O/A visa and insurance experience today

[Sheryl]

9 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

the premiums are high because the risk pool is 50+ year olds only (high risk)

 

if they had 20 year olds paying in as well the risk pool would be significantly lower. they don't.

 

its like buying car insurance specifically for under 25s and trying to compare to general car insurance. apple and oranges

 

 

 

There was, however, absolutely no reason to create these special -- and very very badly designed -- products. Esepcially since there is still nothing available for older retirees.

 

nor to use 400/40 as the cover required, that makes absolutely no sense.

 

Nor to not accept foreign policies. If they are worried about policies being effective in Thailand/companies paying up they could limit it to foreign insurers offering expat policies who have existing direct payment contracts with Thai hospitals. That is still a good number and with much, much better products available at much better price.

[sfokevin]

2 hours ago, Skallywag said:

These health insurance topics always puzzle me regarding expats views on retiring abroad and their priorities.

As Sheryl points out above and has sensibly mentioned before, hospitalization is expensive.

The attitude that, "i have insurance in my home country" or "I can self-insure myself" seems irresponsible if you are under 70 and never signed up for international or thai health insurance policy.

People spend millions/hundreds of thousands of baht on homes, cars, motorcycles, vacations, financing girlfriends or wives, etc...  but consider health insurance an unnecessary expense at 6-8K a month.

If you get in an accident or come down suddenly with a severe health problem, "flying" home may not be an option.

No one likes to pay for insurance if they are healthy or relatively young (OP 55 years), yet if new cars or new motorcycles, or new homes take priority over health insurance, you are playing russian roulette IMO. 

 

Yada Yada Yada... 

Edited November 6, 2019 by sfokevin

[Genericnic]

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

There was, however, absolutely no reason to create these special -- and very very badly designed -- products. Esepcially since there is still nothing available for older retirees.

 

nor to use 400/40 as the cover required, that makes absolutely no sense.

 

Nor to not accept foreign policies. If they are worried about policies being effective in Thailand/companies paying up they could limit it to foreign insurers offering expat policies who have existing direct payment contracts with Thai hospitals. That is still a good number and with much, much better products available at much better price.

Interesting that my foreign policy is not good enough for immigration but is perfectly fine for 4 hospitals here in Chiang Mai. I have used it at two of them and they are both set up to get the letters of guarantee from my insurance carrier. And it isn't just CM. There are 12 hospitals listed in Bangkok. I am sure there are others in Thailand but I haven't looked on the app for them. 

[Samui Bodoh]

3 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

I urge you to complain back to the Embassy/Consulate which issued the visa.

Hi All

 

I wanted to add my strong endorsement to @Sheryl's comment above re: writing/complaining to the Embassy/Consulate who issued the visa.

 

I have an O-A and am currently in my second year with a Multiple RE permit, and recently returned without issue before the 31st of October.

 

The reason for my post is a conversation that I had in Canada with a Consular official. I asked about the insurance requirement for an O-A Long Stay, and he didn't seem to know much about it (please don't read too much into that; it was a while before the 31st and he did tell me to check the Thai insurance website).

 

One point he made, without any prompting from me, was that there would be definite feedback provided by the Consulate about the whole O-A issue. I explained that I didn't have a problem with insurance (I have my own), but that my problem was the lousy insurance required. He got that. The impression that I was left with after our chat (10-15 minutes) was that the feedback from that Consulate was not going to be good at all. 

 

I can't even pretend to know how the Thai government works internally, but if many Embassies and Consulates report back negatively, perhaps there will be some impetus to improve the regs.

 

So, as above, please write to the issuing Embassy/Consulate and give'm hell.

 

Cheers

 

PS As always, thanks to all who participate here; everything that I know about Thai visas, I learned here. Cheers all!

 

[jacko45k]

35 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

OK if she got a 60 day Tourist Visa, she would not be asked to buy

Thai insurance ??, she already has UK insurance.

regards Worgeordie

I think someone answered already..... 

[brianj1964]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

 

You can get a Non O Visa based on marriage when you are married with a Thai wife. 

But you can ALSO get a Non O Visa based on retirement when +55 years of age (as well as meeting the other requirements).

In both cases the thai-approved health-insurance is not required.

