Jump to content
Thai Visa Forum

Absolute latest from Immigration on Insurance...


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, LivinLOS said:

I believe that current information leads to the conclusion immigration offices are looking for OA visa extensions. 

 

I have no idea what's going to happen with the past O-A visa, current extensions of stay folks when they go to do their next annual extension (or next entry into the country) from Oct. 31 onward in terms of the insurance requirement.

 

But from the various reports posted here recounting the info given by various Immigration Offices, they seem to be looking back to whatever was the person's most recent VISA and whether it was an O-A, and not on what kind of extensions they may have had in the wake of that visa....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 753
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As of 11am today, from Hatyai Immigration, who in my books are the greatest ,most helpful bunch of People i have ever delt with... UBON JOE is absolutely correct with everything he has stated...F

Oh well, the info i got is there at the start of this Thread....take it or leave it. It may be of use to some members... Just follow Ubon Joe's leads...he has it spot on....  

You didn't ask that question explicitly did you? A yes or no answer will suffice in this case. 

Posted Images

4 hours ago, DrJack54 said:

For example I enter los on a non o based on marriage valid for 90 days then I apply for 12 month permission of stay based on marriage. The following year I apply for permission of stay based on retirement. Followed the next year as being parent of Thai child. Which visa am I extending. I do not have a valid visa. 

I think you're extending your permission to stay based on your original non O. You've just been changing the reasons to extend your permission to stay using different criteria.

 

When I went to open a new bank account last year they checked my O-A visa from a few years ago and checked my stamps for the admitted until date. Never once looked at my recent extension of permission to stay.

 

My O-A visa has enter by date but never been stamped as used. It is obviously still accepted as a valid visa, by Bangkok Bank at least.

 

My previous passports have many Non-O visas based on being a parent of Thai children but I don't have those passports handy to see if older Non-O visa get stamped as used, therefore invalid. I'm curious if anyone has an example of more that one O-A visa in a passport and if the earlier one is marked as used or canceled.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

Not really. It is whoever did the translation from Thai to English.

In Thai. image.png.b042bf04c31368634992fbc2fe0a247b.png

Google translate to English.

image.png.53c589de4549e8bca777ad0401535e06.png

Fair enough but TM. 7 requests type of visa entered on. In Thai and English.

ปพะเภทของ
วีซ่า
Type of
visa

The extension of permission to stay is clearly based on the underlying visa.

 

When doing a TM. 30 the field for type of visa does not include one for 'Extension of permission to stay' we must in fact select a visa type from the list.

 

I am certainly curious how Immigration views the long ago used Non O-A visas, is it really expired/invalid?

Edited by KeeTua
add tm.30
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, KeeTua said:

Fair enough but TM. 7 requests type of visa entered on. In Thai and English.

ปพะเภทของ
วีซ่า
Type of
visa

The extension of permission to stay is clearly based on the underlying visa.

I am certainly curious how Immigration views the long ago used Non O-A visas, is it really expired/invalid?

You could put non immigrant or non im in that space and meet the requirements for the form completion. It is just to indicate that you have the correct visa for the extension you are applying for. It would be tourist or TR if applying for an extension of a entry from one.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KeeTua said:

From Immigration Bureau website 'Visa Extension':

Home > Service  > Visa Extension > Visa Extension - In the case of retirement

 

Some web pages of the Immigration Bureau say visa  when they mean permission to stay and this is probably part of the reason why some immigration officials and some journalists and other people misunderstand the true meaning of the English version of the Police Order and the Immigration Bureau Order about the announced insurance requirement for foreigners who arrive in Thailand with an non-immigrant visa category O/A.

 

Edited by Maestro
Corrected links
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Maestro said:

 

Some web pages of the Immigration Bureau say visa  when they mean permission to stay and this is probably part of the reason why some immigration officials and some journalists and other people misunderstand the true meaning of the English version of the Police Order and the Immigration Bureau Order about the announced insurance requirement for foreigners who arrive in Thailand with an non-immigrant visa category O/A.

 

Historically, many folks here on TV have had endless difficulty comprehending what a visa really is (use Websters, not Oxford) and the fact that a visa can never be renewed, extended, or modified ... and that an expired visa is just that -- expired.

 

But perhaps even more perplexing is that, indeed, Thai Immigration themselves have become quite confused on the proper terminology (at least in English, but I suspect in Thai as well). 

 

Luckily, in practice, as evidenced by the manner in which things are actually performed/enforced by TI (in terms of allowing entry, granting a stay, validity dates, verbiage in stamps in passport, etc.), the "proper" terminology ends up coming into play. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Historically, many folks here on TV have had endless difficulty comprehending what a visa really is (use Websters, not Oxford) and the fact that a visa can never be renewed, extended, or modified ... and that an expired visa is just that -- expired.
 
