O/A visa and insurance experience today

[lkv]

6 hours ago, Thaidream said:

What are these people to do?

Extend the temporary stay again for another year by meeting current requirements, or terminate the visit.

 

Nobody forced them to sell their assets, but if they did, they can rent.

 

If they cannot afford to rent, and they are indeed homeless, as you say, it may have to do with improper financial planning, and no foreign country will welcome them with open arms.

[UncleMhee]

 

3 hours ago, lkv said:

it may have to do with improper financial planning, and no foreign country will welcome them with open arms.

We can't all be clever dicks who can see unforseen circumstances.....I hope the world never goes tits up for you! But that's just me....many others may welcome it to happen with that sort of attitude.

[GeorgeCross]

4 hours ago, lkv said:

Extend the temporary stay again for another year by meeting current requirements, or terminate the visit.

 

Nobody forced them to sell their assets, but if they did, they can rent.

 

If they cannot afford to rent, and they are indeed homeless, as you say, it may have to do with improper financial planning, and no foreign country will welcome them with open arms.

 

and heartless **** of the day award goes to..

 

[john terry1001]

The UK have changed their rules several times over the last few years regarding people who have entered the UK under one set of rules but find they have to meet different/new rules that are in place if they want to continue their stay when their current permission of stay comes to an end.

 

 A change in the English language requirements, changes to the finance requirements and changes to documentary proof for those finance requirements spring to mind straight away and there are more.

 

If you complain about not being able to meet those new requirements you are told bluntly there is nothing to stop you and your spouse living in your own country.

[el jefe]

1 hour ago, UncleMhee said:

 

We can't all be clever dicks who can see unforseen circumstances.....I hope the world never goes tits up for you! But that's just me....many others may welcome it to happen with that sort of attitude.

While it's sad that some people failed to plan, if they have no assets and no insurance those are exactly the expats the Thai government wants out. They're the cause of this mess.

[Langsuan Man]

Too many cooks spoil the broth

 

Any appeals to the US Embassy should be directed at the economic pain this new policy is going to have on US insurance companies.  No one gives a damn about retirees, but the Embassy Economic Officer will be taken to task when Blue Cross / Blue Shield is forced out of Thailand, not to mention the dust up that is coming over Tri Care that COL Wayne Turnbull, the Defense Attach'e,  is eventually going to have to deal with 

 

With all due respect to posters here, you really don't understand how the US Embassy, and the Foreign Service specifically,  works.  And trust me the ACS are not the movers and shakers in the Diplomatic Community.  The power lies with the Political Officers followed by the Econ Officer and somewhere down the pecking order is the Consular Officer 

 

So those of you who are inclined to make your opinions known I would suggest that you direct your attention where it will do some good:

 

The Honorable Michael Heath

Chargé d’ Affaires

Embassy of the United States

120-22 Wireless Road

Bangkok, Thailand 10330

 

And trust me he has a whole staff who answer his correspondences and failure to respond has been known to sink many a diplomat's career 

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, john terry1001 said:

he UK have changed their rules several times over the last few years regarding people who have entered the UK under one set of rules but find they have to meet different/new rules that are in place if they want to continue their stay when their current permission of stay comes to an end.

Has the UK passed changes that are impossible to meet such as  forcing people to purchase insurance from only certain companies and then not selling the policies to certain people and making it impossible to meet the requirement.

 

You and I know that is not the coase and that laws must be fair and equitable. In addition, changes in laws need to have an appeal process or a way to challenge them.

 

There is no comparison to what Thailand is doing and what the UK and the USA does regarding Immigration.

 

In fact, at this very time the US is attempting to make medical insurace mandatory for anyone applying for Permanent Residency status in the Us  and the law has been challended and put on hold.   However, as part of the change- anyone currently in the US is grandfathered.  Even Donald Trump knows there is no way the US courts would allow a law to be applied ex post facto.

[lopburi3]

11 minutes ago, el jefe said:

While it's sad that some people failed to plan, if they have no assets and no insurance those are exactly the expats the Thai government wants out. They're the cause of this mess.

Actually many of us did plan but the goalposts seem to have been moved with retroactive effect. 

 

Where does being too old to obtain local insurance have anything to do with assets? 

 

Many of us have excellent insurance but it is not being allowed under current policy. 

