Cannot stay if you have a pre-existing medical condition. True, or false.

[Peter Denis]

28 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

This "lengthy" post simply falls flat on its face for two deliberate false assumptions:

a) It is wrong to say that people on OA don't have to hold 800000 in a Thai bank as they have to do so when they apply for an extension of stay based on retirement.

b) people on O visa don't have to hold 800000 when applying for an extension of stay since they can use the monthly income justification.

This is not correct.

The requirements and conditions when applying for an extension of stay for reason of retirement based on a Non Imm OA Visa or a Non Imm O Visa are EXACTLY the same (the sole exception being the Health-Insurance requirement which is only mandatory when applying for an extension for reason of retirement of an original Non Imm OA Visa).

Once you apply for an extension of stay the 'A' after the Non Imm O, does not matter any more, be it for a retirement-extension or a marriage-extension.

 

[4MyEgo]

45 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

This "lengthy" post simply falls flat on its face for two deliberate false assumptions:

 

a) It is wrong to say that people on OA don't have to hold 800000 in a Thai bank as they have to do so when they apply for an extension of stay based on retirement.

b) people on O visa don't have to hold 800000 when applying for an extension of stay since they can use the monthly income justification.

At no time did I say that people on an O/A did not have to hold 800,000 baht in a Thai account when applying for an extension of stay. This was for the initial application you do not need to have 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account, i.e. they could come in for the year, do the damage and exit. I would assume most people here would know that that if people on the O/A were applying for the extension after 1 year then 800,000 baht in the bank is the requirement. Make of my post what you like, but previously the O/A in the 1st 12 months left it wide open for those to do what damage they could do regarding what I said, you cannot doubt that, but now that has stopped by mandatory insurance.

 

Again, most know how the system works here with regard to the O retirement visa i.e. 800,000 or 65,000 a month, clutching at straws, really my posts falls flat on its face does it, because of my two deliberate false assumptions.

 

Get a grip on it will you, my assumptions are pretty much on the money, if your prepared to accept the facts, no doubt you are not prepared to, and that's fine, others have and will.

 

Thanks for your input though.

 

 

Edited January 10, 2020 by 4MyEgo

[Momofarang]

15 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

This is not correct.

The requirements and conditions when applying for an extension of stay for reason of retirement based on a Non Imm OA Visa or a Non Imm O Visa are EXACTLY the same (the sole exception being the Health-Insurance requirement which is only mandatory when applying for an extension for reason of retirement of an original Non Imm OA Visa).

Once you apply for an extension of stay the 'A' after the Non Imm O, does not matter any more, be it for a retirement-extension or a marriage-extension.

 

But that's exactly why I don't like in @4MyEgo posts. He omits this reality, and then develops into some well thought, well balanced scheme by the Thai authorities. Which is nonsense.

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

But that's exactly why I don't like in @4MyEgo posts. He omits this reality, and then develops into some well thought, well balanced scheme by the Thai authorities. Which is nonsense.

My apologies.  I misread, you meant to say that it were 2 false statements.  And they are indeed false, and that's why I posted the actual requirements.

[4MyEgo]

16 minutes ago, Momofarang said:

But that's exactly why I don't like in @4MyEgo posts. He omits this reality, and then develops into some well thought, well balanced scheme by the Thai authorities. Which is nonsense.

I suppose the government could have made it mandatory for all visa holders to take out mandatory insurance, I suppose then you would really have something to get worked up on ?

[4MyEgo]

10 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

My apologies.  I misread, you meant to say that it were 2 false statements.  And they are indeed false, and that's why I posted the actual requirements.

Please explain in your meaning what is false about my posted requirements.

[Peter Denis]

3 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Please explain in your meaning what is false about my posted requirements.

I reacted to:

a) It is wrong to say that people on OA don't have to hold 800000 in a Thai bank as they have to do so when they apply for an extension of stay based on retirement.

b) people on O visa don't have to hold 800000 when applying for an extension of stay since they can use the monthly income justification.

These are obvious false statements, and that's the only thing I wanted to point out.

>> Please let it go now...

[MadMuhammad]

17 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

The long of the truth.

