Jump to content

Details of mandatory health insurance for Non-Imm O-A visas to be announced next week


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Max69xl said:

It still just about Long Stay O-A visas obtained from your home country. So what's the problem? 

That’s phase one. Everyone will have to have this. 
 

One group won’t get forced insurance while another group doesn’t. Use your head.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 861
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I would have thought with the millions of tourists flooding Thailand that they would be more of a medical problem then a few hundred expats living here !

Yes, but many expats can't get an insurance because of their age.

I still find this extremely hard to believe as the hospital will never let you leave until paid in full. How do you rack up a bill and then walk away?   All we can do is wait and see what

Posted Images

23 hours ago, Tuvoc said:

 

For those of us with Thai wives, leaving Thailand isn't really an option in most cases !

Well put and bringing up the Family as best as one can with frozen state pensions but it is always financial and they never take in to account the homes of course not in our names.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, dcnx said:

That’s phase one. Everyone will have to have this. 
 

One group won’t get forced insurance while another group doesn’t. Use your head.

No only those getting visas from the UK and an extension of stay is not an A/O visa.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dcnx said:

That’s phase one. Everyone will have to have this. 
 

One group won’t get forced insurance while another group doesn’t. Use your head.

Probably not. They will likely grandfather some older long stays who would experience the most hardship. They did the same with financial qualifications years ago when they raised them. O-As are mostly newer retirees. Before O-A class, retirees used the same non-O as marriage.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2019 at 8:55 AM, burner2014 said:

Bt40,000 outpatient coverage???
This would be the worse. This means you need to buy a much more expansive coverage plan than you might need just for this visa. I am not interested in outpatient coverage and still forced to buy it?
This will shake out a lot of foreigners living here. As if the outpatient medical services would be the ones which have outstanding bills. No doctor treats you "outpatient" if you don't show your credit card or health insurance. It's all about emergencies (in terms of "open bills")

I live in Chonburi and damaged my hip in a fall a few weeks ago (no, I wasn't drunk😀) and went to Burapha University teaching hospital outpatients department in Bang Saen for treatment. I registered using my Pink ID Card and that's all I needed. They never asked for a credit card or insurance details. As it turned out the x-rays, treatment and medication only amounted to 1300 baht but it could have been a lot more expensive. Nobody asked me for 'proof of funds' when I went in or when I saw the doctors, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/18/2019 at 10:52 AM, Time Traveller said:

Well yes, it would cover it. But this is all about Thai insurance companies making big profits. Why charge the foreigners 100 baht per person, when you can charge 10,000 baht per person. Knowing that they will pay! 

10,000 ????  You think tourist will pay that? I doubt it.

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

Agree to a certain extent.  When you look at the financial changes for extensions of stay it is perfectly clear they do not want retired single men. There were no changes to the marriage extensions. I conclude then that they welcome people married to a Thai who have a genuine reason to be here as opposed to single men who - in their opinion I guess - really add no value to the country 

 

Yes I came to similar conclusions, but again a married old retiree will have the same health risks as a single old retiree so you could also say it is inconsistent.

 

I'm retiring to Thailand late next year with my Thai wife. I had planned to get extensions based on retirement, as it is approved on the spot and documentation is easier, no witnesses etc, and the extra cash isn't an issue, but now I'm thinking I should go the marriage extension route as it could be more "future-proof" and they don't seem to like you switching from comments on here. Of course, in a year's time it could all be totally different.

 

Edited by Tuvoc
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, rabas said:

Probably not. They will likely grandfather some older long stays who would experience the most hardship. They did the same with financial qualifications years ago when they raised them. O-As are mostly newer retirees. Before O-A class, retirees used the same non-O as marriage.

Wishful thinking, but the way i see it is like this:

 

A. Why would anyone "grandfather" an insurance non requirement? It was something long term visitors should have had, to begin with. It was an error, that people were accepted without insurance, and now this mistake is being corrected. This will be the official rhetoric/logic.

 

B. On the same logic with the affidavit, no Embassy will bother to certify foreign insurance, not that Immigration would accept it - they will keep blaming one another etc, in typical Thai fashion, as they have before - so bottom line is, local preferred insurance will very likely be required (yes, scam, but "this is the law" - not open to debate).

 

C. Nobody is retired here. The word "Retirement" on stamps is misleading. People over the age of 50 receive longer permissions of stay /extensions, for their visits. If regulations change, you simply do would not meet the requirements for an extension of stay, and you would terminate your visit.

 

D. They will probably accept a cash deposit on top of the 800K in lieu of insurance. That 800K is "living expenses", even though it stays blocked nowadays many months of the year (or part of).

Edited by lkv
Link to post
Share on other sites

The assertion that expats have unpaid hospital bills is somewhat difficult to believe. About 3 years ago I was in the hospital for a broken shoulder. I had superb travel health insurance and the hospital had a full 100% guarantee of payment. For all intensive purposes the hospital was keeping me in the hospital unnecessarily long because I had superb insurance. Yet the truth was the hospital provided terrible care. I rarely saw a nurse, they never changed my bandages.

 

Only when I decided I would go outside the hospital to get a second opinion regarding my care, wow at least 20 nurses appeared from nowhere demanding I pay my bill in full before I leave despite the fact the hospital had been provided a guarantee of payment from my insurance company. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, <deleted> dasterdly said:

"A majority of long stay  extension holders in Thailand want to purchase some type of coverage but  are prohibited by the cost; age; and pre existing conditions.  Why pay a premium of 80,000 Thai Baht for coverage per year  to show a docucment to immigration- obtain an extension- and then when ill- the Insurance Company refuses to pay  That means the  patient/Visa holder- has usesless insurance and still has to pay the bill- .

The  Thai insurance companies operating under the long stay visa program are listed on the internet and have so many exclusions that  the coverage is useless and obviates the whole reason for it. It appears to simply a legal scam to enrich Thai Insurance companies and their shareholders."

 

Agree entirely.

 

"The only way any mandatory coverage will work in Thailand is for the Thai Government to allow anyone holding a one year extension of stay to buy into the Thai Social Secuirty scheme which is approx- 457 Baht per month or aprox 5500 Baht per year. "

 

The Thai Social Security Scheme is subsidised, and there is no reason for expats to also be subsidised - but it should be possible for expats to be able to pay a reasonable annual premium to obtain treatment in govt. hospitals.

 

I'm pretty sure that the majority of us would still use private health care for most things - so being able to pay an annual premium for govt. hospitals would benefit both private and govt. hospitals.

'

but it should be possible for expats to be able to pay a reasonable annual premium to obtain treatment in govt. hospitals.'

 

How much though?  Expats tend to be in the age group that gets increasingly more expensive.  I'd say it would need to be 50,000 per year at a guess.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Max69xl said:

It still just about Long Stay O-A visas obtained from your home country. So what's the problem? 

You're absolutely right. My sincerest apologies for having expressed an opinion. 

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

'

but it should be possible for expats to be able to pay a reasonable annual premium to obtain treatment in govt. hospitals.'

 

How much though?  Expats tend to be in the age group that gets increasingly more expensive.  I'd say it would need to be 50,000 per year at a guess.

 

Maybe a bit more if it is to cover pre-existing conditions, and ongoing management of conditions that will pop up. Maybe as much as 100,000 per year. I'd be happy enough to pay that sort of figure if it is comprehansive.

Edited by Tuvoc
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...