Jump to content
BANGKOK 18 June 2019 15:44
webfact

Mandatory health insurance for foreigners aged over 50 in Thailand - why it may not affect you

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, natway09 said:

Maybe it should apply to all long term residents over 50 as we are the ones who are most 

likely to need extensive, expensive hospital treatment when things go pear shaped.

The 800,000 Bht required for our extension will not suffice

People on an O-A stay for up to 2 years without putting any money in a Thai account. Maybe thats part of the whole idea to do with insurance for O-A

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jessc said:

Currently the Pacific Cross insurance Thai Visa is hawking .......
 

I didn't know that.  Do we get a special deal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

People on an O-A stay for up to 2 years without putting any money in a Thai account. Maybe thats part of the whole idea to do with insurance for O-A

That exactly what I am thinking but the idea has been born and for me, that is a worry. This is a literal cash cow for certain parties. Maybe they want the O-A visa to die off? I thought it requirements without the need of bringing money in, too lax.

Edited by totally thaied up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kingstonkid said:

It will be interesting. I assume our fav mod ubonjoe would have had input.  Personally until i hear from him anything immig related is hearsay.

 

GO JOE

Did you check out the forum he moderates?  That would be the first place I'd look.  I don't think he is primarily moderator of the Thai news forum. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

People on an O-A stay for up to 2 years without putting any money in a Thai account. Maybe thats part of the whole idea to do with insurance for O-A

People on Non-O retirement extension through monthly income also need not put any money in a Thai account. So, will they be targeted, too?

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's next ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zydeco said:

People on Non-O retirement extension through monthly income also need not put any money in a Thai account. So, will they be targeted, too?

How are they getting an extension without putting money in a Thai bank ? its 65k a month 800k pa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Looks like marriage visa applicants will skate by for now, I see that an O-A visa is a retirement visa and an O visa is a marriage visa. If Ubon Joe or anyone can confirm that O visa holders will not have to worry about the insurance requirement.

 

I'm all for being repsonsible and having the ability to cover, but of course the main problem is grappling with  deliberately unclear rules and other rules set to benefit the insurance companies and stiff people out of their money and the disconnects between immigration and embassies issuing visas,  and the inevitable bunglings because its new rules and procedures and oh sorry sir have to go back your country its the mistake. Or going to the bank to get the policy and "Sorry no have."

Edited by Shaunduhpostman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jessc said:

I thought this article was clear and helpful, even if the rules still are not. Thanks!

However, a suggestion: should this new requirement for mandatory health insurance ever be extended to apply to extensions based on retirement, perhaps the health insurance that Thai Visa is selling (notably, right along side these articles) could also be available to the full range of retirees who've lived in Thailand for many years - - often because paying full rate for medical care in Thailand is STILL less expensive than buying insurance back home. Currently the Pacific Cross insurance Thai Visa is hawking only covers people to age 64.

The expats who will be most effected by this requirement, if applied to extensions based on retirement, are those who have retired here on a fixed income, and who have aged out of basically any insurance (affordable or otherwise) available for purchase in Thailand. So, even if financially able to buy the insurance, they can't. And, likely, have no where to go to if unable to stay in Thailand.

I got in touch with this company, and got nowhere. Cannot put birth year less than 1955, got un-helpful email reply. Still waiting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Teddy3943 said:

It's funny that sometimes immigration officers in various cities use various interpretations of their own laws...

It also shows the total lack of professionalism at the top of the said ministry and over many decades. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

You get to stay, lol

 

I couldnt get one, dam elephantiasis and 3rd stage syphilis  

But they ignored your hepatitis and terminal haemorroids, yeh?   LOL

Edited by wgdanson
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand the rule something like this some retirees need the mandatory insurance and other retirees do not need it and the price of the insurance is various.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...