 

The video in my opinion is nothing short of trying to stir up the hornet's nest. It showed no options, therefore is implying that Thailand doesn't want farangs to retire here, which for those of us that live here know is a load of rubbish.

 

My take on this is simple if you think outside the square.

 

Could it be that Thailand wanted to strengthen a current loophole whereby it make it mandatory for those who do not have money in Thailand to have money in the bank to support themselves if hospitalisation was required ?

 

Making sure that those on the retirement visa otherwise known as an the non O visa have 800,000 baht in their Thai bank account for 2 months before they apply for their extension and 3 months after their extension, with 400,000 baht to remain in the account for the remainder of the year, i.e. making sure those on the O visa/extension based on retirement have at least 400,000 in their bank account, which in hindsight reduces the exposure to Thailand's hospitals from those farangs who have no money in their bank account to pay for any necessary treatment/s if and when in hospital.

 

By doing the above I believe that the Thai government has understood that doing things this way, it is not impacting on most farangs, as those farangs should have the required 800,000 baht in the bank anyway and as has always been the case, albeit they tweaked the law to make it so that the farangs have 400,000 baht or half of that 800,000 baht requirement in the account for the 12 months to assist those farangs for any such unforeseen events should they require hospitalisation as opposed to peein it up the wall and leaving it for the government to pay the hospitals, well someone has to pay the tab.

 

I call this good management and the Thai's being understanding of the fact that if they imposed mandatory insurance for farangs on the non O visa/extension, it would have a major impact on a lot of elderly farangs who couldn't get insurance over a certain age, perhaps they looked at the statistics and said, these guys have been here for years and xyz of them are in their 60's, 70's, 80's and would have to leave which would create a big mess for them and also impact on a lot of Thai's, although minimal, then you have those who have families and are not married to Thai's although have Thai partners that they support, get my drift, so I applaud the Thai government for shoring up the loophole, it's responsible and for not making it mandatory for the retirement and or marriage visa/extensions to take out mandatory health insurance, and do not see them making it mandatory in the future for the above reasons I have stated. If they do, we will all have to address it when and it arises, speculating will only cause us stress, and we are all here to enjoy ourselves, are we not ?

 

Those on the O/A visa don't require to have the 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account and can enter and leave Thailand when they want, so it looks that perhaps they know more than what they are wanting to say, just my thoughts, i.e. maybe they have uncovered a system where those on the O/A could enter, get what they required from the hospital system and exit without paying, just my thought as paranoid as it sounds, and if true has left the Thai's with a loophole which costs the Thai taxpayer to foot the bill. If they don't want to take out the mandatory insurance, they can simply changed visas to an O based on retirement or even go for an elite visa, they have options, it's not a do or die scenario and has nothing to do with farangs not being welcome.

 

Whoever made this video simply cannot see past his own nose, because it's that big it's obscures his vision.

 

This is just shoring up the loophole, i.e. if you have a non O, then you are now required to have mandatory insurance before you depart your country, and it must be with a Thai health insurance company, which they can verify, unless it is one on the list that fits the criteria, like I said, they are shoring up the loophole, call me mad, I don't mind, but I like to think outside the square.

 

I am all for mandatory health insurance in all countries, I mean why should someone else pick up the bill, in Australia where I come from, in the state of Melbourne last year if I recall correctly, the government had to pay $80,000,000 in costs to hospitals for visitors to Melbourne who had used the system, had no insurance and then left, I believe they had recouped 3/4's of it, but $20,000,000 or a 1/4 was ridden off, so why should Melbournian's have to foot the bill, for those that don't know, Australia has 7 states last time I checked, although I haven't been far south for a couple of days if you would excuse the pun. 

 

I have a pre-existing condition, I have health insurance, I am on the marriage extension, albeit it is expensive and it only covers me for emergency cover, and it will go up when I turn 60 this year, like it or lump it, I have to carry my own, rightfully so as I am a guest here in Thailand, although I can self insure as there is no mandatory requirement for me to have health insurance in Thailand, and I could self insure and pocket the annual expense, but like I said, I should carry my own and not rely on the Thai's to cover me or allow me to self insure because monitoring such I would imagine would be difficult unless they want to put a few farangs noses out of joint, like make it mandatory to have x amount of baht in the bank for 12 months of the year. 