[jackdd]

13 hours ago, Thaidream said:

It is  completely against all  ethical considerations to make somerthing mandatory that a person cannot obtain because it is not available.

Is there a right to stay in Thailand? Is Thailand obligated to offer a visa for every situation?

If somebody can't fullfill the requirements for a retirement visa they still have the option to buy the Thailand Elite visa.

[rosk]

On 11/6/2019 at 10:51 AM, brianj1964 said:

How much is this insurance costing per year?

they told me to take a picture of a web link when they originally told me I could get a tourist visa? My wife seemed to think the IO said 40,000

I am 59, have LMG Thai health insurance that covers 1.5 million, no outpatient. Price 47000 a year.

Asked yesterday price for outpatient that covers the 40000 required for OA visa and extension, is 22000 extra per year, basically for nothing.....

Will try the conversion to O visa when next extension is due June next year, if that loophole is not closed by then.

 

[Thaidream]

6 minutes ago, jackdd said:

s there a right to stay in Thailand? Is Thailand obligated to offer a visa for every situation?

If somebody can't fullfill the requirements for a retirement visa they still have the option to buy the Thailand Elite visa.

No one is arguing that Thailand cannot make medical insurance mandatory for  O-A Visas issued AFTER the mandatory date.  People who now want to retire in Thailand know that if they make that choice they need to arrange for the medical insurance.

 

The argument is fairness, equity and reciprocity. It is unethical and most likely illegal to  change a law/requirement  and  make it effective for people who came 20 years ago and never had the requirement.  This is not about planning or whether options exist such as the Elite Visa and who is to say that they won't at some time apply the rule ex post fact to that.

 

How would you like to spend500K or 1 million Baht for an elite Visa and then surprise, suprise 3 years later you need to have medical insurance but only from a Thai Company.

 

Think how one of your citizens who came to Thailand 20 years ago under the O-A Visa and has extened continuosly and is now 75 years old and all of a sudden that person is told they now need a medical insurance policy and they try and buy the insurance and are told- no company will sell them insurance.

 

If  you can't se the unfairness and absolute lack of any moral compass in such a situation you may want to  revist your consccience.

[Martyp]

32 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Is there a right to stay in Thailand? Is Thailand obligated to offer a visa for every situation?

If somebody can't fullfill the requirements for a retirement visa they still have the option to buy the Thailand Elite visa.

 

[john terry1001]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

Has the UK passed changes that are impossible to meet such as  forcing people to purchase insurance from only certain companies and then not selling the policies to certain people and making it impossible to meet the requirement.

I don't know where you're from, but YES, the UK have done, and probably still do.

 

As an example, it has passed laws to implement/change the requirements for a particular level of English to qualify for further and indefinite leave to remain and severely restricted where the exams can be taken.

 

Add to that the fact they do not inform people about any changes, either by contact or general advertising, so many are unaware of the changes until they need to update their leave to remain, by which time its too late to do anything (the life in the UK test immediately springs to mind) 

 

Refusing applications because the financial documents required (for self employed) are different for the ones listed in the online application was another, of many, problem.

 

I can guarantee these are genuine problems, I know the people involved personally.

 

But one of the most bizarre refusals I know personally was a friend bringing his wife to the UK. He rents his house and he's a self employed gas engineer sub contracted to British Gas, one of the largest Utility companies in the UK. They send him his daily work by text/email every morning before he starts then drives to each job to repair the fault in the customers own home. According to the British Embassy, receiving the list of his work before he leaves home means he's working from home. The BE refused his wife's visa because he didn't have permission from the local Government Authority to run his business from from his private residence so he was working illegally. 

 

Compared to some of the restrictions and changes imposed by the UK, the requirements imposed by Thailand is like a walk in the park.    

 

Plus, although they also do update UK Government website with the changes they are buried deep in the mountains of information about a whole host of different types of info. So many people aren't aware anyway.

[jackdd]

32 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

No one is arguing that Thailand cannot make medical insurance mandatory for  O-A Visas issued AFTER the mandatory date.  People who now want to retire in Thailand know that if they make that choice they need to arrange for the medical insurance.

 

The argument is fairness, equity and reciprocity. It is unethical and most likely illegal to  change a law/requirement  and  make it effective for people who came 20 years ago and never had the requirement.

Your understanding and the Thai governments understanding of the situation are just different.