But perhaps even more perplexing is that, indeed, Thai Immigration themselves have become quite confused on the proper terminology (at least in English, but I suspect in Thai as well). 
 
Luckily, in practice, as evidenced by the manner in which things are actually performed/enforced by TI (in terms of allowing entry, granting a stay, validity dates, verbiage in stamps in passport, etc.), the "proper" terminology ends up coming into play. 
But you're quite wrong.
Visas can most definitely be extended.

Another example - -

How to Extend Your U.S. Visa While in the U.S.

Co-authored by Clinton M. Sandvick, JD, PhD

Updated: September 6, 2019

Extend your stay in the United States by filing a visa extension request with the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) using Form I-539. 



https://m.wikihow.com/Extend-Your-U.S.-Visa-While-in-the-U.S.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

But you're quite wrong.
Visas can most definitely be extended.

Another example - -

How to Extend Your U.S. Visa While in the U.S.

Co-authored by Clinton M. Sandvick, JD, PhD

Updated: September 6, 2019

Extend your stay in the United States by filing a visa extension request with the U. S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) using Form I-539. 



https://m.wikihow.com/Extend-Your-U.S.-Visa-While-in-the-U.S.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Wrong? You have so beautifully illustrated my point...

 

"Extend your stay in the United States by filing a visa extension request"  555

 

I-539 is a change/extension of Non-Immigrant Status.

 

"Extend your Visa..." verbiage from wikihow. C'mon dude.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Whilst i agree with what you are saying, that there is an anti foreigner vibe coming from the top, down at the bottom of the pyramid, money is money, at the end of the day.
 
It seems that they forget about TM30, financials, and likely insurances, for a price.
 
For people that really want to stay in Thailand, and are willing to put up with it, it may come as a viable option. Perhaps better than "i need to move back home, I have no other options".

One only has to read TV on a reasonably sporadic basis to be enlightened enough to know what type of farang they want to exclude.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you're extending your permission to stay based on your original non O. You've just been changing the reasons to extend your permission to stay using different criteria.
 
When I went to open a new bank account last year they checked my O-A visa from a few years ago and checked my stamps for the admitted until date. Never once looked at my recent extension of permission to stay.
 
My O-A visa has enter by date but never been stamped as used. It is obviously still accepted as a valid visa, by Bangkok Bank at least.
 
My previous passports have many Non-O visas based on being a parent of Thai children but I don't have those passports handy to see if older Non-O visa get stamped as used, therefore invalid. I'm curious if anyone has an example of more that one O-A visa in a passport and if the earlier one is marked as used or canceled.
Single-entry visas get stamped USED when the single entry they allow for is done. Multi-entry visas just expire on their valid until date.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Visas can most definitely be extended...

 

It does not matter how often and by what people and by how many people visa is used to mean permission to stay, the only thing that matters from the legal point of view is how these terms are defined in law and in regulatory documents issued under the authority of laws.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes everyone refers to extension of visa. Pay 1900 baht at imm "to extend visa". Wrong!. You are extending your permission of stay. In some cases ie visa exempt entries you don't even have a visa. Your extending " until date". It ain't rocket science.

 

I don't. I say extension of stay based on retirement but a lot of people at the immigration offices give a deer in the headlights look when they hear that. 

I have never ever said a visa is the same thing as an extension.

 

However in the case of retirement status there must have been an original visa O or OA upon which ALL subsequent extensions are based upon.

 

So sorry to say you are extending your visa isn't really wrong. It communicates what you are doing quite well in a way that most everyone understands.

 

However it is important to emphasize that a visa and an extension are different things.

 

 

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Carolina Reaper said:

Wrong? You have so beautifully illustrated my point...

 

"Extend your stay in the United States by filing a visa extension request"  555

 

I-539 is a change/extension of Non-Immigrant Status.

 

"Extend your Visa..." verbiage from wikihow. C'mon dude.

I don't think you've proven me wrong at all. In the case of extensions relevant to the Thai example and I'm sure countless other countries the extension of current status is based on the original VISA. So to say visa extension again is not wrong as it communicates that situation very well. 

 

 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, LivinLOS said:

Will they look at it that a marriage extensions doesnt need insurance, or that the initial OA visa generated the initial permission of stay, hence does ?? 

There have not been any changes to the requirement for an extension based on marriage. Much discussion has been initiated because a recent police order, specific to retirement extensions, does make mention of insurance requirements in relation to people who have been granted an O-A Visa. Although how to interpret that is the reason for these discussions.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, domdom said:

Good morning

 

As announced I went today to Jomtien immigration to check again what has been told to me tuesday by the male immigration officer at the entrance of immigration office

This time I went to counter 8 and checked with the lady with glasses who sits outside the counter and checks the papers when we apply for extension..