 

I don't have the solution, but the video is all one sided and for those that can see through the propaganda, will stay on to enjoy Thailand with her warts and all.

 

If you don't have money in the bank albeit 400,000 baht to keep in the bank for a year at a time without touching it, you shouldn't be here, it's not a great deal of money, and if you drink that much, i.e. 12 Changs a day, you won't be on this planet much longer.

 

Just my two bobs worth. 

More like $1.70’s worth not absolutely accurate version of events IMO. Great write up mate 

[Lacessit]

3 hours ago, tgeezer said:

I couldn’t justify not bringing the 800,000THB to Thailand on these grounds.  The difference in interest between banks in Thailand and banks in UK is negligible.   

There are other options. The peer-to-peer lender Ratesetter in the UK and Australia ( separate entities ) has a very good reputation. Interest rates from 2.5% to 8%, depending on the term involved, and demand,  1 month to 5 years.

True, there is no government guarantee on investor deposits. However, by keeping individual loans small, the risk can be managed.

My average rate of return last financial year from Ratesetter was 7.1%, with zero defaults.

[Sheryl]

16 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Government hospitals have extended waiting times, can be up to 8 hours before a doctor sees you, if at all.

The private hospital I go to is 2200 baht per day for a private bed. Round it up to 2500 baht per day, that's 200 days in there before my self-insured funds run out. I'll either have got out or carked it well before then.

 

The bed charge is only that: charge for the bed. It does not include any of the treatment costs.

 

Doctor fees, medications, labs/scans and other tests, surgeries, medical supplies  etc are all additional.  Typically the daily bed charge is just a very small percentage of the total bill.

 

The length of the hospitalization is not a major determinant, short stays can cost as much or more than long stays since the bed/room charge is only a minor part of total bill.

 

Hospitalizations here in private hospitals will easily reach 3-4 million baht if they entail specialized surgeries or ICU care. 

 

500K will cover a very routine surgical procedure with no complications. It will not cover stent placement or other cardiac surgery etc.

 

Even in a government hospital costs can exceed 1 million baht.

 

The minimum needed to be adequately self-insured is 1 million if using only government hospitals, 3-4 million if using private.

 

 

[4MyEgo]

2 hours ago, MadMuhammad said:

More like $1.70’s worth not absolutely accurate version of events IMO. Great write up mate 

Yeh, when writing a lengthy post, some information can be left out, like the 800,000 for the 2nd year of the O/A if extending or not including the 65,000 per month for the O retirement, but hey, never said I was perfect, ego might be a little big, but at least I gave it a solid go, unlike some keyboard warriors that don't contribute, just winge or try and bring people such as myself down for missing some irrelevant stuff out which most know anyways.

 

All good mate.

[Lacessit]

2 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

The bed charge is only that: charge for the bed. It does not include any of the treatment costs.

 

Doctor fees, medications, labs/scans and other tests, surgeries, medical supplies  etc are all additional.  Typically the daily bed charge is just a very small percentage of the total bill.

 

The length of the hospitalization is not a major determinant, short stays can cost as much or more than long stays since the bed/room charge is only a minor part of total bill.

 

Hospitalizations here in private hospitals will easily reach 3-4 million baht if they entail specialized surgeries or ICU care. 

 

500K will cover a very routine surgical procedure with no complications. It will not cover stent placement or other cardiac surgery etc.

 

Even in a government hospital costs can exceed 1 million baht.

 

The minimum needed to be adequately self-insured is 1 million if using only government hospitals, 3-4 million if using private.

 

 

You may be right. However, heart problems are not in my family tree.

My two main concerns are a stroke, or a vehicle accident. I drive very carefully. Can't do much about a stroke except for exercise and diet.

[natway09]

Some people just really hate Thailand to write this rubbish.

Without going through the visa situation (explained  above by many)

the haters should have a look at their own countries requirements before knocking

of a Thai wanting to LIVE, not visit their country.

Thailand is not a dumping ground for any farang who just wishes to live here & grizzle about the requirements.

