. (so also when this is for example the 10 extension)

[Thaidream]

4 minutes ago, merijn said:

When the extension is done on a O-A visa the insurance is required regardless when the O-A was issued. (so also when this is for example the 10 extension)

That is what the police order MAY say  and some IOs have indicated the same but I and others do not believe the Police Order actualy indicates that and that prior O-A holders are grandfathered.

 

I may be completely wrong. time will tell.

[Momofarang]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

At the moment it is not necessary, but you seem to be planning ahead and have covered the bases. How about insurance, do you carry it? 

I have a "no limit" cover, with max deductible equivalent to one week of income. Spending 200k to 300k yearly at Burmrungrad. And these frakkers want me to pay another 50k to 120k into their corrupt scheme!

Edited November 11, 2019 by Momofarang

[Peter Denis]

6 hours ago, Ellis said:

I was shown two receipts for insurance on the immigration officer's smartphone for policies sold earlier that day. One was for a full year of cover, the second was six months to cover the length of the proposed stay. 

5 hours ago, lkv said:

1. It has been explained already by myself and couple of other members of this forum that the process of buying insurance is more complex than what you are describing. Yet, you are claiming it's as easy as booking a flight.

@Ellisdid not claim anything, he just reported his experience and we should be thankful for him doing so.

 

However, I do agree that anyone offered to buy health-insurance on-the-spot at the Airport in order to be stamped in for 1 year when arriving on a pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa, should absolutely refuse that offer.

There are now also several reports of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa holders with no health-insurance nor re-entry permit that have been stamped in for the full 1 year.

So, it could have been an error of border-immigration to demand health-insurance for those early-arrivers, that has since then been corrected.