O/A visa and insurance experience today

[deej]

3 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Not for much longer.

Britty with due respect.

If so .let it be

The present Govt will pay for it  in baht (Cash) and plenty too 

Us expats do contribute to their coffers substainally every day

Again RELAX

 

[lamyai3]

13 hours ago, Thaidream said:

If Thailand was  smart- it would realize that  by providing no reasonable access to this change for many already in Thailand for decades  or at least grandfathering  prior O-A holders- it faces really bad publicity especially if  social media picks up  problems of aging foreigners being forced out of Thailand.

I noticed letters on the subject have been published in the Bangkok Post the past couple of days, which might signal this story is gaining traction in the print media. This is how the TM30 coverage developed too, starting in the letters section, followed by opinion and editorial columns and cartoons, and then a bit later front page news. 

[LivinLOS]

4 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Anyway, had enough of your Insurance company loving posts, there's a nasty edge of meanness realism about them I just don't want to read, on ignore.

There. Fixed it for you. 

[LivinLOS]

11 minutes ago, lamyai3 said:

I noticed letters on the subject have been published in the Bangkok Post the past couple of days, which might signal this story is gaining traction in the print media. This is how the TM30 coverage developed too, starting in the letters section, followed by opinion and editorial columns and cartoons, and then a bit later front page news. 

Yeah and it sure fixed that TM30 problem !! 

[lamyai3]

1 hour ago, spetersen said:

Would'n it be nice to consider to close this thread. Its just a bunch of speculations on 131 pages and lot of BS, and as of today there is some hard evidence with a new or old O-A visa health insurance is required from government from approved health insurance companies.

Although it's drifted into a wider ranging discussion, the essence of the thread was documenting how airports were treating people arriving with pre October 31st Non O-A visas. This treatment by airport staff has evolved since the beginning of the thread with a seeming decision to apply consistency from around the second week in November. Latterly the thread has also documented people's experiences with getting extensions when the original visa was a Non O-A.

 

So while there's a lot of speculation on here, there's a lot of important substance too. Perhaps the best thing to say is that the thread could benefit from some pruning. 

[DrJack54]

3 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Yeah and it sure fixed that TM30 problem !! 

When was the last report of 800baht fine at eg CW. They were being posted often few months back. I did my 12 month extension Oct 8. TM30 not mentioned.

[LivinLOS]

16 minutes ago, DrJack54 said:

When was the last report of 800baht fine at eg CW. They were being posted often few months back. I did my 12 month extension Oct 8. TM30 not mentioned.

where I am its all the time.. Chiang mai fines for lacking TM30 on pretty much any interaction, even things like residence letters for car purchases etc.. 

[lamyai3]

35 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Yeah and it sure fixed that TM30 problem !! 

They've dialled it down to a significant extent in Bangkok and simplified the self reporting requirements since the media backlash mid year, and they were also forced to come out and make public statements about it.

 

Negative media on the treatment of pensioners regarding the insurance issue makes it much harder for the senior levels of immigration to keep brushing it under the carpet. Obviously the numbers affected by the insurance are way lower than with the TM30, but the human interest factor is higher.

 

There are also the opposing stories being published about the numbers of foreigners who are not paying hospital bills - one article today suggests 50% of bills are going unpaid. Proper independent substantiation of the figures they're bandying around (and who they apply to) is needed more than ever when they're using spurious statistics to direct government policy. 

[Thaidream]

12 hours ago, el jefe said:

I wrote a letter to the US Embassy. Their reply contained misstatements of facts and a link to the new rules. Nothing useful or even hopeful. So good luck with expecting pressure from foreign embassies to force a change.
I'm with LivinLOS. Healthcare is no more of a human right than food. I don't see anyone offering free food. And please don't reply with "homeless shelters...."

If the Embassy got their facts wrong- correct them. I already have.

