Jump to content
BANGKOK 16 June 2019 09:34
webfact

Mandatory health insurance for over 50s in Thailand only affects those on Non-Immigrant Visa O-A

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

That does clear some things up.  However, there is the below quote which goes on to complicate things.  This is a Google translation.  I do not have the skills to correctly translate it and Google could be totally wrong.  Please note the part near the end of the quote:

 

"Therefore assigned the Ministry of Public Health Ministry of the Interior Ministry of Foreign Affairs And the Immigration Bureau Accelerate the improvement of relevant regulations And the Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) together with related agencies to prepare the online insurance purchase channels To facilitate foreigners Non-Immigrant Visa OA Code (1 year period). Additional foreigners must have Thai health insurance coverage throughout the period of stay in Thailand."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, AAArdvark said:

That does clear some things up.  However, there is the below quote which goes on to complicate things.  This is a Google translation.  I do not have the skills to correctly translate it and Google could be totally wrong.  Please note the part near the end of the quote:

 

"Therefore assigned the Ministry of Public Health Ministry of the Interior Ministry of Foreign Affairs And the Immigration Bureau Accelerate the improvement of relevant regulations And the Office of Insurance Commission (OIC) together with related agencies to prepare the online insurance purchase channels To facilitate foreigners Non-Immigrant Visa OA Code (1 year period). Additional foreigners must have Thai health insurance coverage throughout the period of stay in Thailand."

Isn't the "throughout the period of stay" statement referring to the (1 year period) mentioned in the previous sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

This thread is a minnow in the company of some of the others recently. The discussion on 800k post extension seasoning a few months ago ran to 191 pages... 

Yeah I agree about the 800k thread. Somehow I weathered that storm. Maybe because the insurance thread hit a little closer to home.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Isn't the "throughout the period of stay" statement referring to the (1 year period) mentioned in the previous sentence.

I think it does.  The concern is the "Additional foreigners" part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AAArdvark said:

I think it does.  The concern is the "Additional foreigners" part.

Google translate, I would replace the word additional with the word "and", or "also"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I agree about the 800k thread. Somehow I weathered that storm. Maybe because the insurance thread hit a little closer to home.

Ironically the increased financial requirements ( 800k ) caused me to prepare for plan B , back to the UK in September for an OA .
Now, due to the latest developments it’s back to plan A !!

Ho hum , such is life 🥴
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:


Ironically the increased financial requirements ( 800k ) caused me to prepare for plan B , back to the UK in September for an OA .
Now, due to the latest developments it’s back to plan A !!

Ho hum , such is life 🥴


Is it correct that if you use a visa agent, you do not have to have money in the bank?  They arrange this for you?  This could be your plan A.1

Share this post


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

No one argued about the meaning of what "on" means.  The discussion was that near the beginning of this thread, someone posted that the news article makes it everything perfectly clear and it does not when it uses both "on" and "seeking".   The authors of the article make it clear that they interviewed someone from immigration.   It may be clear in the original text from the MOPH but not many people on here could translate the nuances needed.

read it..a few posters were arguing about "on" in threads and basing everything on each wording in English,

when everything has been translated from Thai to English by someone who wants to generate clicks from their "news".

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

No one argued about the meaning of what "on" means.  The discussion was that near the beginning of this thread, someone posted that the news article makes it everything perfectly clear and it does not when it uses both "on" and "seeking".   The authors of the article make it clear that they interviewed someone from immigration.   It may be clear in the original text from the MOPH but not many people on here could translate the nuances needed.

My wife speaks Thai and English and owns an Immigration assistance agency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it correct that if you use a visa agent, you do not have to have money in the bank?  They arrange this for you?  This could be your plan A.1

I believe that is correct but i am wary of agents tbh.

A poster on TVF, Captain Jack, had an issue doing exactly that and got into a bit of a pickle !!
So much so that he ended up trying to relocate to South America but in the end went back home to the States.

Probably many on here that do it that way but I’d rather not take the risk, I have the money so no biggie !!

Share this post


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


I believe that is correct but i am wary of agents tbh.

A poster on TVF, Captain Jack, had an issue doing exactly that and got into a bit of a pickle !!
So much so that he ended up trying to relocate to South America but in the end went back home to the States.

Probably many on here that do it that way but I’d rather not take the risk, I have the money so no biggie !!

captain jack was a failure whilst trashing Thailand..typical loser. He left because he didn't bother to read up on health insurance before a life changing move. Went back to USA and then SA and ran back home again. He is where he needs to be and thats the USA

Share this post


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

My wife speaks Thai and English and owns an Immigration assistance agency. 

And can probably translate the original much better than Google.  However, my argument remains the same.  This thread started with a translated interview with immigration.  From that interview alone, people were saying that everything is now perfectly clear.  From that article alone, that is not true.  I simply pointed out the inconsistencies in the particular article in the OP.

An official translation of the statement from MOPH would go a long way in resolving the issue.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Andrew Dwyer said:


I believe that is correct but i am wary of agents tbh.

A poster on TVF, Captain Jack, had an issue doing exactly that and got into a bit of a pickle !!
So much so that he ended up trying to relocate to South America but in the end went back home to the States.

Probably many on here that do it that way but I’d rather not take the risk, I have the money so no biggie !!

 

If I tie up $25k here, I'm not able to touch it for 6 months and then only 400k of it.   

IF I put it in a MMA earning currently 2.2% = 17,000 baht.  If an agent cost 7-9000 baht, you're still ahead and don't have to deal with bringing money in AND getting it out when the time comes.  

It seems far too many people are using agents quite successfully and with the current insurance/money changes, this might become more peoples option.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
If I tie up $25k here, I'm not able to touch it for 6 months and then only 400k of it.   
IF I put it in a MMA earning currently 2.2% = 17,000 baht.  If an agent cost 7-9000 baht, you're still ahead and don't have to deal with bringing money in AND getting it out when the time comes.  
It seems far too many people are using agents quite successfully and with the current insurance/money changes, this might become more peoples option.  

Yes, I agree, it’s a good option, Captain Jack was probably not a good example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a bit clearer now for some people. I would also like to think, as some have said, that the fact that I have a significant sum of money on deposit in Thailand would make it so the Thai govt. wouldn't force me to buy insurance.

That said, I'm not going to breathe too big a sigh of relief. I think anyone on a long stay visa or extension that is nearing or over the age of 50, should prepare themselves for some kind of health insurance requirement in the future. If it never comes to pass, great. If it does, at least one may be somewhat prepared for it. 

  • Like 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...