Concensus in reference to accomodating the Non O. A insurance requirement.

[Dumbastheycome]

Ok. The debates  and commentaries  about  the whats and what ifs has  made the topic of  a Non O.A based extension as  clear as mud due to the general application of the  recent requirement  for Health Insurance.

But putting aside the debate and ever variable  individual experiences  arising from the inconsistencies inherent in  Thai Immigration perceptions and applications of "policy" I would ask a (maybe) simpler  question about any  genuine opinion as to which accepted Thai  Insurance Company provides  the cheapest  or  best deal ?

I  face an upcoming application  for my 14th extension based on retirement. I have been  married and domiciled in Thailand more than less for 15 years. I opted for the retirement visa  route originally because it was  less "involved"  than  on marriage. I have since the start  had the  required  800,000 fixed deposit.

But  now I have to contemplate  the options. Do I scurry about to find options to  circumvent the requirement or do I  be as an obedient  dog  and passively  submit. Ok yes. I am disgusted  by the mandatory infliction that basically denies open options in favor of local profiteering (IMO).

And so to my  question.

For those who  have already opted for compliance in purchasing  the  expensive pathetic  cover offered as in compliance with  compulsory Insurance is there  any possible consensus as  to which Company offers the best  cost relevant "Policy" ?

I would  add that I  already have  offshore  comprehensive  coverage at reduced cost due to  "no claims" history  and  zero  underlying health issues at  age  67.

 

[Andrew Dwyer]

For me ( at age 58 ) Pacific Cross works out cheapest on the list . Add to that a 300k deductible and it is heavily discounted.

 

NOTE: not advising you go for it or condoning these useless insurance plans just stating the facts as I see them.

I’m on a retirement extension from an OA visa and will go the O visa route.

[BigStar]

3 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Do I scurry about to find options to  circumvent the requirement or do I  be as an obedient  dog  and passively  submit.

Yes.

[oceanbreeze851]

An O visa extension for stay for retirement does not require insurance. 

[Langsuan Man]

7 hours ago, oceanbreeze851 said:

An O visa extension for stay for retirement does not require insurance. 

For now

[traveller101]

10 hours ago, Andrew Dwyer said:

For me ( at age 58 ) Pacific Cross works out cheapest on the list . Add to that a 300k deductible and it is heavily discounted.

 

NOTE: not advising you go for it or condoning these useless insurance plans just stating the facts as I see them.

I’m on a retirement extension from an OA visa and will go the O visa route.

I second that statement and more specifically would opt the "Standard Extra Policy" with the max. deductible of 300000 baht, which reduces the total annual premium  to 19000 Baht for my age (64).

Note: This policy does not appear on the official website of accredited Insurers but is nonetheless accepted by Immigration.

Pacific-cross-Standard-Plan_Update-19.pdf

[sirocco]

To think that will solve the problem is an understatement.
In addition, this only concerns farang / Thai couples.
And what do we do with farang / farang couples or singles?
Not everyone has the financial or physical means to travel outside Thailand every 3 months.

[Martyp]

1 hour ago, Langsuan Man said:

For now

Speculation and fear - not helpful. He is looking for an answer for now and a non-O doesn't require insurance now. It is one of several options.

[Martyp]

You are looking for a consensus on TVF? LOL!!!

 

I've read all the the threads too. My summary is that

 

1. Buy the cheapest insurance policy. I have Pacific Cross and another poster suggested this too. You already have insurance you like and want to keep. Don't think of this as insurance but simply a yearly fee to continue to remain on your current retirement status based on a previous non-O-A visa.

2. Change the reason for your extension to marriage. I've seen suggestions that this would eliminate the insurance requirement even though your original visa was O-A.

3. Change to a non-O then 1 year extensions. Either retirement or marriage.

 

I am in a similar immigration status. I came on an O-A. I have 1 year extensions as a retiree. I have 800k in the bank. I was married this year and chose to continue to extend as a retiree. I have PC insurance but I no longer have US insurance. I am OK with all this but if I were planning to come to Thailand today I would come on a tourist visa, get an non-O, and then 1 year extensions. So far I still like the ease of the 800k method but would be OK with the marriage method if necessary.

 

I doubt you are going to get any new info with this thread. The longer it gets the more confusing it will get. That is the TVF way!

Edited January 6, 2020 by Martyp

[Andrew Dwyer]

46 minutes ago, sirocco said:

To think that will solve the problem is an understatement.
In addition, this only concerns farang / Thai couples.
And what do we do with farang / farang couples or singles?
Not everyone has the financial or physical means to travel outside Thailand every 3 months.

Not sure who you are replying to but if you are insinuating that after converting to an O visa you have to leave the country every 3 months then you are mistaken.

While it is true to “ kill “ your OA extension you have to leave the country, either without a re entry permit or when your extension is due, returning on visa exempt or an O visa SE 90 days will lead you into extension of the O visa ( based on retirement or marriage etc ).

Only 1 exit and entry is required to “ convert “ to an O visa .

[sirocco]

thank you for this info, and even if it doesn't concern me (a certain insurance from my country is accepted for the OA extension, well, it was in October 2019, but, but, that can change) I will check, out of habit , and out of solidarity for those who are going to struggle.
So, no blame.