 

Iguess you and the other poster doesn't mind that someone with no food might die or a person with no money to pay insurance or a hospital might die?  I do mind it!

 

People have a right to life- it's not always about money. It's also  about human compassion;  empathy; and ethics.  If normal people reject this- the World is regressing and doomed but I still believe the vast majority of people  do believe in human rights and dignity.

Edited November 30, 2019 by Thaidream

[LivinLOS]

On 11/26/2019 at 10:00 AM, Hayduke said:

 

"Multiple opposite statements? Confusing the issue? Even when educated?" Where does this nonsense come from? It seems that a desire to be hailed as some sort of expert can be obviously more important to some than having a solid grip on the truth. Making up reasons to vent aggression when certain facts are not hailed as holy, universal divine truth, is not only silly...it's dead wrong!

Apologies.. It was user Huckenfell who was making the false trolling claims and subsequent opposite claims.. 

Unintentional.. Confused the usernames.. My bad !! 

[OJAS]

A particular issue which, as far as I can tell, hasn’t been raised in this thread so far is that, if my understanding of the relevant Police Order is correct, an ex-OA visa holder would only be granted a retirement extension up to the expiry date of his current TGIA-approved health insurance policy - which might not necessarily be for a full 12 months. While Pacific Cross, for example, are, I gather, prepared to amend their policies to ensure consistency and alignment with policyholders’ existing retirement extension cycles, the fact that insurers in this part of the world, I gather, only commission renewals of existing policies no sooner than a month before their expiry dates might still lead to problems in subsequent years.

 

In particular, an ex-OA visa holder could find himself having to sail very close to the wind in getting his next annual health insurance renewal done and dusted before his current permission to stay expired (particularly if a major holiday like Songkran were to intervene). At the very least, he could almost certainly kiss goodbye to any chance of being able to continue applying for a new retirement extension anywhere near to up to 45 days in the case of Chaeng Wattana (or 30 days at most other offices) in advance.

[Martyp]

8 minutes ago, OJAS said:

A particular issue which, as far as I can tell, hasn’t been raised in this thread so far is that, if my understanding of the relevant Police Order is correct, an ex-OA visa holder would only be granted a retirement extension up to the expiry date of his current TGIA-approved health insurance policy - which might not necessarily be for a full 12 months. While Pacific Cross, for example, are, I gather, prepared to amend their policies to ensure consistency and alignment with policyholders’ existing retirement extension cycles, the fact that insurers in this part of the world, I gather, only commission renewals of existing policies no sooner than a month before their expiry dates might still lead to problems in subsequent years.

 

In particular, an ex-OA visa holder could find himself having to sail very close to the wind in getting his next annual health insurance renewal done and dusted before his current permission to stay expired (particularly if a major holiday like Songkran were to intervene). At the very least, he could almost certainly kiss goodbye to any chance of being able to continue applying for a new retirement extension anywhere near to up to 45 days in the case of Chaeng Wattana (or 30 days at most other offices) in advance.

I still need to ask this question but I’m pretty confident that I could renew my Pacific Cross policy early enough to still be able to apply early at CW. You pay for the full year policy up front. You would just be paying early for a policy that starts a couple of months later.

[moontang]

18 minutes ago, OJAS said:

A particular issue which, as far as I can tell, hasn’t been raised in this thread so far is that, if my understanding of the relevant Police Order is correct, an ex-OA visa holder would only be granted a retirement extension up to the expiry date of his current TGIA-approved health insurance policy - which might not necessarily be for a full 12 months. While Pacific Cross, for example, are, I gather, prepared to amend their policies to ensure consistency and alignment with policyholders’ existing retirement extension cycles, the fact that insurers in this part of the world, I gather, only commission renewals of existing policies no sooner than a month before their expiry dates might still lead to problems in subsequent years.

