Removed a troll post.

20 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

 

 

There's been no such clarification regarding O-A based retirement extension of stay applications being filed from Oct. 31 onward. And there continue to be fresh reports arriving from various Immigration offices of insurance being required, rightly or wrongly, when past O-A visa holders now apply for retirement extensions of stay.

 

This is the part that needs clarifying. 

There are genuine guys who are worried sick about their pending visit to immigration and not being prepared for their possible request for Insurance cover. 

Guys supporting families with existing foreign cover who are going to be driven out as they cannot afford the extra expense. 

If it’s not true then these people need putting out of their misery and stress. 

At the moment all we are seeing is conflicting reports, genuine or not.

 

Can I politely request that Mods remove all posts across all threads that are not in line with the current Immigration requirement  re extensions so as not to unnecessarily worry those on extensions. 

 

 

10 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

This would make sense wouldn't? But I'll keep my doubts for myself.

It would actually make sense but given how often the visa rules don't make sense here let's hope that change isn't really going to happen. 

1 minute ago, Kadilo said:

This is the part that needs clarifying. 

There are genuine guys who are worried sick about their pending visit to immigration and not being prepared for their possible request for Insurance cover. 

Guys supporting families with existing foreign cover who are going to be driven out as they cannot afford the extra expense. 

If it’s not true then these people need putting out of their misery and stress. 

At the moment all we are seeing is conflicting reports, genuine or not. 

 

Yeah its starting to feel like being on retirement status in Thailand is ideal for masochists. 

34 minutes ago, crazygreg44 said:

...

There are incoming reports that a correction in the interpretation of the police order has led to a "grandfathering" scheme regarding all O/A visa that were issued before 31 st of October 2019 which says, NO health insurance needed for extension of the O/A or an EOS resulting from an O/A from this period.

...

If indeed correct that would be great news!

3 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

That's great news!

There were several reports that holders of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visas when entering Thailand were not stamped in for the 1-year they were entitled to, because of no health-insurance.  But after Nov 7 it was confirmed that that was a mistake, and these unfortunates have now the possibility to have the mistake corrected at IO.

But what you are saying is that ALSO those applying for an extension of stay based on an original pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa are grandfathered, and so NO health insurance required.

Cheers and Champagne!

Too early for champagne. Haven't heard that about extensions. What's his source? 

6 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

That's great news!

There were several reports that holders of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visas when entering Thailand were not stamped in for the 1-year they were entitled to, because of no health-insurance.  But after Nov 7 it was confirmed that that was a mistake, and these unfortunates have now the possibility to have the mistake corrected at IO.

But what you are saying is that ALSO those applying for an extension of stay based on an original pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa are grandfathered, and so NO health insurance required.

Cheers and Champagne!

it seems that I am wrongly convinced about this.

 

Read the post above from Kadilo . . . it tells all.  We still don't know what is going to happen to all those who are already on an EOS resulting from a former Non-Imm-O/A and who need  need their yearly extension.

 

in fact . . it is too early for Champagne !

 

8 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

But what you are saying is that ALSO those applying for an extension of stay based on an original pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa are grandfathered, and so NO health insurance required.

Cheers and Champagne!

 

I wouldn't pop the champagne on O-A extensions of stay just yet....

 

I have no idea what the basis of Greg's claim is regarding EOS and insurance, and there certainly haven't been any supporting reports that I've seen of that.

 

He may be thinking that just because Immigration now seems to be clarifying that pre Oct. 31 O-A issue visa entries don't require insurance, that that somehow automatically produces the same result for extension of stay applications. Thus far, I see no evidence of that.

 

PS Edit - Ya, as I was saying....

 

2 hours ago, Haribo said:

One of our clients just came to us from immigration in Hua Hin. The customer is continuously for 4 years with annual extensions of an OA visa in Thailand. He has not received a new extension because he had no health insurance certificate. This means that in Hua Hin even with an extension of an OA visa the proof of insurance must be present. So not only at new exhibitions abroad but also with extensions in Thailand. Can someone from another region confirm or deny this to me? Thanks

Would it not be more accurate for you to contact other agents rather than rely on TVF?

At some point, Immigration is going to have to reckon with a similar set of issues for O-A based retirement extensions of stay as they are now with O-A visa entries (especially after adding the insurance requirement language for O-A visa holders to the retirement extensions of stay order).