It is what it is ,, 

[JDGRUEN]

There Is a lot of misinformation posted on this thread

[Max69xl]

On 1/9/2020 at 1:46 AM, AdamTheFarang said:

Retirement is Non-O therefore has anything changed in regards to insurance? 

Health insurance is only needed for the O-A Visa and for the 1 year extensions based on the O-A Visa.

[superal]

23 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

Correct.

 

Though insurers will sometimes refuse to give a policy altogether if there are significant pre-existing conditions; it really depends on what they are.  Sometimes you can get insured but with exclusion, sometimes you can't get insured at all. And companies will vary.

 

IF you are on an OA visa you are required to have insurance from one of 13 specified Thai companies in order to extend your stay under that visa. For the initial visa issuance only, you can use a foreign policy if your insurer signs the necessary form, or the Embassy involved agrees to issue based on a review of your policy documents.  You will be granted entry only until the date of policy expiration and from there on would have to have a Thai policy. Or start the process all over with a new OA visa issued in your home country.

 

IF you are on an OA visa and IF you cannot get a policy with one of the specified Thai companies, either due to pre-existing condition or due to age (they don't issue policies past age 75) then you cannot extend your stay under that visa. You can, however, leave the country to change your visa type to "O" and then extend as there is no insurance requirement for that. There are however requirements for funds in a Thai bank.

 

IF you are on an OA visa and obtain a policy from one of the specified companies but with exclusions, you can extend your stay under the OA visa.

A non O based on a UK state pension does not need proof of income but leave the country every 90 days .

 

Thai medical bills in government hospitals ,  1/  Thai patient is basic cost  2/ Non Thai but Asian e.g Laos patient with added costs ,  3/ European/farang fully loaded to as much as basic private treatment in some cases .   Yesterday I had an appointment at my local government hospital with an  ophthalmologist . I joined the Thai queue , went through the same procedures as them and waited for my bill which was 2200 baht and the Thai lady who I followed through from the start had a 150 baht bill . My medication was basic eye drops . My check bin also stated in Thai that I was in the  European price category .

 

My point is Thai medical insurance is based on the higher level of care and not that of a basic government hospital and therefore there is discrimination against kosher long stay farangs with either Thai family relations or good track records of visa compliance .  If there were insurance policies attached to government hospitals and based on reasonable non discriminating costs , insurance would be within the reach of many farangs and not as it is now just a profiteering venture for Thai insurance companies and associates . 

 

 

 

[Sheryl]

4 hours ago, Lacessit said:

You may be right. However, heart problems are not in my family tree.

My two main concerns are a stroke, or a vehicle accident. I drive very carefully. Can't do much about a stroke except for exercise and diet.

 

Whatever health problem may come (and in my experience it is often not what you expect), treatment costs will be vastly greater than you have planned on. That was my key point. You are not adequately self-insured with only 500k baht (to put it mildly) and hospital bed/room charges have little to do with  what a hospitalization will cost you.

 

It is a common mistake among people unused to paying full price for health care at point of service  to think that the per day bed charge is indicative of costs. It is not (though at a private hospital it certainly makes sense to avoid "VIP rooms" and the like). Neither is there any other single fee you can find that will indicate total bill as it is all a la carte. Even with surgery, one has to take care getting an estimate to differentiate the cost of the specific surgery from total cost of the hospitalization -- and remember that costs quoted will nto include care for any complications.

 

Some examples, both from hospitalizations not entailing ICU care or highly specialized surgeries:

 

Private hospital (BDMS Group) I had a 2 week hospitalization for an accident some months back. Included ortho surgery x 2 but without instrumentation (which always ups the cost when required as titanium screws etc and expensive)  and second surgery quite minor.  Itemized bill is a good 15 pages long. Total cost around 650k.  Room charge (a standard private room) is less than 74K of the total..

 

Government Hospital Household staff had 5 day hospitalization that included orthopedic surgery with instrumentation. 3 page itemized bill, total  173k. Room charge - with a "special" private room - was only 5 k of that.

 

As mentioned before really major/catastrophic illness or accidents (i.e. requiring ICU care or very specialized surgeries like cardiac or neuro) easily run to the millions.

 

Cancer treatment will likely easily eat up millions of baht.

 

As you have only 500k in self insurance I strongly urge you ti use only government hospitals and also have a back up plan for getting more funds  quickly if it is something really major.

