15 hours ago, puck2 said:

More than 75 years old - in the IMO of Mae Hong Son the officer didn't ask me for a health insurence document. Within 14 years there have been only 2 officers doing their job for my annual extensions. Both with a common sense!

 

Maybe you can change your home-/address .... on the paper, if you have a family member or friend here in the province.

Is your original visa O-A or O?

7 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Is your original visa O-A or O?

... and if it is O-A did you apply for the 1-year extension for reason of retirement?

25 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

Is your original visa O-A or O?

 

Always  O-A.

 

To Peter Denis:  ...1 year extension for reason of retirement .... with the document of my monthly income, certified by the German Consul in CM and this year by the German Embassy. (The German Consul in CM had to retire because of his age.)

16 hours ago, puck2 said:

More than 75 years old - in the IMO of Mae Hong Son the officer didn't ask me for a health insurance document. ...

With your last message you confirmed that in Mae Hong Son the IO did not require you to show an IO-approved health-insurance policy when you applied for the 1-year extension of stay based on your original Non Imm O-A Visa for reason of retirement.

Normally it IS required, but when over 75 years of age it is simply impossible to subscribe to such a Thai IO-approved policy.  So there is not way that you can meet that requirement and that's probably the reason IO didn't even mention it when you applied for the 1-year extension.

Note: I am also aware of an applicant who applied for the 1-year extension based on his original Non Imm O-A Visa for reason of retirement, where IO did not ask for the health-insurance policy.  Either IO forgot about it, or more plausible > knowing that applicant was married to a Thai national, requiring the insurance would have him change the reason of the application to marriage.  As that requires much more paperwork to be processed, it's well possible that they simply let it go to save both themselves and the applicant the extra admin for the marriage extension application.

4 minutes ago, puck2 said:

 

Always  O-A.

 

To Peter Denis:  ...1 year extension for reason of retirement .... with the document of my monthly income, certified by the German Consul in CM and this year by the German Embassy. (The German Consul in CM had to retire because of his age.)

 

Sorry; (since some time) TV doesn't give me the opportunity to correct my thread.

 

The correct answer to Mrs. Sheryl is :  the "original" Visa was

 

 O -  (NOT: O-A). I looked now in my passports and I read alsways (=every year)"O" under "category". Surprise, surprise. 

16 minutes ago, puck2 said:

Sorry; (since some time) TV doesn't give me the opportunity to correct my thread.

With the new format when you need to correct your post, you have to click the '3 dots' in the right-upper corner of your post and select EDIT.  

Note that it can only be done during a limited period of time (approx 20 minutes).

17 minutes ago, puck2 said:

...

The correct answer to Mrs. Sheryl is :  the "original" Visa was

 O -  (NOT: O-A). I looked now in my passports and I read alsways (=every year)"O" under "category". Surprise, surprise. 

Since you do not have an original Non Imm O-A Visa, the mandatory Thai IO-approved health-insurance requirement when applying for the 1-year extension of such Visa for reason of retirement, is NOT required.  So it is only normal that your Mae Hong Son IO did not ask you about it.

To Peter Denis:

What did I write before?  "Both (officers) with a common sense".

Reading about the IMMI-problems in so many provinces, I feel very lucky that I can do all this paperwork in the IMMI of  Mae Hong Son !

 

I seems to me, so many IMMI-officers are great "to fallow the law" .... but only the letters of the law. Too unable ore incompetent to use the brain, what means common sense.

On 11/4/2020 at 1:28 AM, Meat Pie 47 said:

can not offer any advice ask Ubon Joe

My apologies for asking. Why do you answer if you don't know it? 

On 11/7/2020 at 1:25 PM, puck2 said:

To Peter Denis:

What did I write before?  "Both (officers) with a common sense".

Reading about the IMMI-problems in so many provinces, I feel very lucky that I can do all this paperwork in the IMMI of  Mae Hong Son !

 

I seems to me, so many IMMI-officers are great "to fallow the law" .... but only the letters of the law. Too unable ore incompetent to use the brain, what means common sense.

 

Yep, a couple of immigration officers with sufficient competence and common sense to follow the law to the letter in your case.

 

A read of numerous other threads on here will probably reveal that there are plenty of officers in other immigration offices up and down the length and breadth of LOS who also have sufficient competence and common sense to follow the law to the letter by not insisting on compliance with the TGIA-approved insurance requirement by retirees with original non-O visas when they apply for their retirement extensions.

57 minutes ago, OJAS said:

 

Yep, a couple of immigration officers with sufficient competence and common sense to follow the law to the letter in your case.

 

A read of numerous other threads on here will probably reveal that there are plenty of officers in other immigration offices up and down the length and breadth of LOS who also have sufficient competence and common sense to follow the law to the letter by not insisting on compliance with the TGIA-approved insurance requirement by retirees with original non-O visas when they apply for their retirement extensions.

which offices insist on insurance with the non Imm O retirement? I've not heard of one

On 11/4/2020 at 6:55 PM, Peter Denis said:

You are mixing up 2 completely different issues.

1 - Everybody currently applying to re-enter Thailand must meet the CoE requirement of having an insurance policy with 100.000 US $ coverage for medical treatment in Thailand (including treatment of covid-19).  Such insurance is NOT required when already in Thailand  and applying for an extension of stay.

2 - The OP is in the specific case that his 1-year extension based on his Non Imm O-A Visa is due for renewal.  When applying for such 1-year extension for reason of retirement, this requires a Non Imm O-A compliant IO-approved health-insurance policy provided by a Thai insurer.  However at age 76 none of those Thai insurers will accept him for such a policy, and hence it is simply impossible for him to meet that requirement.  In similar cases IO did void that impossible to meet health-insurance requirement.

So essentially the ability to extend your visa depends on ever changing or randomly enforced immigration regulations and the mood of the IO,  in addition to being forced to purchase an expensive, substandard insurance policy (pay to stay) that if cancelled voids your visa.  I think it is safe to assume that these companies will get few if any claims or complaints.  At 72 that is not a position I want to be in.  Hope, common sense, IOs making exceptions and agents passing along the brown envelopes should not be a part of the visa process.  

20 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

which offices insist on insurance with the non Imm O retirement? I've not heard of one

Me neither! It's just that the poster to whom I was responding appeared to be of the view that his office was worthy of special congratulation for not doing so!

On 11/7/2020 at 1:24 PM, Peter Denis said:

Since you do not have an original Non Imm O-A Visa, the mandatory Thai IO-approved health-insurance requirement when applying for the 1-year extension of such Visa for reason of retirement, is NOT required.  So it is only normal that your Mae Hong Son IO did not ask you about it.

 

I would like to say thank you very much, Peter Denis.

 

I have had a mistake in my thinking. Before I thought, getting a 1-year extension for NON-O would require leaving Thailand every 3 months/90 days. Therefore I thought in reality (= not leaving Thailand all 3 months)  it would be like an O-A in my case in Mae Hong Son. Wrong.

He patiently explained to me, that "applying for the 1-year extension of such  a Visa for reason of retirement is NOT required", means you must not leave the country all 90 days/3 months and that this extension is valid for 1 year.

Therefore  the good result (for me), I don't need a Thai health  insurence for the extensions precedure. (I'm insured in Germany).  Therefore - as Peter said - " So it is only normal that your Mae Hong Son IO did not ask you about it."