Hi a friend just returned from doing his 90 day report at CM IMM and also to get a re-entry as he's going to Viet. he was told that if he leaves Thai. and returns he will need compulsory health insurance. I have never heard this but he said he questioned 2 IMO's I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit?? Cheers

 

 

If he has an "O" visa, no insurance is required, and even if he had an O-A if he has a reentry permit no insurance would be required

It is only if he submits a 1 year extension of stay application on basis of his non-O/A; that is when proof of insurance will be requested.   It is also possible that on a fresh entry of non-o/a, insurance might be requested.

 

The re-entry permit "should" not be an issue on the re-entry.   You are not requesting new permission to enter.  You are re-entering on a previous permission to stay that is still valid.

 

And yes, non-o is different type of visa than non-o/a.

 

 

Hi a friend just returned from doing his 90 day report at CM IMM and also to get a re-entry as he's going to Viet. he was told that if he leaves Thai. and returns he will need compulsory health insurance. I have never heard this but he said he questioned 2 IMO's I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit?? Cheers

 

 

There is still a lot of grey area about returning with an existing OA visa (not re-entry permit that should be safe), currently it seems border officers are stamping the full 12 months but its a bit of an unknown.. 

On a O visa no issues. 
On a re-entry permit no issues.. 
On a OA issued before Oct 31 (law says needed but IOs seem to be ok with it for now). 
On a OA issued after Oct 31 should have needed insurance to be issued it, hence may be asked for proof. 

 
 

See the other thread.. Been discussed to death for months in the visa forum. 

WOW, 2 obvious incorrect responses when asking for information from 2 CM immigration officers!

 

1. When re-entering Thailand with a re-entry permit, as he will be doing, it will NOT be required as the re-entry permit will keep his granted permission to stay alive (irrespective whether it is O or OA).

2. He has an O Visa.  Making statements about health-insurance being required is incorrect.

Only if he has an OA - retirement Visa will he ever be queried about it (when he applies for an extension of stay).

 

No wonder everybody gets confused, when the responses of those who are expected to enforce the requirements are blatantly incorrect.

1 minute ago, Peter Denis said:

WOW, 2 obvious incorrect responses when asking for information from 2 CM immigration officers!

<snip>

2. He has an O Visa.  Making statements about health-insurance being required is incorrect.

<snip>

No wonder everybody gets confused, when the responses of those who are expected to enforce the requirements are blatantly incorrect.

So many folks are clueless to what thier visa class actually is.. lets not be so sure its the immigration officer who is wrong. 

1 hour ago, bt2017 said:

I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit

If he is married to a Thai as I am and has an non 'O' visa, then no insurance is required, that said as others have also said, if it's a non 'O/A' visa, i.e. not married to a Thai, then insurance will be required when he renews his extension in due course, that said, best be looking at his passport for clarification.

 

1 hour ago, LivinLOS said:

 

 

Error

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

If he is married to a Thai as I am and has an non 'O' visa, then no insurance is required, that said as others have also said, if it's a non 'O/A' visa, i.e. not married to a Thai, then insurance will be required when he renews his extension in due course, that said, best be looking at his passport for clarification.

 

You seem to be suggesting that all non-O visas except marriage are non-OA. This is not correct. For example I originally entered on a non-OB visa

43 minutes ago, neilrob said:

You seem to be suggesting that all non-O visas except marriage are non-OA. This is not correct. For example I originally entered on a non-OB visa

And there were Non-O issued not for retirement, not for marriage, not for business, not for work.......just simply Non-O for longer stay than voa.  

On 11/30/2019 at 1:06 PM, bt2017 said:

he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit?? Cheers

Non-O or O-A  ?!!!

they are very different. 

No insurance is required for non-O extension. 

I can tell you that CM Immigration are as confused about health insurance when it comes to extensions of stay for Non O-A retirement as the rest of us. A friend, 3 weeks ago, did his extension of stay at CM and health insurance was never mentioned. Yet when enquiring at the CM Imm office whether it is needed or not they say yes. So I asked them about my friend getting his extension and not being asked about health insurance, and I just got a blank stare back from the IO. No effort to ask anyone else to ascertain what is and isn't required.

