Hi

I am interested in April international since it is based in France and France has one of the best consumer protection bodies for the Insurance industry - they regulate the insurance industry well..

 

Has anyone got experience with April? How long have they been covering Thailand?

 

It seems very cheap if you dont mind maximum excess, but a shame it stops covering you when you hit 80 yrs old.

 

 

There are a number here covered with both April International and April Thailand.

 

I dare say one will be along in due course.

What are pros and cons april thailand vs april  international?

 

I heared its possible in future that thailand might prevent thai "residents/long stayers" using international insurance?

I have been with April for some years. They are good but expensive. No questions on any of my claims.

They transferred me from the International version to the Thai version - half of the price at the time. I am here for the long run. I have no plans to return to the UK.

Some multinational insurers have a policy of not competing against their local operations, so you might find that April International refers you to April Thailand if you use a Thai address in your application. There are also Thai regulatory issues that may make April International reluctant to insure someone with a Thai address. That aside, it is often the case that offshore insurers provide higher limits and broader coverage than Thai-based insurers. This holds true in the case of multinational insurers with both offshore an onshore offerings. Offshore health insurance tends to be more expensive due to the higher limits and generally broader coverage.

 

Offshore insurers will usually employ more rigorous underwriting procedures when considering an applicant, but will then be easier on claims once someone has been accepted. Local insurers will often not properly underwrite risks and then rely upon extensive investigations after a claim is filed as a substitute for good underwriting on the front end. It can be argued that both approaches can result in situations where no coverage applies, but the latter approach is much more likely to cause a policyholder to become disgruntled when a claim is denied for something that should have been clearly written in the policy and understood as an exclusion when coverage was taken out.

 

The Office of the Insurance Commissioner is generally pro-policyholder in its attitude when it comes to complaints, but the Thai regulatory framework is not nearly as comprehensive as France's.

 

Good luck.