You: He came to live in Thailand 20 years ago.

Thai government: We allow him to visit Thailand a year at a time.

 

I think Thailand never promised the people to stay in Thailand all the time, they just promised the next year (and they keep this promise, already issued permissions to stay are not affected)

I don't say that Thailand is totally innocent. They issue a "certificate of residence" to a temporary visitor, which might lead the temporary visitor to believe he has some kind of residence in Thailand. If Thailand would not issue this (and also no yellow house book), and temporary visitors were not able to register a car or get a Thai driving license this seperation would be clearer.

 

Just to spin your idea that somebody was repeatedly allowed to extend his visa for another year a bit further:

10 years ago i decided to become a long term tourist in Thailand on visa exempts. When they started limiting visa exempts at land borders, should i have claimed "I entered Thailand on visa exempts before, i demand the right to continue doing so"?

Why should they have to issue you an extension just because they did the last time?

 

You repeatedly say that because of "ex post facto" they can't just apply new laws to old cases. If somebody started overstaying in Thailand ten years ago, and now gets caught, or leaves through an airport. Should the person tell the IO that back then when he started overstaying there was no ban for overstaying, so now they can't ban him?

 

[zydeco]

53 minutes ago, jackdd said:

You: He came to live in Thailand 20 years ago.

Thai government: We allow him to visit Thailand a year at a time.

But the Thai government also says something else in addition to what your write. They say "for the purpose of retirement" on your extension application. Retirement is usually something that takes place longer than one year. Implicit is that it will continue until death or voluntary repatriation. Explicit is that you maintain 800K in the bank, do the 90 day reports, and all the other TMs. Health insurance is a new requirement/regulation created out of thin air with virtually no regulation. It is a regulation, moreover, whose administration is being outsourced to the private sector insurance companies. Can Thailand do this?  Of course, they can.  They can choose to become the next North Korea, if they want. And they will need to suffer the consequences to their reputation, which is already plummeting in the Western world. Virtually no good news for Westerners ever comes out of Thai Immigration. Things only become more difficult, more expensive, more time consuming. Meanwhile, virtually everything out of Immigration that effects Chinese and Indians is becoming less expensive, easier, and accommodative. Mind, not the same. Yet. But these are the directions things are going. Better for Chinese and Indians. Worse for Westerners. 

[Gweiloman]

12 minutes ago, zydeco said:

But the Thai government also says something else in addition to what your write. They say "for the purpose of retirement" on your extension application. Retirement is usually something that takes place longer than one year. Implicit is that it will continue until death or voluntary repatriation. Explicit is that you maintain 800K in the bank, do the 90 day reports, and all the other TMs. Health insurance is a new requirement/regulation created out of thin air with virtually no regulation. It is a regulation, moreover, whose administration is being outsourced to the private sector insurance companies. Can Thailand do this?  Of course, they can.  They can choose to become the next North Korea, if they want. And they will need to suffer the consequences to their reputation, which is already plummeting in the Western world. Virtually no good news for Westerners ever comes out of Thai Immigration. Things only become more difficult, more expensive, more time consuming. Meanwhile, virtually everything out of Immigration that effects Chinese and Indians is becoming less expensive, easier, and accommodative. Mind, not the same. Yet. But these are the directions things are going. Better for Chinese and Indians. Worse for Westerners. 

I’m curious. Are you saying that the requirements for Chinese and Indians wrt visas, extensions of stay etc are different?

[AAArdvark]

9 hours ago, lkv said:

Extend the temporary stay again for another year by meeting current requirements, or terminate the visit.

 

Nobody forced them to sell their assets, but if they did, they can rent.

 

If they cannot afford to rent, and they are indeed homeless, as you say, it may have to do with improper financial planning, and no foreign country will welcome them with open arms.

Yes, they failed to anticipate the end of embassy letters with the requirements for up to 800K in the bank, the bad exchange rate and the requirement of health insurance.  These all came out of the blue and no one knew it was going to happen.  Also, some people have been in Thailand for many years with no problems.  It would have been nearly impossible for anyone to know what was in store. 

[AAArdvark]

2 hours ago, jackdd said:

Is there a right to stay in Thailand? Is Thailand obligated to offer a visa for every situation?

If somebody can't fullfill the requirements for a retirement visa they still have the option to buy the Thailand Elite visa.

