Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, how241 said:

I have followed the insurance threads for years with interest.  I last was covered under my ex-wifes policy back in the USA until 2009.  Since then, living in Thailand I have self insured following Sherly's financial  recommendations.  There seems to be a lot of confusion and conflicting info on what insurance company to buy and what Pattaya agent can handle this.   The only thing I am sure of is not to go with a Thai company.

As a 70 year old,  can anyone recommend a Pattaya agent and a good non-Thai company.  I am not concerned about the cost but want to be sure of getting paid if-when I put in a claim.  Please respond if you have actually gotten paid as I have read many posters talking good about their company but later mention that they have never put in a claim.  Thank for any info.

Apparently it's illegal to sell non-Thai policies here so if you don't want a Thai company, look outside the country. Even the brokers can't recommend them.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
On 6/27/2024 at 4:09 AM, scubascuba3 said:

Travel insurance is very good value, anyone who doesn't get that must be crazy. Health Insurance is relatively expensive and continues to go up until it's unaffordable for many

 

Indeed health insurance does tend to go up for most when one gets older - but not for everyone.

 

As has been pointed out, the knowledge that health insurance costs nominally go up is the reason why some of us, when we were much younger (and not in our 70s like myself now), when we went job hunting, we found a job that provided subsidized health insurance as part of a pension plan.  In my case the job may have not had the best salary (at the time) but that subsidized health plan that came with the job was great (where in my case the rate does NOT go up when I get older). 

 

That assurance that I could have subsidized health insurance for the rest of my life was worth a lot to me - and after I spent a LOT of time cranking the numbers (decades ago) I came to the conclusion that it was worth taking a small salary cut to work for this organisation where they would subsidize my Health Insurance when I got older.

 

I think that is something for those in their 30s, and 40s to take note of, is keep the possibility of a subsidized Health Insurance in mind (one that one can keep and still be subsidized when one retires), as a hiring 'perk' , when you go job hunting.

Edited by oldcpu
  • Thanks 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

Indeed health insurance does tend to go up for most when one gets older - but not for everyone.

 

As has been pointed out, the knowledge that health insurance costs nominally go up is the reason why some of us, when we were much younger (and not in our 70s like myself now), when we went job hunting, we found a job that provided subsidized health insurance as part of a pension plan.  In my case the job may have not had the best salary (at the time) but that subsidized health plan that came with the job was great (where in my case the rate does NOT go up when I get older). 

 

That assurance that I could have subsidized health insurance for the rest of my life was worth a lot to me - and after I spent a LOT of time cranking the numbers (decades ago) I came to the conclusion that it was worth taking a small salary cut to work for this organisation where they would subsidize my Health Insurance when I got older.

 

I think that is something for those in their 30s, and 40s to take note of, is keep the possibility of a subsidized Health Insurance in mind (one that one can keep and still be subsidized when one retires), as a hiring 'perk' , when you go job hunting.

No doubt your employer took advantage of you over the decades and underpaid you, the benefit of moving around or consulting instead 

Posted
Just now, scubascuba3 said:

No doubt your employer took advantage of you over the decades and underpaid you, the benefit of moving around or consulting instead 

 

No.

I kept my eye on the job market the entire time I was employed ... and compared my benefits and salary to what was available elsewhere.

 

Your generalization (?) view there, in the case of my employment and the experience of others I have talked to, could not be more wrong.

.

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, oldcpu said:

 

No.

I kept my eye on the job market the entire time I was employed ... and compared my benefits and salary to what was available elsewhere.

 

Your generalization (?) view there, in the case of my employment and the experience of others I have talked to, could not be more wrong.

.

 

 

yeah ok everyone says that

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

yeah ok everyone says that

They can say what they want.

 

I did such.

 

I changed my career 4 times ( and changed my work continent 4x)  before settling down in the job that provided superb insurance. ... and I would have changed again had it made sence. 

 

No. You are just wrong.

 

Edited by oldcpu
  • 1 month later...
Posted
On 5/29/2024 at 6:02 PM, Mike Lister said:

I recently had my thyroid removed by a top rated hospital and endured 5 days of first rate care. The cost was 170k Baht,

Hi Mike, Can you please let me know who was the doctor  and the name of hospital please? I may have to do the same myself

  • 2 months later...
Posted (edited)

I think you shouldn't save on insurance, especially when you already reach an age with more health-related risks.