 

So I'd be interested to see posts from anyone who has done an extension of stay ( Non O-A based on retirement ) since 31 Oct at CM to see what their experience was.

A friend went to CM immigration to renew his extension of stay based on a O-A visa about 1 week ago he was told insurance needed. He will be getting a o visa

Just get insurance 

Troll 

A friend of mine went to the immigration at the moon and was told that when expats leave Thailand they will never be allowed back into Thailand. Cheers. OP is trying to stir up the pot of Anxiety. ????

This is from an email I got from a visa service I used years ago (but no longer use). Make of it what you will: 

 

"This is (name) from (visa agent) with a November update.

We have had many retirees on a O-A type visa contacting us about the new rules. It is now REQUIRED for you to have an insurance policy for one of the approved insurers here if you want to continue to have a O-A type visa.

We have been advising those who do not want, or need insurance to transition to a NON-O type visa which does not have this requirement."

14 minutes ago, Trujillo said:

This is from an email I got from a visa service I used years ago (but no longer use). Make of it what you will: 

 

"This is (name) from (visa agent) with a November update.

We have had many retirees on a O-A type visa contacting us about the new rules. It is now REQUIRED for you to have an insurance policy for one of the approved insurers here if you want to continue to have a O-A type visa.

We have been advising those who do not want, or need insurance to transition to a NON-O type visa which does not have this requirement."

The announcement should be a little bit more precise.

Yes, it is required when applying for an extension of stay for RETIREMENT based on an original OA Visa.

However, if you are married, you can apply for an extension of stay for MARRIAGE based on an original OA Visa.  In the latter case, health-insurance is not required (and the financials required are lower than for an extension based on retirement).

Actually, many retirees who entered on an OA Visa - retirement, and later on married a thai national can go that road.  Because of the additional paperwork - both for the IO and the applicant - many simply stayed on their 'retirement' reason when applying for an extension of stay.  But now with the new health-insurance requirement, it would be the easiest way to avoid the expensive and basically worthless thai insurance required. 

Can a single person who entered the Kingdom with a OA-retirement and now on yearly extensions get married and have the yearly extensions amended from retirement to marriage without having to leave the Kingdom?

4 minutes ago, cnxgary said:

Can a single person who entered the Kingdom with a OA-retirement and now on yearly extensions get married and have the yearly extensions amended from retirement to marriage without having to leave the Kingdom?

YES, when you are married and it is time to extend your annual permission to stay for your Non Imm OA Visa, you apply for your extension of stay but this time not for reason of RETIREMENT, but for reason of MARRIAGE.

> See previous post #20

Won't be long,  mandatory health insurance for all expats living in Thailand,  it's just logical so don't jump visa types to currently avoid it. 

 

Also, the policy must be from one of the dodgy health insurance providers gazetted by Immigration. 

 

What about those estimated 4 to 5 million migrants from Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam that are working in Thailand. (ref: IOM Thailand)

 

I bet the Thai government won't be pursuing them for health insurance, it would defeat their goal of cheap labour for Thai companies. 

 

What a fast, go after the Farangs and BTW force them into using the kickbacks from Thai nominated health insurance providers; no other policies accepted...... 

 

Under the UN discrimination act I would see this singling out of one group of individuals as discrimination by the Thai government.  

 

I am in agreement for health insurance in Thailand for all foreigners; tourists, visitors, workers and expats; but not the current dictatorial style being forced on expats.   

On 12/1/2019 at 7:47 PM, Rocking Robert said:

Just get insurance 

Easier said than done... 

1 hour ago, berrec said:

Won't be long,  mandatory health insurance for all expats living in Thailand,  it's just logical so don't jump visa types to currently avoid it. 

 

 

An opinion not supported by logic or fact.

 

Health insurance will not pay hospitals for costs related to pre-existing conditions.  Plus policy limits are low.

2 minutes ago, Dante99 said:

An opinion not supported by logic or fact.

Slightly more than an opinion... 

 

14 minutes ago, Dante99 said:

An opinion not supported by logic or fact.

Not been reading the government announcements then huh ??? 

They are telling us in no uncertain terms..