I can get the second option in Thailand? I previously came here on an "O" based on marriage but don't want to be here permanently on that option, I only asked for that visa because earlier this year I had to show £22000 in my bank to get the O/A for 3 consecutive months but then they went exclusively online and only asked for my most current bank statement 

[LivinLOS]

47 minutes ago, Ellis said:

Same has just happened to me. Non OA issued a few months ago, second time using it. Girl on immigration desk asked for insurance, I said it's a pre October visa so doesn't apply. Supervisor took me away, same conversation. A third supervisor came along and they were all confused so we ended up in the office where a higher level supervisor came in and basically said it applies to all Non OA's irrespective of date. At that stage I had no option but to either buy insurance online (on the spot) or take a 30 day stamp, which I did, in the hope I could later get it corrected in Bangkok. I'm at a loss about what to do now. 

Could you please post images of your OA visa and the 30 day entry stamp given ?? 

 

Not doubting you, but theres a high level of trolling and confusion around this topic so verification really will help. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

51 minutes ago, travelerjim said:

Try Pacific Cross...with high deductibles of 100,000...200,000 300,000. The 300,000 brings down cost est 50%

 

And Pacific Cross has confirmed that their policy holders can choose ANY  deductible level they wish, and doing so will NOT cause any problem with their O-A certified policies being accepted and receiving the required insurance certificate for Immigration.

 

[Peter Denis]

33 minutes ago, Ellis said:

Same has just happened to me. Non OA issued a few months ago, second time using it. Girl on immigration desk asked for insurance, I said it's a pre October visa so doesn't apply. Supervisor took me away, same conversation. A third supervisor came along and they were all confused so we ended up in the office where a higher level supervisor came in and basically said it applies to all Non OA's irrespective of date. At that stage I had no option but to either buy insurance online (on the spot) or take a 30 day stamp, which I did, in the hope I could later get it corrected in Bangkok. I'm at a loss about what to do now. 

Very sad and disturbing story!

It confirms that the present practice in Suvarnabhumi Airport is that ALL holders of an OA Visa or a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa, irrespective when it was issued, are from now on required to meet the new health-insurance requirement.

And you have 2 options > either buy that required health-insurance on the spot OR enter Thailand Visa-exempt and sort it out later at an in-country IO after having bought thai-approved health insurance and get stamped in for the full year you were entitled to if you had met the HI requirement on entry. 

< or go for the Non Imm O Visa application, that does not require health insurance >

If the Suvarnabhumi case (several reports) is the official stance on how to deal with Non Imm OA Visas from now on, this means that ALL Non Imm OA Visa holders would be affected somewhere within the coming 12 months when a) entering or re-entering Thailand, or b) applying for an extension of a permission to stay.

 

I think it would be difficult to turn this practice back, now that the tone has been set.

Yes indeed, Amazing Thailand...

[ukrules]

1 hour ago, sqwakvfr said:

Currently I have a 1 Million Baht Inpatient only policy for 13,000 Baht per year with renewals until I turn 70.  But my current insurance policy will not be accepted by Immigration.  Good luck on your search.

This is the problem, they've increased the prices and made a very short list of expensive policies which are the only policies accepted.

 

The whole thing is a scam by the government working together with the insurance industry.

 

They must think we're too stupid to notice. I can't wait for this to hit the media around the world.

[GeorgeCross]

3 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Very sad and disturbing story!

It confirms that the present practice in Suvarnabhumi Airport is that ALL holders of an OA Visa or a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa, irrespective when it was issued, are from now on required to meet the new health-insurance requirement.

And you have 2 options > either buy that required health-insurance on the spot OR enter Thailand Visa-exempt and sort it out later at an in-country IO after having bought thai-approved health insurance and get stamped in for the full year you were entitled to if you had met the HI requirement on entry. 

< or go for the Non Imm O Visa application, that does not require health insurance >

If the Suvarnabhumi case (several reports) is the official stance on how to deal with Non Imm OA Visas from now on, this means that ALL Non Imm OA Visa holders would be affected somewhere within the coming 12 months when a) entering or re-entering Thailand, or b) applying for an extension of a permission to stay.

 

I think it would be difficult to turn this practice back, now that the tone has been set.

Yes indeed, Amazing Thailand...

 

wouldn't it be ironic if local immigration offices refused to reactivate the OA (from the visa exempt) thus forcing applicants to local countries where they could ONLY get non-o's!!!

 

 

[GeorgeCross]

5 minutes ago, ukrules said:

This is the problem, they've increased the prices and made a very short list of expensive policies which are the only policies accepted.

 

The whole thing is a scam by the government working together with the insurance industry.

 

They must think we're too stupid to notice. I can't wait for this to hit the media around the world.

 

not sure asking long stay tourists to have health insurance will be much of a story.