 

 

 

 

[Sheryl]

44 minutes ago, superal said:

A non O based on a UK state pension does not need proof of income but leave the country every 90 days .

 

Thai medical bills in government hospitals ,  1/  Thai patient is basic cost  2/ Non Thai but Asian e.g Laos patient with added costs ,  3/ European/farang fully loaded to as much as basic private treatment in some cases .   Yesterday I had an appointment at my local government hospital with an  ophthalmologist . I joined the Thai queue , went through the same procedures as them and waited for my bill which was 2200 baht and the Thai lady who I followed through from the start had a 150 baht bill . My medication was basic eye drops . My check bin also stated in Thai that I was in the  European price category .

 

My point is Thai medical insurance is based on the higher level of care and not that of a basic government hospital and therefore there is discrimination against kosher long stay farangs with either Thai family relations or good track records of visa compliance .  If there were insurance policies attached to government hospitals and based on reasonable non discriminating costs , insurance would be within the reach of many farangs and not as it is now just a profiteering venture for Thai insurance companies and associates . 

 

 

 

 

Actually the compulsory insurance for OA visa (which I am certainly no fan of, to put it mildly) is not adequate for basic government hospital either.

 

You cannot extrapolate what hospitalization in ICU, or cardiac surgery, or dialysis or cancer treatment would cost from the cost of an outpt visit to an opthalmologist.  I have known Thai patients to have bills of 1 million baht. They usually don't have to pay most of it themselves, but it can certainly cost that if it is a major accident or catastrophic illness requiring ICU care, specialized surgeries and the like. 

 

Chances are the  150 baht the Thai lady you mention pay was nto the full bill, but rather what she had to pay herself with the rest subsidized by whichever of the three Thai health scheme she was under.

 

In the 173,000 government hospital bill example I gave previously (for an uneventful 5 day hospital stay with no ICU; ortho surgery but no complications) the patient was a migrant worker enrolled under the 30 baht scheme. 173,000 was the totla bill but the "30 baht" scheme paid all but the extra charge of a private room and part of the cost of the titanium screws.

 

In practice most hospitals do not have two tier pricing. Most charge foreigners the same as they do any Thai who has to pay full price.  There are exceptions,  mainly in areas where a lot of farang live e.g. Vachira Hospital in Phuket, the government hospitals around Pattaya. Siriraj Hospital in Bangkok levies an additional 20%.  But for most Thai hospitals there are not enough farang patients to make it with the effort of setting up two tiered pricing.

 

 

 

[superal]

11 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

Actually the compulsory insurance for OA visa (which I am certainly no fan of, to put it mildly) is not adequate for basic government hospital either.

 

You cannot extrapolate what hospitalization in ICU, or cardiac surgery, or dialysis or cancer treatment would cost from the cost of an outpt visit to an opthalmologist.  I have known Thai patients to have bills of 1 million baht. They usually don't have to pay most of it themselves, but it can certainly cost that if it is a major accident or catastrophic illness requiring ICU care, specialized surgeries and the like. 

 

Chances are the  150 baht the Thai lady you mention pay was nto the full bill, but rather what she had to pay herself with the rest subsidized by whichever of the three Thai health scheme she was under.

 

In the 173,000 government hospital bill example I gave previously (for an uneventful 5 day hospital stay with no ICU; ortho surgery but no complications) the patient was a migrant worker enrolled under the 30 baht scheme. 173,000 was the totla bill but the "30 baht" scheme paid all but the extra charge of a private room and part of the cost of the titanium screws.

 

In practice most hospitals do not have two tier pricing. Most charge foreigners the same as they do any Thai who has to pay full price.  There are exceptions,  mainly in areas where a lot of farang live e.g. Vachira Hospital in Phuket, the government hospitals around Pattaya. Siriraj Hospital in Bangkok levies an additional 20%.  But for most Thai hospitals there are not enough farang patients to make it with the effort of setting up two tiered pricing.