And then next year immigration changes the requirements for the elite and makes it retroactive.

[zydeco]

10 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I’m curious. Are you saying that the requirements for Chinese and Indians wrt visas, extensions of stay etc are different?

Actually, you are not "curious." You're simply trying to be argumentative. Yes, the requirements are different. Look at the visa exempt list. Right now it's still marginally more difficult and expensive for Indians and Chinese. But things are headed in the opposite direction with the constantly applied visa fee waiver for those two countries. Pretty soon, perhaps Thai Immigration will switch out the UK, Australia, and the US (since they were targeted with the income letter removal) with China and India.

[Thaidream]

1 hour ago, jackdd said:

You repeatedly say that because of "ex post facto" they can't just apply new laws to old cases. If somebody started overstaying in Thailand ten years ago, and now gets caught, or leaves through an airport. Should the person tell the IO that back then when he started overstaying there was no ban for overstaying, so now they can't ban him?

Your example has nothing to do with ex post facto-    How about the reverse of your example-   10 years ago- you overstayed by 10 days- and there was no fine; today you enter Thailand and because the law now says overstay  is punishable by 1,000 Baht per day- the Io charges you 10,000 Baht because of your overstay of 10 days 10 years ago. This what ex post facto means. 

 

Thailand already recognizes the conccept.  In 1998 Thailand decided to raise the income level required for retirement from 200K to 800 K the current level.  Becaue of the concept of ex post facto- they grandfathered everyone currently in Thailand in 1998 at the level of 200K.  There are people currently in Thailand with unbroken extensions that do not need to show 800K- they show 200K. 

 

In addition- back in the 70s -  thailand  provided Permanent Residency and lifetime work permits at no charge, These people did not have to report  to Immigration or the labor department.  This law was changed but the people who obtained lifetime permanent residency and lifetime work permits did not have to follow the new law- they were grandfthered. I know a few people in Bangkok who are still alive- never report to Immigration or the labour departmnet although they are now retired.

 

My argument is that since their is a precedent for Thailand grandfathering law changes and following the concept of ex post facto- they need to do it right now again to clear up the chaos they have created.

 

Once they indicate that this change applies only to people who enter after 31 October 2019 and not  before- everything flows smoothly as long as one does not break their extension of stay.   Retirees feel more secure; IO's do not have to argue with people- they simply check the date of the original O-A- If before 31 October 2019- no insurance.  If after 31 Oct 2019- Insurance- Simple; easy to follow.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Just a reminder:

 

This thread is ostensibly the one for people with current or past O-A visas to report their O-A insurance enforcement experiences either at the borders or at local Immigration offices, with both entries and O-A based retirement extension applications.

 

So if you've had a recent run-in with Thai Immigration over the O-A insurance issue, this is the place to report just what happened, when and where!

 

[Mapguy]

A useful reminder!  Just the facts, ma'am; just the facts! No polemics, please!

[Max69xl]

1 hour ago, zydeco said:

But the Thai government also says something else in addition to what your write. They say "for the purpose of retirement" on your extension application. Retirement is usually something that takes place longer than one year. Implicit is that it will continue until death or voluntary repatriation. Explicit is that you maintain 800K in the bank, do the 90 day reports, and all the other TMs. Health insurance is a new requirement/regulation created out of thin air with virtually no regulation. It is a regulation, moreover, whose administration is being outsourced to the private sector insurance companies. Can Thailand do this?  Of course, they can.  They can choose to become the next North Korea, if they want. And they will need to suffer the consequences to their reputation, which is already plummeting in the Western world. Virtually no good news for Westerners ever comes out of Thai Immigration. Things only become more difficult, more expensive, more time consuming. Meanwhile, virtually everything out of Immigration that effects Chinese and Indians is becoming less expensive, easier, and accommodative. Mind, not the same. Yet. But these are the directions things are going. Better for Chinese and Indians. Worse for Westerners. 

Chinese and Indians comes mostly as tourists for short visits = 15 days. What's better for Chinese and Indians? Almost every westerner can enter Thailand free on a 30 days Visa exempt and it can get extended another 30 days, but Chinese and Indians only get 15 days Visa on Arrival, and it can only get extended 7 days at Immigration. And don't compare tourists from China or India with expats on long stay. 