 

many countries require it and are sensitive to immigrants not having cover when their taxes pay for it

 

 

 

Edited November 6, 2019 by GeorgeCross

[LivinLOS]

3 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

wouldn't it be ironic if local immigration offices refused to reactivate the OA (from the visa exempt) thus forcing applicants to local countries where they could ONLY get non-o's!!!

 

 

And when given 30 days to extend, do they 'only' need insurance or must money again be seasoned for 2/3 months ?? So a timeline longer than the 30 day period of stay admitted until. 

The implications of this mess keep growing.. 

[kingofthemountain]

1 hour ago, Maestro said:

 

There is a chain of command.

 

Cabinet resolution (2 April 2019)

----> Police Order 548/2562 Criteria

----> Immigration Bureau Order 300/2562 Documents

----> ----> Memorandum 0029.161-W 4603 dated 27.09.2019

----> ----> Memorandum 0029.161/545 dated 01.10.2019 - th.pdf (available only in Thai)

 

The immigration officials are at the receiving end of the memoranda and the senior ones probably also have the Police Order and the Immigration Bureau Order on file. The official at Suvarnabhumi airport (BKK) was working with  the memorandum 0029.161-W 4603. Can you see where he got it wrong?

Yes i know there is a chain ok command

but the police orders, memorandum and so on stop at the head of the local immigration office (I named him ''the boss'' in my post) And it's ''the boss'' who gives the directives to the individuals immigration officers, or to the differents senior officers at the differents desks for the biggest offices

 Do you really think seriously every individual immigration officer has all the documents and memorandum and even if they have them, can they understand them?

Edited November 6, 2019 by kingofthemountain

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

4 minutes ago, ukrules said:

This is the problem, they've increased the prices and made a very short list of expensive policies which are the only policies accepted.

 

 

I'd differ with your comment a bit regarding Pacific Cross, which is one of the O-A certified insurers and, more importantly, one of the very few willing to write new policies for folks age 65 and up.

 

Pacific Cross started out under the prior O-X insurance program with three very limited policies as you describe above. But now under the O-A visa program, they've gotten MOST of their general public health insurance policy line certified for O-A compliance.

 

And in their general public policies, there are quite a few different choices with very good cover levels that are O-A certified, are available to older folks, won't get canceled at an early age, and have substantial premium discounts available for both optional deductible levels and no claim status.

 

[Peter Denis]

2 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

wouldn't it be ironic if local immigration offices refused to reactivate the OA (from the visa exempt) thus forcing applicants to local countries where they could ONLY get non-o's!!!

Yes indeed, that would mean forcing original OA holders into an almost equivalent scheme that does NOT require the health-insurance.  Ironic, sad, ridiculous, ... fill-in ...

 

[GeorgeCross]

1 minute ago, LivinLOS said:

And when given 30 days to extend, do they 'only' need insurance or must money again be seasoned for 2/3 months ?? So a timeline longer than the 30 day period of stay admitted until. 

The implications of this mess keep growing.. 

 

not sure its even possible to extend a visa exempt?

 

[Martyp]

9 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

And Pacific Cross has confirmed that their policy holders can choose ANY  deductible level they wish, and doing so will NOT cause any problem with their O-A certified policies being accepted and receiving the required insurance certificate for Immigration.

 

That sounds promising. I already have a Pacific Cross policy and my agent has told me the same thing. I am about to renew next month so I will be sure to ask for any documentation I need to show to immigration when necessary.

[GeorgeCross]

1 minute ago, Martyp said:

That sounds promising. I already have a Pacific Cross policy and my agent has told me the same thing. I am about to renew next month so I will be sure to ask for any documentation I need to show to immigration when necessary.

 

it was a running joke around here for a while that what's needed is 400K cover with a 400K deductible!
 

guess they ran with it ????

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 minutes ago, Martyp said:

That sounds promising. I already have a Pacific Cross policy and my agent has told me the same thing. I am about to renew next month so I will be sure to ask for any documentation I need to show to immigration when necessary.

 

Yes...  They've told me specifically for their existing policy holders, assuming their current policy is one of the O-A-certified ones in their policy line, that the policy holders specifically needs to tell them/ask them at renewal time that they'll need O-A insurance certification, and then the insurer will provide that as part of renewing the policy.

 

Obviously, for an existing policy holder, Pacific Cross wouldn't know a particular policy holder will need the O-A certification unless the policy holder tells them.

 

[LivinLOS]

6 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

not sure its even possible to extend a visa exempt?

 

people arriving with a 1 year non imm OA multiple are being given 30 days to buy the insurance, its only logical that once they purchase the insurance tehy are given the further 11 months that thier entry suggests they should have. 

[ukrules]

10 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

not sure asking long stay tourists to have health insurance will be much of a story.