Disagree sorry to say . I have first hand evidence that three tier systems exist in government hospitals and to support that a friend of mine is married to a Thai nurse who gave him the low down on the pricing structure . The cheap treatment in Thai hospitals for farangs is mostly a thing of the past . However after seeing the eye specialist I had to see a general doctor for high blood pressure that was revealed at my initial check in . The bill was 220 baht . 100 baht for the doctor and 120 for the b/p pills . I repeat , my bill showed that I was a European , a distinct classification of being a non Thai . Why else would they bother to highlight that ?  I was hit hard for being a non Thai without doubt . 

[Max69xl]

5 hours ago, superal said:

A non O based on a UK state pension does not need proof of income but leave the country every 90 days .

 

Thai medical bills in government hospitals ,  1/  Thai patient is basic cost  2/ Non Thai but Asian e.g Laos patient with added costs ,  3/ European/farang fully loaded to as much as basic private treatment in some cases .   Yesterday I had an appointment at my local government hospital with an  ophthalmologist . I joined the Thai queue , went through the same procedures as them and waited for my bill which was 2200 baht and the Thai lady who I followed through from the start had a 150 baht bill . My medication was basic eye drops . My check bin also stated in Thai that I was in the  European price category .

 

My point is Thai medical insurance is based on the higher level of care and not that of a basic government hospital and therefore there is discrimination against kosher long stay farangs with either Thai family relations or good track records of visa compliance .  If there were insurance policies attached to government hospitals and based on reasonable non discriminating costs , insurance would be within the reach of many farangs and not as it is now just a profiteering venture for Thai insurance companies and associates . 

 

 

 

You can't compare a change of visa from an O-A to an O without a need for health insurance with a 90 days visa where you have to leave the country every 90 days. That's a totally useless visa for an expat who lives here. That's for underaged who doesn't meet the requirements for a long term stay visa.

 

[superal]

8 hours ago, Max69xl said:

You can't compare a change of visa from an O-A to an O without a need for health insurance with a 90 days visa where you have to leave the country every 90 days. That's a totally useless visa for an expat who lives here. That's for underaged who doesn't meet the requirements for a long term stay visa.

 

Without meeting the financial rules i.e. 800k / 400k the 90 day leaving Thailand and then re-entering is the only way for those without funds using a non O visa based on retirement and their state pension .

[Sheryl]

12 hours ago, superal said:

Disagree sorry to say . I have first hand evidence that three tier systems exist in government hospitals and to support that a friend of mine is married to a Thai nurse who gave him the low down on the pricing structure . The cheap treatment in Thai hospitals for farangs is mostly a thing of the past . However after seeing the eye specialist I had to see a general doctor for high blood pressure that was revealed at my initial check in . The bill was 220 baht . 100 baht for the doctor and 120 for the b/p pills . I repeat , my bill showed that I was a European , a distinct classification of being a non Thai . Why else would they bother to highlight that ?  I was hit hard for being a non Thai without doubt . 

 

And I have direct proof from many hospitals that they do not.

 

It depends on the hospital.

 

Why would an upcountry hospital that sees at most a handful of farang patients a year (if that) bother to create a dual pricing structure? They do not. It is the hospitals which see a reasonable number of them which do this.

 

I would hardly  call a 10 baht consultation fee being "hit hard". Would be 1,000 at a private hospital.

 

 

[superal]

53 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

And I have direct proof from many hospitals that they do not.

 

It depends on the hospital.

 

Why would an upcountry hospital that sees at most a handful of farang patients a year (if that) bother to create a dual pricing structure? They do not. It is the hospitals which see a reasonable number of them which do this.

 

I would hardly  call a 10 baht consultation fee being "hit hard". Would be 1,000 at a private hospital.

 

 

Hi Sheryl ,

               I was not complaining about the 220 baht fee but the earlier charge of 2200 baht fee for me as opposed to the Thai ladies 150 baht for the same treatment . I cannot quote on any Thai health scheme that she may be on . I was told that when you check in to the hospital reception you are placed into a payment scale of 3 tiers i.e. local Thai ,   S.E. Asian ,   European / Farang which is the top tier and that was told to me by the farang husband of a nurse who works in the hospital . BTW he gets all of his treatment free being the husband of the Thai nurse .

Point of clarity ,  do health insurance quotes give a choice of private or government hospital treatment which would present a big differential in costs or is there a generalisation ? 