 

In particular, an ex-OA visa holder could find himself having to sail very close to the wind in getting his next annual health insurance renewal done and dusted before his current permission to stay expired (particularly if a major holiday like Songkran were to intervene). At the very least, he could almost certainly kiss goodbye to any chance of being able to continue applying for a new retirement extension anywhere near to up to 45 days in the case of Chaeng Wattana (or 30 days at most other offices) in advance.

Good question.  Here is my untested plan.  My extension ends on January 9, 2020...I am on OA from 2014.  I can only extend 30 days early in Nonthaburi.  According to Clarke at Pacific Cross, I can go in advance and buy my policy.  I plan to buy it for 10 January 2020 till 9 January 2021.  Clarke says the process takes less than a week, 4 or five days if I want to pick up the paperwork at Sathorn.  So Monday the 9th, 2019,  buy the policy and pay for it..the following week get my copies and bank letters, and head to the IO.  Note, a physical is not required for me, but will for some...and there are no claims allowed during the first thirty days, no matter how long in advance you pay..the calendar starts when the policy takes effect.  It seems logical that would work, because the extension is just the new year added on to the old one..certainly seen logic fail before, though.  Holidays are 5, 10, 30, 31 December 2019...and will be working around those.

Edited November 30, 2019 by moontang

[OJAS]

On 11/30/2019 at 2:59 PM, moontang said:

Good question.  Here is my untested plan.  My extension ends on January 9, 2020...I am on OA from 2014.  I can only extend 30 days early in Nonthaburi.  According to Clarke at Pacific Cross, I can go in advance and buy my policy.  I plan to buy it for 10 January 2020 till 9 January 2021.  Clarke says the process takes less than a week, 4 or five days if I want to pick up the paperwork at Sathorn.  So Monday the 9th, 2019,  buy the policy and pay for it..the following week get my copies and bank letters, and head to the IO.  Note, a physical is not required for me, but will for some...and there are no claims allowed during the first thirty days, no matter how long in advance you pay..the calendar starts when the policy takes effect.  It seems logical that would work, because the extension is just the new year added on to the old one..certainly seen logic fail before, though.  Holidays are 5, 10, 30, 31 December 2019...and will be working around those.

@Sheryl: I am particularly concerned as to what might happen to him in January 2021, when he would need to renew a synchronised health insurance policy in tandem with applying for a further retirement extension. My assertion that local insurers only seek renewals of existing policies within 1 month of their expiry date was based on my renewal experiences with my existing Luma policy.

 

But is no sooner than 1 month in advance, in fact, a general rule of thumb, in your experience, with renewing annual Thai health insurance policies (in Pacific Cross’s case in particular)? If it is, then it follows that retirees to whom the health insurance policy requirement is to apply will, in future, almost certainly have to wait until the last minute, by when their latest policy renewals will, hopefully, have been done and dusted (instead of turning up at their immigration offices up to 45 or 30 days, depending on the office, in advance of their current permission to stay expiring), before they can apply for fresh retirement extensions – with all the worry which that would entail for them on account of the risk of being sent away for further documents (which, conceivably, could prove impossible for them to provide before their existing permission to stay expired).

 

It is this slightly longer-term issue (which, as far as I can tell, hasn’t yet been raised in this and other threads) which I personally find particularly troubling in the overall context of the possible application of the health insurance requirement to ex-OA visa holders.

 

What do you think?
 

[Sheryl]

You'd have to ask the specific insurer. Most will renew a month in advance, some might renew 45 days or so.

[Mango Bob]

On 11/30/2019 at 2:55 PM, Martyp said:

I still need to ask this question but I’m pretty confident that I could renew my Pacific Cross policy early enough to still be able to apply early at CW. You pay for the full year policy up front. You would just be paying early for a policy that starts a couple of months later.

I talked to an agent at Pacific Cross on this issue.  They said they could terminate the current policy and reimburse you and start a new policy on the date you want to do your extension.

[jacko45k]

On 11/29/2019 at 9:16 AM, BritManToo said:

Why not?