She asked me why I came back as I made my extension on september 4th.. So I told her I heard there would be a mandatory health insurance and she immediately answered ' not for you, only for new OA visas after 31st October..

I again asked her "so, when I do my extension next year no need of a health insurance

No, no need for extension, only for new visas..

 

Things are pretty clear in Jomtien apparently

Have a nice day

Are you on an Non O/A or O?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jacko45k said:

There have not been any changes to the requirement for an extension based on marriage. Much discussion has been initiated because a recent police order, specific to retirement extensions, does make mention of insurance requirements in relation to people who have been granted an O-A Visa. Although how to interpret that is the reason for these discussions.... 

Surely you understood my point tho. 

 

The guy who came in on an OA and is extending for retirement (according to some offices I should point out) does need it. 

 

The guy who came in on an OA, and extended on marriage ?? Assume he doesnt but thats not the enforcement above. 

 

The guy who came in on an OA extended on marriage but now extends on retirement again, logically he is the same as the first guy, but did the extension due to marriage 'convert' his extension of stay to a non imm O ?? 

 

Of course these are subtle detail questions that are likely to have different answers all over the place, mostly its just a way of pointing out how crazy it is to now start to consider future extensions of stay, from historical entry visa that generated them. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

FYI, I wrote emails to both the Wash DC Embassy and L.A. Consulate in the U.S. asking re the new insurance requirement. Wash DC has replied after several days, L.A. has not. I was specifically trying to see what detail they'd provide about the use of home country insurance policies.

 

Here's the Wash DC Embassy's response. And again, interestingly, no mention of the "first year" only notion for foreign policies as stated on the TGIA website:
 

 

Of course, re the use of home country insurance policies, the elephant in the room remains the apparent inability of policyholders to get their home country insurers to sign off on the Thai MoPH legalistic insurance certif.

 

And for those planning to rely on Thai insurers, the fact that most of those participating either won't write policies for older folks and/or won't renew policies for older folks. And even for those few that will write such policies, the costs as people get into their 70s, 80s, and beyond are prohibitively expensive -- with no current option to self-fund or self insure.

 

It has been said many times that US insurance companies won’t sign the Thai insurance certificate. The certificate is pretty simple just requesting whether the insurance company policies are consistent with the Thai insurance requirement. Maybe someone should try to get a letter from the US insurer stating the inpatient and outpatient coverage and whether they cover an expat living in Thailand. Then let the Thai consult decide if the coverage meets the Thai regulation. 
 

The US insurer can’t be expected to interpret the Thai regulation and the Thai Consulate can’t be expected to interpret a complex US insurance policy.  Surely a US company would be willing to sign their own summary of the important points of their own policy. There is plenty we don’t know about how this policy will be implemented in the coming weeks. This could be something worth a try.

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

Maybe someone should try to get a letter from the US insurer stating the inpatient and outpatient coverage and whether they cover an expat living in Thailand. Then let the Thai consult decide if the coverage meets the Thai regulation. 

 

Anything's worth a try...

 

But, the written info received thus far from the Wash DC Embassy and the Chicago Consulate is that they're going to require the specific Thai government insurance certificate signed by the foreign insurer, if the O-A applicant wants to rely on a foreign insurance policy. There doesn't appear to be any wiggle room about that.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Anything's worth a try...

 

But, the written info received thus far from the Wash DC Embassy and the Chicago Consulate is that they're going to require the specific Thai government insurance certificate signed by the foreign insurer, if the O-A applicant wants to rely on a foreign insurance policy. There doesn't appear to be any wiggle room about that.

 

I saw that but they just cut and pasted the info from the Thai government. I would expect that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Anything's worth a try...

 

But, the written info received thus far from the Wash DC Embassy and the Chicago Consulate is that they're going to require the specific Thai government insurance certificate signed by the foreign insurer, if the O-A applicant wants to rely on a foreign insurance policy. There doesn't appear to be any wiggle room about that.

 

Why do they not list cost for those over 65?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mango Bob said:

Why do they not list cost for those over 65?  

 

Because they're the Thai govt., not private insurance companies?

 

And in many cases, re the Thai insurance companies, they won't write new policies for people beyond age 65, so no premium amounts to quote.

 

Edited by TallGuyJohninBKK
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Because they're the Thai govt., not private insurance companies?

 

And in many cases, re the Thai insurance companies, they won't write new policies for people beyond age 65, so no premium amounts to quote.

 

I was looking at the Standard plans not the Platinum plans.  Can we get the Platinum plans or the Standard Extra plan?

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...