[Sheryl]

1 hour ago, superal said:

  do health insurance quotes give a choice of private or government hospital treatment which would present a big differential in costs or is there a generalisation ? 

 

All health insurance policies that I am aware of allow for either public or private hospital. However, some lower end policies exclude the most expensive Thai private hospitals e.g. cannot be used at any of the BDMS hospitals.

 

Lower end policies have limits, not only in total but for specific things (e.g. room cost, doctor fees, scans, Xrays etc) so it is nto as if going to a pricey hospital means they will pay much more.  Even though the total may be less than the policy maximum, you may still have to pay out of pocket if any specific thing exceeds the limit for it under your policy. It iso nly the higher end policies that will pay actual cost up to the overall maximum.

 

Obviously using government hospitals one is less likely to exceed any maximums than if one uses a private hospital. However you will usually have ti pay up front and be reimbursed after, as few government hospitals have direct billing arrangements or the staff needed to deal with insurance companies.

[jacko45k]

6 hours ago, superal said:

Without meeting the financial rules i.e. 800k / 400k the 90 day leaving Thailand and then re-entering is the only way for those without funds using a non O visa based on retirement and their state pension .

Well I understand you said 'without funds', but shooting off to Laos, Vietnam, Penang or wherever every 90 days costs money too....an agent is a one off cost for the year. 

[AdamTheFarang]

I have heard that insurance is required for Retirement Visas. Are we all in agreement that insurance is needed in 2020 and if you have a pre-existing medical condition you can still stay in Thailand but one would need to pay for treatment for any pre-existing condition.

[jacko45k]

6 minutes ago, AdamTheFarang said:

I have heard that insurance is required for Retirement Visas. Are we all in agreement that insurance is needed in 2020 and if you have a pre-existing medical condition you can still stay in Thailand but one would need to pay for treatment for any pre-existing condition.

Not really.  Insurance is required for Non-Imm-OA Visas and retirement extensions based on an O-A. This is not the case for retirement extensions based on a Non-Imm O, It is also not the case for extensions based on being married to a Thai.

 

Paying yourself for items excluded from your medical insurance has always been the case. Those exclusions do not preclude issuance of a retirement extension.

Edited January 11, 2020 by jacko45k

[Sheryl]

1 minute ago, AdamTheFarang said:

I have heard that insurance is required for Retirement Visas. Are we all in agreement that insurance is needed in 2020 and if you have a pre-existing medical condition you can still stay in Thailand but one would need to pay for treatment for any pre-existing condition.

 

No. Suggest you read the thread.

 

Insurance is required only for an O-A visa. You can also retire on an on-O visa for which there is no insurance requirement.

 

As to the pre-exisitng condition please read prior posts in this thread. May or may not prevent getting insurance.

[AdamTheFarang]

5 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

No. Suggest you read the thread.

 

Insurance is required only for an O-A visa. You can also retire on an on-O visa for which there is no insurance requirement.

 

As to the pre-exisitng condition please read prior posts in this thread. May or may not prevent getting insurance.

I have seen a video in 2020 where for a retirement visa insurance is required. I am trying to help! As usual complete confusion and contradicting information about Visas. Nothing changes. Maybe the people that renewed without needing it the rules have changed. Think logically, why would people over 50 be exempt! They are the most likely to need medical treatments! Either way as per my original question, answer is you are allowed to stay?

Edited January 11, 2020 by AdamTheFarang

[smedly]

On 1/9/2020 at 4:36 PM, 4MyEgo said:

The long of the truth.

 

The video in my opinion is nothing short of trying to stir up the hornet's nest. It showed no options, therefore is implying that Thailand doesn't want farangs to retire here, which for those of us that live here know is a load of rubbish.

 

My take on this is simple if you think outside the square.

 

Could it be that Thailand wanted to strengthen a current loophole whereby it make it mandatory for those who do not have money in Thailand to have money in the bank to support themselves if hospitalisation was required ?