I have a Thai family and children, why shouldn't I pay the same monthly premium as a Thai?

I import enough money to support a family and household of five, and have been for the past ten years.

Cynically I must reply.... because you are not Thai. Most of your reasons are simply fluff.

[moontang]

23 hours ago, Mango Bob said:

I talked to an agent at Pacific Cross on this issue.  They said they could terminate the current policy and reimburse you and start a new policy on the date you want to do your extension.

So the question still is.. do you need it on the day of your extension, as opposed to the day the new extension takes effect..remember, the existing one is not cancelled on an extension...the new year doesn't start until the old one finishes.

[britishjohn]

59 minutes ago, moontang said:

So the question still is.. do you need it on the day of your extension, as opposed to the day the new extension takes effect..remember, the existing one is not cancelled on an extension...the new year doesn't start until the old one finishes.

My permission to stay expires 26 Jan 2020. Are you saying that if I apply for an extension on say 6 Jan, it will still run from the 26th ?

 

And so therefore perhaps my insurance should start on the 26th ?

[Andrew Dwyer]

1 hour ago, britishjohn said:

My permission to stay expires 26 Jan 2020. Are you saying that if I apply for an extension on say 6 Jan, it will still run from the 26th ?

 

And so therefore perhaps my insurance should start on the 26th ?

Yes , your extension date remains the same (26th) irrespective of the date you apply.

Unlike the 90 day report which will change if you report early or late.

[moontang]

1 hour ago, britishjohn said:

My permission to stay expires 26 Jan 2020. Are you saying that if I apply for an extension on say 6 Jan, it will still run from the 26th ?

 

And so therefore perhaps my insurance should start on the 26th ?

Actually, your one year extension will be for the period of 27th January 2020 until 26 January 2021.  That would seem to be the period the insurance is required for, and prevent the aforementioned synchronization issues.  Logic doesn't always prevail, here, though.  

[moontang]

2 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

Yes , your extension date remains the same (26th) irrespective of the date you apply.

Unlike the 90 day report which will change if you report early or late.

Correct, and the 30 day extensions are the same as one year extensions..it is added on..you do not lose any time by taking care of it early.  I may actually go ask them at my IO, which is a lot closer than the PC Office...Maybe, it is something that has not occured to them yet...otherwise, you might only get an 11 month extension.

[steevjee]

On 11/29/2019 at 4:52 PM, Peter Denis said:

You will NOT be queried for health-insurance when entering Thailand with your pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa.

You will be stamped in for a full year permission to stay (as you are entitled to from your OA Visa) from the day you enter Thailand (e.g. Jan 3rd 2020 > permission to stay till Jan 2nd 2021).

When you exit and re-enter Thailand before the validity of your pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa expires, you will be once again stamped in for a full year permission to stay.

During that second period you will need to buy a re-entry permit before exiting and re-entering Thailand, otherwise your permission to stay will be voided.

The health-insurance requirement will only kick in when you apply for an extension of stay based on your original OA Visa.  That date is almost 2 years down the road, so you have all the time of the world to consider your options during that period (e.g. switching to a Non Imm O - retirement Visa).

Better not to take any action yet as things might evolve in course of coming months.

Just enter Thailand as you intended and enjoy the almost 2 years your pre Oct31 issued OA Visa provides you, without any health-insurance worries.

 

 

I'm in the same position as this gent, I have a Non OA (1st year) which is due to expire on Jan 17 2020.

As its a Multiple Entry Visa I have been in and out a few times with the most recent return stamp in my passport being Sept 12 2019, thus extending me until until Sept 10, 2020 (if I stayed without leaving). However I have now returned to Australia for a couple of months and plan to return to Thailand in early Jan 2020 prior to my Jan 17 2020 expiry.

However with all the uncertainty surrounding Non OA and Mandatory Health Insurance I figured I should should call the Thai Embassy here in Canberra which I did yesterday 3/12.