 

--After requiring insurance for Oct. 31 and onward O-A visa issuances, are they suddenly going to let those folks off the insurance hook when a year or two later they might switch to future retirement extensions of stay? I doubt it.

 

--And what about the pre-Oct. 31 O-A visa holders who now may already be on current retirement extensions of stay? There are numerous reports of Immigration offices telling those folks that they'll be required to show insurance upon renewal. Is that just another big misunderstanding, or is that what they're going to stick to?

--

32 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

This would make sense wouldn't? But I'll keep my doubts for myself.

 

probably need to close the non-o loophole first without setting off a panic visa run to it!

 

 

2 hours ago, Haribo said:

One of our clients just came to us from immigration in Hua Hin. The customer is continuously for 4 years with annual extensions of an OA visa in Thailand. He has not received a new extension because he had no health insurance certificate. This means that in Hua Hin even with an extension of an OA visa the proof of insurance must be present. So not only at new exhibitions abroad but also with extensions in Thailand. Can someone from another region confirm or deny this to me? Thanks

I hope you are not offended by the initial incredulous response your post received.  Many here are somewhat 'stressed out' by the continuing uncertainty whether health-insurance will be required for extensions of stay for pre Oct 31 issued OA Visas. 

At this moment we welcome ANY reports that can shed light on this matter, so THANK YOU for your contribution.

Of course, first-hand reports are preferred as these tend to be more accurate than hear-say.  Posting a scan of the passport-page with the original OA Visa category also helps to avoid any confusion that might arise.  

Thanks.   

55 minutes ago, crazygreg44 said:

excuse me, are you an internet troll ?

 

There are incoming reports that a correction in the interpretation of the police order has led to a "grandfathering" scheme regarding all O/A visa that were issued before 31 st of October 2019 which says, NO health insurance needed for extension of the O/A or an EOS resulting from an O/A from this period.

 

and YOU - completely new to this forum - want to tell us something else ?  

There are incoming reports to the effect that people are being stamped in for 12 months. 

 

I have yet to read any successful extension granted or grandfathering reports for that.. Could you link to it please ??

4 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

There are incoming reports to the effect that people are being stamped in for 12 months. 

 

I have yet to read any successful extension granted or grandfathering reports for that.. Could you link to it please ??

I already posted my excuse as I cannot clarify that EOS are going to be grandfathered

 

As goes for the EOS with older O/A or existing EOS extended for another year, I was wrong in my assumptions. 

 

We still do not know what is going to happen, it is too early too say with 100% clarity

 

I wish to express my sincere apologies for assuming member "haribo" for being a troll

1 minute ago, crazygreg44 said:

I already posted my excuse as I cannot clarify that EOS are going to be grandfathered

 

As goes for the EOS with older O/A or existing EOS extended for another year, I was wrong in my assumptions.  We still do not know what is going to happen, it is too early too say with 100% clarity

yes I was catching up the thread.. 

 

I think its perfectly clear.. But then I also believe the stamping in instructions are absolutely clear, and they have back tracked on that and are stamping in contrary to the written instruction. 

4 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

probably need to close the non-o loophole first without setting off a panic visa run to it!

 

 

May i ask nicely

for clarafication of your Non O  loop hole

as for myself

have had a Non O  visa since 2003 and have abided by their laws .(800ks in the bank etc etc) in full.

Never knew of a loop hole ever

Perhaps i am not in the loop????

 

5 hours ago, brianj1964 said:

So is clarification now issued before 31/10 no insurance, issued after 31/10 yes insurance? And ALL extensions yes insurance?

5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

No

 

Just to clairfy, @ubonjoe, what is your opinion on whether these people will need insurance for an extension based on retirement?

 

1. Person A has a current OA issued before 31st October, but has never extended.

2. Person B has at least one retirement extension based on an OA issued at some point in the past.

 

Thanks.

 

12 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

 

 

Just to clairfy, @ubonjoe, what is your opinion on whether these people will need insurance for an extension based on retirement?

 

1. Person A has a current OA issued before 31st October, but has never extended.

2. Person B has at least one retirement extension based on an OA issued at some point in the past.

 

Thanks.

 

Person A will need insurance at one Immigration office but not another.

 

Person B will not need insurance at one Immigration office but will at another.

 

There will be a meeting eventually, and they would all need or not need insurance.

1 minute ago, lkv said:

Person A will need insurance at one Immigration office but not another.

 

Person B will not need insurance at one Immigration office but will at another.

 

There will be a meeting eventually, and they would all need or not need insurance.