 

Making sure that those on the retirement visa otherwise known as an the non O visa have 800,000 baht in their Thai bank account for 2 months before they apply for their extension and 3 months after their extension, with 400,000 baht to remain in the account for the remainder of the year, i.e. making sure those on the O visa/extension based on retirement have at least 400,000 in their bank account, which in hindsight reduces the exposure to Thailand's hospitals from those farangs who have no money in their bank account to pay for any necessary treatment/s if and when in hospital.

 

By doing the above I believe that the Thai government has understood that doing things this way, it is not impacting on most farangs, as those farangs should have the required 800,000 baht in the bank anyway and as has always been the case, albeit they tweaked the law to make it so that the farangs have 400,000 baht or half of that 800,000 baht requirement in the account for the 12 months to assist those farangs for any such unforeseen events should they require hospitalisation as opposed to peein it up the wall and leaving it for the government to pay the hospitals, well someone has to pay the tab.

 

I call this good management and the Thai's being understanding of the fact that if they imposed mandatory insurance for farangs on the non O visa/extension, it would have a major impact on a lot of elderly farangs who couldn't get insurance over a certain age, perhaps they looked at the statistics and said, these guys have been here for years and xyz of them are in their 60's, 70's, 80's and would have to leave which would create a big mess for them and also impact on a lot of Thai's, although minimal, then you have those who have families and are not married to Thai's although have Thai partners that they support, get my drift, so I applaud the Thai government for shoring up the loophole, it's responsible and for not making it mandatory for the retirement and or marriage visa/extensions to take out mandatory health insurance, and do not see them making it mandatory in the future for the above reasons I have stated. If they do, we will all have to address it when and it arises, speculating will only cause us stress, and we are all here to enjoy ourselves, are we not ?

 

Those on the O/A visa don't require to have the 800,000 baht in a Thai bank account and can enter and leave Thailand when they want, so it looks that perhaps they know more than what they are wanting to say, just my thoughts, i.e. maybe they have uncovered a system where those on the O/A could enter, get what they required from the hospital system and exit without paying, just my thought as paranoid as it sounds, and if true has left the Thai's with a loophole which costs the Thai taxpayer to foot the bill. If they don't want to take out the mandatory insurance, they can simply changed visas to an O based on retirement or even go for an elite visa, they have options, it's not a do or die scenario and has nothing to do with farangs not being welcome.

 

Whoever made this video simply cannot see past his own nose, because it's that big it's obscures his vision.

 

This is just shoring up the loophole, i.e. if you have a non O, then you are now required to have mandatory insurance before you depart your country, and it must be with a Thai health insurance company, which they can verify, unless it is one on the list that fits the criteria, like I said, they are shoring up the loophole, call me mad, I don't mind, but I like to think outside the square.

 

I am all for mandatory health insurance in all countries, I mean why should someone else pick up the bill, in Australia where I come from, in the state of Melbourne last year if I recall correctly, the government had to pay $80,000,000 in costs to hospitals for visitors to Melbourne who had used the system, had no insurance and then left, I believe they had recouped 3/4's of it, but $20,000,000 or a 1/4 was ridden off, so why should Melbournian's have to foot the bill, for those that don't know, Australia has 7 states last time I checked, although I haven't been far south for a couple of days if you would excuse the pun. 

 

I have a pre-existing condition, I have health insurance, I am on the marriage extension, albeit it is expensive and it only covers me for emergency cover, and it will go up when I turn 60 this year, like it or lump it, I have to carry my own, rightfully so as I am a guest here in Thailand, although I can self insure as there is no mandatory requirement for me to have health insurance in Thailand, and I could self insure and pocket the annual expense, but like I said, I should carry my own and not rely on the Thai's to cover me or allow me to self insure because monitoring such I would imagine would be difficult unless they want to put a few farangs noses out of joint, like make it mandatory to have x amount of baht in the bank for 12 months of the year. 

 

I don't have the solution, but the video is all one sided and for those that can see through the propaganda, will stay on to enjoy Thailand with her warts and all.

 

If you don't have money in the bank albeit 400,000 baht to keep in the bank for a year at a time without touching it, you shouldn't be here, it's not a great deal of money, and if you drink that much, i.e. 12 Changs a day, you won't be on this planet much longer.

 

Just my two bobs worth. 

correct and great post

 

 

problem is that Immigration will take bribes to overlook those that don't have the required financials - processed through an agent