[lkv]

3 hours ago, AAArdvark said:

Yes, they failed to anticipate the end of embassy letters with the requirements for up to 800K in the bank, the bad exchange rate and the requirement of health insurance.  These all came out of the blue and no one knew it was going to happen.  Also, some people have been in Thailand for many years with no problems.  It would have been nearly impossible for anyone to know what was in store. 

No, failed to realise, like @jackdd was saying, that it's a temporary stay, and were misled to believe it's somehow permanent.

 

Every section of the 1979 Immigration Act calls it a temporary stay.

 

If you look at the description of non O-A it says: (MFA)

 

This type of visa may be issued to applicants aged 50 years and over who wish to stay in  Thailand for a period of not exceeding 1 year without the intention of working. 

[justin case]

fact: most expats spend a lot of money

fact: you are married, but gives you max 1 year extension while wife becomes a full citizen in your home country after a few years, no yearly begging trip, no 90 days, no tm30, right to work, right to land/house if you can afford, no 2 tier pricing, etc...

 

thailand is backwards and xenophobic

 

personally, I am FORCED to live here, now as a short time tourist after 10+ years because ex decided to go f. around, "be free", lied in court, does not follow divorce agreement, would really want me out of thailand, does not care for my "our" daughter, etc...

 

lost 2 houses & car, only got a "right" on paper to live in one of them while raising my daughter, but she does not deliver any paper for me to go apply for the correct visa and thai court, well, they would fine her 500 baht for not following the agreement and sadly would cost me 100.000 baht or more to go fight this in court, no, off course, no guarantee from any lawyer that she will do anything (or get 500 baht fine) that was signed by both parties...

 

welcome to the 19th century

[jackdd]

18 minutes ago, lkv said:

Every section of the 1979 Immigration Act calls it a temporary stay.

In Thai non-immigrant is called "คนอยู่ชั่วคราว", which if you translate it word by word translates to: person staying temporarily

The problem is that many people don't understand non-immigrant, i think they like to oversee the "non" part.

 

2 hours ago, Max69xl said:

And don't compare tourists from China or India with expats on long stay.

Why? Under immigration law they are considered the same, the only difference is the length of stay.

 

1 minute ago, justin case said:

fact: you are married, but gives you max 1 year extension while wife becomes a full citizen in your home country after a few years, no yearly begging trip, no 90 days, no tm30, right to work, right to land/house if you can afford, no 2 tier pricing, etc...

fact: A foreign wife married to a Thai man also becomes a full citizen after a few years.

fact: A retired Thai man marries a German woman, and they move to Germany. The Thai man will not get citizenship unless they have income in Germany.

This means unless the woman has enough money to support both of them the Thai man has to work to be able to get citizenship, actually not so different to Thailand.

[Momofarang]

So amongst the 1117 posts of this thread, which has gone way off topic, are there any first hand accounts of:

a) anyone, with a non OA entry prior to October 31st, having been denied extension based on retirement;

b) anyone, with a non OA entry prior to October 31st, having been denied extension based on marriage to a Thai?

Now one may argue that extension are off topic too, so please point to the relevant thread(s).

[UncleMhee]

7 hours ago, el jefe said:

While it's sad that some people failed to plan, if they have no assets and no insurance those are exactly the expats the Thai government wants out. They're the cause of this mess.

It's got nothing to do with failing to plan; it's directly at the feet of the Junta led, Thailand 4.0 Government. Good guys, i.e. Rich guys in.....what a load of! I've got rich countrymen living here I wouldn't give the time of day too; simply because they're <deleted> mobsters. Even with today's exchange rate an aged pensioner can make a good life here for himself and any Thai family he may have. Lay the blame directly where it belongs.....at the feet of greed, government and big business; the same as everywhere else in the world. I wish all of you "rich" good guys the very best if you can meet requirements, and get to stay; you'll need the wishes in the long run, believe you me!

[Peter Denis]

Sad News!

Afaik - this is the 1st first-hand report of an OA extension denial for reason of not meeting the health-insurance requirement.

 

 

[saiber]

On 11/8/2019 at 8:06 PM, LivinLOS said:

or you know.. just getting a non imm O.. 

Where i have to leave the country every 90 days... not my intentions. O-A is absoloutely the perfect visa . ( from now on only if they accept a foreign insurer and stop this "Go-Hock" regarding mandatory Thai insurer. )