That's cleared that up then. ???? Have you ever thought about applying for a job at Immigration? 

4 minutes ago, Exploring Thailand said:

That's cleared that up then. ???? Have you ever thought about applying for a job at Immigration? 

Having just arrived last week I have best part of 12 months to see how it plays out, got a 12 month stamp so I'm happy...at the moment

4 minutes ago, brianj1964 said:

Having just arrived last week I have best part of 12 months to see how it plays out, got a 12 month stamp so I'm happy...at the moment

I'm in the same situation. I was stamped in for a year on the 30th. 

2 hours ago, Kadilo said:

Guys supporting families with existing foreign cover who are going to be driven out as they cannot afford the extra expense. 

If it’s not true then these people need putting out of their misery and stress.

Surely those supporting families should be on an extension based on marriage and therefore excluded from this problem anyway.

2 hours ago, newatthis said:

Would it not be more accurate for you to contact other agents rather than rely on TVF?

They're no agents with more knowledge than people here.

1 hour ago, deej said:

May i ask nicely

for clarafication of your Non O  loop hole

as for myself

have had a Non O  visa since 2003 and have abided by their laws .(800ks in the bank etc etc) in full.

Never knew of a loop hole ever

Perhaps i am not in the loop????

I would suggest the loophole he's  referring to is one that allows somebody presently on an O-A to leave Thailand then return on a VE/non O thereby bypassing the need for any insurance.

 

There isn't a loophole for people already on a non O. They're not part of the insurance issue anyway.

2 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

--And what about the pre-Oct. 31 O-A visa holders who now may already be on current retirement extensions of stay? There are numerous reports of Immigration offices telling those folks that they'll be required to show insurance upon renewal. Is that just another big misunderstanding, or is that what they're going to stick to?

--

 

That is the $10,000 question.

 

Another important point, is that several Embassies nowadays (Washington, Jakarta just to name the first two popping up on Google, will only issue a non immigrant visa category "O" for the following purposes:

 

Non-Immigrant Visa Type “O” may be granted to applicants who meet one of the following requirements:

• Applicants who are lawfully married to a Thai citizen
• Dependents of a foreigner currently working or studying full-time in Thailand
• Volunteers or applicants who work for a non-governmental organization (NGO)

 

No so called "retirement" is mentioned there. Because that's what the non O-A is for (long stay).

 

One should take into account that trend also.

47 minutes ago, john terry1001 said:

Surely those supporting families should be on an extension based on marriage and therefore excluded from this problem anyway.

There seems to be a tacit assumption that anyone supporting a Thai wife / family is on an extension to a non-O visa.  This is not correct.  i personally know of several people, who are married to Thais, who originally started out with a non-OA and have been on extensions for many years.  Most are extending for 'retirement', despite having a Thai wife, merely because this involves far less bureaucracy.  It does require twice the finances, of course, but if you can meet these, it is far less hassle than getting an extension based on marriage.

46 minutes ago, john terry1001 said:

Surely those supporting families should be on an extension based on marriage and therefore excluded from this problem anyway.

Perhaps they are not in Thailand  continuously, perhaps not the 90-120 days to get a marriage extension, perhaps they were using a O-A for its ME capabilities, perhaps they prefer to prove funds in home country, perhaps they could not get the Thai insurance anyway, as they are not always in Thailand continuously etc. ????????

But they do hope to be able to come and be with there family as often as possible ???? ????. Does the insurance cover for immigration issue stress or is it excluded ????????.

6 minutes ago, doctormann said:

There seems to be a tacit assumption that anyone supporting a Thai wife / family is on an extension to a non-O visa.  This is not correct.  i personally know of several people, who are married to Thais, who originally started out with a non-OA and have been on extensions for many years.  Most are extending for 'retirement', despite having a Thai wife, merely because this involves far less bureaucracy.  It does require twice the finances, of course, but if you can meet these, it is far less hassle than getting an extension based on marriage.

That would be my case. I arrived on an OA in Feb 2017. My first extension of stay was based on retirement. I got married to a Thai this March but in October decided to continue my extension of stay based on retirement for the reason you stated.  I happen to have Pacific Cross insurance already so I don't expect my next extension of stay to be an issue.

24 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

That is the $10,000 question.

 

As far as I am concerned it is now confirmed that in Chiang Mai at least, all O-A visa extension based on retirement will require evidence of health insurance, what other offices around the country do may vary.