For my mom (she is 75 years old) I chose an insurance that includes more things, but at an affordable price. We contacted a broker who deals with insurance and he chose us. You can look here what they propose: https://premierpmi.co.uk/family-health-insurance/

Edited by orang37
Posted
2 hours ago, orang37 said:

I think you shouldn't save on insurance, especially when you already reach an age with more health-related risks.

For my mom (she is 75 years old) I chose an insurance that includes more things, but at an affordable price. We contacted a broker who deals with insurance and he chose us. You can look here what they propose: https://premierpmi.co.uk/family-health-insurance/

That's probably travel insurance which isn't the same as health insurance

Posted
On 11/18/2024 at 2:11 AM, orang37 said:

I think you shouldn't save on insurance, especially when you already reach an age with more health-related risks.

That's the conundrum I came up with just a few months ago when my health insurance premium shot up to 250,000 baht for the year, and it only had a 1 million baht cover!

 

I searched other health insurance companies but at my age (76) I was almost uninsurable, so I went back to my insurance company and asked what the premium would be if I paid an excess of 50,000 baht, and they came back with a figure which I deemed acceptable.

 

Having said all of that when one gets to my age and has had various ailments/procedures/medical events during one's life, they will very often count these as "exclusions" so in effect one becomes insurable for very little – –however, there are still some "nasties" which can affect an elderly body, so I think I'm covered in this respect!!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
On 5/29/2024 at 10:51 AM, scubascuba3 said:

it does get much more expensive as you get to 70s/80s, i saw Sheryl saying her premium has increased to US$5k+

5,000 dollars a year????????????

Posted
22 hours ago, ThaiPauly said:

5,000 dollars a year????????????

$5K  USD is not that bad.   It's about 175K  THB....Way less than you might pay for one episode at a private hospital. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
2 hours ago, how241 said:

$5K  USD is not that bad.   It's about 175K  THB....Way less than you might pay for one episode at a private hospital. 

Wouldn't be bad if paying claims were guaranteed, can't be nice seeing the words "Claim Denied" so self insurance is still required 

Posted
12 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

Wouldn't be bad if paying claims were guaranteed, can't be nice seeing the words "Claim Denied" so self insurance is still required 

"Those insured should also be self insured as a "claim denied" is likely and common."


https://aseannow.com/topic/1299265-when-does-it-become-time-to-put-money-aside-in-a-separate-account-and-self-insure/

 

 

Per https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/likely

"If something is likely, it will probably happen or is expected"

 

or from Collins of Glasgow:

 

"You use likely to indicate that something is probably the case or will probably happen in a particular situation."

https://www.".com/dictionary/english/likely

 

So the statement of claim denial being 'likely' is at best hyperbole. To which someone could reckon what else the gent has to say is hyperbole.
 

Posted
58 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

So the statement of claim denial being 'likely' is at best hyperbole. To which someone could reckon what else the gent has to say is hyperbole.
 

Depends on the insurance company and if pre-existing conditions can be found by the insurer to deny the claim

  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Depends on the insurance company and if pre-existing conditions can be found by the insurer to deny the claim

You said 'likely'. Do you have any evidence from anywhere that more than 50% of claims are denied for any reason?

Posted
4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

You said 'likely'. Do you have any evidence from anywhere that more than 50% of claims are denied for any reason?

do you have evidence of claims paid by each insurer?

Posted
43 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

do you have evidence of claims paid by each insurer?

I am not the one who stated that a claim denial is 'likely' without any reference to where or with any specific company or for any specific reason -- and as many claims might be denied for not obtaining prior approval to non-emergency procedure as with nebulous pre-existing condition denials.

Posted
1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

I am not the one who stated that a claim denial is 'likely' without any reference to where or with any specific company or for any specific reason -- and as many claims might be denied for not obtaining prior approval to non-emergency procedure as with nebulous pre-existing condition denials.

Fingers crossed 🤞 you'll be ok

Posted
On 5/29/2024 at 11:23 AM, scubascuba3 said:

Most people don't have that luxury of continuing employer cover

That's probably because they retired [too] early, or switched jobs too frequently to achieve seniority requirements.

 

Yes I can see that many Millennials and Zeers will tread excrement once they will be too old to work..

Posted
53 minutes ago, Ben Zioner said:

That's probably because they retired [too] early, or switched jobs too frequently to achieve seniority requirements.

 

Yes I can see that many Millennials and Zeers will tread excrement once they will be too old to work..

No, most people move jobs, take on new employer health insurance, move on, then retire, some companies perks are good because they are basically a scam like working for the EU

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...