The advice given after a pregnant pause and a slightly embarrassed giggle was... "better to buy the Insurance otherwise I may not be admitted".

That's not on as far as I'm concerned, I dont wish to roll the dice and hope I get a friendly IO and I'm certainly not interested in the BS Insurance as I get 6 months free Travel Insurance with my Credit Card.

So I need to politely ask ... Why are you so sure that they'll just stamp me in with no questions asked on Health Insurance?

[Peter Denis]

48 minutes ago, steevjee said:

So I need to politely ask ... Why are you so sure that they'll just stamp me in with no questions asked on Health Insurance?

Because after the initial confusion and the Nov 7 IO Big Boss meeting in Suvarnabhumi that clarified that it was NOT needed, there have been ZERO reports of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa holders that were denied entry or re-entry because of the health-insurance requirement.  And the pre Nov 7 ones that were incorrectly given a 30-day Visa to sort things out and buy insurance, were contacted to have their stamps corrected by IO at their port-of-entry.

So when you enter before Jan 17, 2020 (your OA Visa expiry date) you will be stamped in for the full year that you are entitled to.

[Olmate]

20 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Because after the initial confusion and the Nov 7 IO Big Boss meeting in Suvarnabhumi that clarified that it was NOT needed, there have been ZERO reports of pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa holders that were denied entry or re-entry because of the health-insurance requirement.  And the pre Nov 7 ones that were incorrectly given a 30-day Visa to sort things out and buy insurance, were contacted to have their stamps corrected by IO at their port-of-entry.

So when you enter before Jan 17, 2020 (your OA Visa expiry date) you will be stamped in for the full year that you are entitled to.

Zero reports of denial but also zero  reports of admittance on a re entry?

[Peter Denis]

2 minutes ago, Olmate said:

Zero reports of denial but also zero  reports of admittance on a re entry?

No, several reports posted on the Forum of admittance on re-entry.

A post Nov 7 report of denial either on entry/re-entry would be Big News, and there have been ZERO.

[lamyai3]

11 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

A post Nov 7 report of denial either on entry/re-entry would be Big News, and there have been ZERO.

The only anomaly I've read about since then is highlighted in post #1568 of this thread. It looks like it's a one off and a mistake by the IO, given that it occurred in the midst of numerous other concurrent reports of people getting stamped in for a year.

[Sheryl]

15 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

No, several reports posted on the Forum of admittance on re-entry.

A post Nov 7 report of denial either on entry/re-entry would be Big News, and there have been ZERO.

 

Actually there has been one, recently.  But only one that I have seen.

 

Seems that on the whole  people with OAs issued before 31 Oct are now being stamped in with no mention of insurance, both first and subsequent entries. Anyone in that situation and asked about it should politely but firmly say no, that applies only to OA issued after 31 October 2019, mine was issued (date) and try to meet a more senior officer.

[mfd101]

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

Seems that on the whole  people with OAs issued before 31 Oct are now being stamped in with no mention of insurance, both first and subsequent entries. Anyone in that situation and asked about it should politely but firmly say no, that applies only to OA issued after 31 October 2019, mine was issued (date) and try to meet a more senior officer.

So does "people with OAs issued before 31 Oct" include people on extension of stay on ground of retirement with old OA visa (in my case late 2015) or does it mean just those still on an OA visa or its one-year extension?

[Sheryl]

7 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

So does "people with OAs issued before 31 Oct" include people on extension of stay on ground of retirement with old OA visa (in my case late 2015) or does it mean just those still on an OA visa or its one-year extension?

Referred to people entering the country on a still valid OA visa.

 

Entries on Re entry permit have never been an issue for any tequirement since no new petmission of stay or extension is granted when entering on a RE permit.

 

Rightly or wrongly it seems most Imm offices are currently requiring insurance for in-country extensions of stay if the original visa was OA no matter how long ago issued.