Jump to content
BANGKOK
weegee

Absolute latest from Immigration on Insurance...

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Martyp said:

Nobody knows for sure but I don’t think you need one of the high price low coverage policies on the government website. They are just policies that meet the minimum requirements. You could buy a higher value policy from one of the Thai companies. My Pacific Cross agent assured me that my 10,000,000 baht policy meets the requirements though I am waiting to see about that. That does not solve the problem of qualifying a foreign policy but it may make considering a Thai policy more palatable.

 

It apparently has to be a policy from one of the 13 companies listed on the site. Pacific Cross is one which is why no problem for you. People with policies from companies other than those listed (or at least underwritten by one of them) have an issue as it appears that TI will only accept certificate from one of these 13.

 

Year 1 (first entry) under a new OA visa is a different matter as foreign policies can be accepted then and it is up to the issuing Embassy or Consulate to decide whether a policy is adequate. While the website has a certificate that foreign insurers are supposed to sign I think it possible that Thai embassies abroad will undnerstand that is not feasible and be willing to review short insurance documents - need to ask the relevant  Embassy if in this situation.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I think most have noticed, there is a serial troll attempting to disrupt this thread and other threads on this topic.

 

If you see such posts please do not reply to them, just hit the report button.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the report button?

 

I found it.  Thank you.

Edited by Mango Bob

Share this post


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

Where is the report button?

 Top right hand corner of each post, when you run your mouse over it, next to the small share and post # entries.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

29 pages of heresay. Ubon Joe must be a Saint not closing the topic down It was answered on page 1.Seems to me anyone who⚖️ posted after that are best gone regardless.!

Haha, Ubon Joe may be a saint, and his opinion should be respected, but I personally haven't seen him walk on water. I doubt even he would claim that his interpretation is absolutely correct that this order will not be retroactive in some form for Non-O-A visas and extensions of permission to stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, nrasmussen said:

At least one thing is clear from the English version: Insurance is needed only when doing an entry using a Non O-A visa issued on or after 2019-10-31. Nowhere does it say say anything else - just pure speculation by people arguing otherwise.

Nowhere may it say otherwise.. However it has been 'said' otherwise by many incountry immigration offices, phone lines, head office, etc.. 

 

Which is right, the letter of the law, or the understanding of that law by immigration remains to be seen. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

There are an equal or greater number claiming extensions do not require insurance too. Best to let the dust settle.....

Have asked a few times.. Is anyone compiling a list of the offices that say it isnt needed ?? I havent seen many / any firm reports, yet have seen firm clear (for what thats worth) reports from many saying it is. 

 

Trying to gauge 'mood' and thinking more than anything.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

Have asked a few times.. Is anyone compiling a list of the offices that say it isnt needed ?? I havent seen many / any firm reports, yet have seen firm clear (for what thats worth) reports from many saying it is. 

 

Trying to gauge 'mood' and thinking more than anything.. 

There are so many trolls spamming this topic that it is hard to tell. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

The same offices have been quoted giving different advise on different days.  Still shaking out.

Yes it's way to early to say anything definitive about actual enforcement policies in any office.

It isn't even 31 October yet!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A nonsensical post has been removed

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Aforek said:

...she understood like this, and Jomtien immigration understood " it's not a new visa, it's an extension of visa" ( which is true ) . 

 

Not quite true, ie not quite the correct terminology, but this is par for immigration officials. As the application form TM.7 says, it is in fact an "EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY STAY IN THE KINGDOM"

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

Not quite true, ie not quite the correct terminology, but this is par for immigration officials. As the application form TM.7 says, it is in fact an "EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY STAY IN THE KINGDOM"

Well OK, but without ever having that base visa for retirement (O or O-A) whether recent or many years old, there would have never been any basis for an extension. Personally I think this hair splitting over terminology on this issue has become tedious and silly. It doesn't change anything either way for how the enforcement of the health insurance requirement turns out.

Edited by Jingthing

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...