That's not the story, the overpriced lousy cover regardless of your other existing coverage which you may have had for decades - this is the scam and the problem.

 

I have a very comprehensive insurance policy which I've had for a long time now, it provides several millions of dollars per year in cover, if I was applying for this particular type of visa then it would not be accepted and I would need to purchase an additional policy.

 

At that point I would be 'double insured' which is complete nonsense.

 

 

[Martyp]

It will be interesting to see if CW knows what is going on at the airport. If they let you in for 30 days and you get an insurance policy will they know what to do with you when you go to CW to get your 1 year permission to stay stamp. What section will they send you to? Section L probably where they process extensions of stay.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Martyp

[uncleeagle]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

 

There was, however, absolutely no reason to create these special -- and very very badly designed -- products. Esepcially since there is still nothing available for older retirees.

 

nor to use 400/40 as the cover required, that makes absolutely no sense.

 

Nor to not accept foreign policies. If they are worried about policies being effective in Thailand/companies paying up they could limit it to foreign insurers offering expat policies who have existing direct payment contracts with Thai hospitals. That is still a good number and with much, much better products available at much better price.

Sheryl, I get that the policy is badly designed and not matched to the implied objective. But for what it is, are the insurance companies charging a fair price or are they charging prices that are far higher than the policy is worth?

[Martyp]

4 minutes ago, uncleeagle said:

Sheryl, I get that the policy is badly designed and not matched to the implied objective. But for what it is, are the insurance companies charging a fair price or are they charging prices that are far higher than the policy is worth?

I’ve seen an interview with a couple of Pacific Cross agents. They confirmed that most of the higher price is due to the restricted pool of applicants over 50 years old. They would much rather sell you higher value policies with a customer base that is all age groups in order to share the risks.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Martyp

[GeorgeCross]

15 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

people arriving with a 1 year non imm OA multiple are being given 30 days to buy the insurance, its only logical that once they purchase the insurance tehy are given the further 11 months that thier entry suggests they should have. 

 

logical yes, but reports are saying they are getting visa-exempt stamps. so i guess we have to wait to see what the stamp says..

 

 

[Genericnic]

2 minutes ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

logical yes, but reports are saying they are getting visa-exempt stamps. so i guess we have to wait to see what the stamp says..

 

 

Visa exempt stamps would be appropriate if they are coming from one of the countries entitled to them, e.g. US, UK, etc. For non-visa exempt countries, they would have to do a VOA (visa on arrival) if they are qualified for that.

 

David

[GeorgeCross]

2 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I’ve seen an interview with a couple of Pacific Cross agents. They confirmed that most of the higher price is due to the restricted pool of applicants over 50 years old. They would much rather sell you high value policies when the customer base is all age groups. 

 

yes as stated before if the risk pool is high risk, as in this case being all over 50 year olds, then the premium will be high too.

 

the whole idea of insurance is that the sum of claims paid out is equal (minus a profit for the insurance company*) to the sum of premiums taken in.

 

free market principles dictate where the profit margin sits unless a cartel has been formed.

 

 

[kingofthemountain]

38 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Very sad and disturbing story!

It confirms that the present practice in Suvarnabhumi Airport is that ALL holders of an OA Visa or a permission to stay based on an original OA Visa, irrespective when it was issued, are from now on required to meet the new health-insurance requirement.

And you have 2 options > either buy that required health-insurance on the spot OR enter Thailand Visa-exempt and sort it out later at an in-country IO after having bought thai-approved health insurance and get stamped in for the full year you were entitled to if you had met the HI requirement on entry. 

< or go for the Non Imm O Visa application, that does not require health insurance >

If the Suvarnabhumi case (several reports) is the official stance on how to deal with Non Imm OA Visas from now on, this means that ALL Non Imm OA Visa holders would be affected somewhere within the coming 12 months when a) entering or re-entering Thailand, or b) applying for an extension of a permission to stay.

 

I think it would be difficult to turn this practice back, now that the tone has been set.

Yes indeed, Amazing Thailand...

Yes very sad and very worrying also if you try to stay on a long term vision here.

If i am right it's the first time a law affect the visa holders with retroactive action

so what's next? O ?

[spetersen]

7 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Apparently not all immigration officers have gotten the message it does not apply to a visa issued prior to October 31st.

I seems the person that stamped you in to  the country for a year was aware of that.

This thread is getting more and more confusing the more you read. For us who entered the country several years ago initially on a O-A visa and reside here now on an extension of stay based on retirement, does the new health insurance requirements apply to us as well ? Thankful for a clarification...