Health Insurance: Non-Imm O-A

[CharlieH]

Posts made in relation to, and quoting a post containing a mistake in visa classification and therefore wrong information have been removed so as not to mislead.

[ukrules]

On 11/4/2019 at 7:44 PM, LivinLOS said:

Been busy for a few days.. Here we are, 4th Nov. 

 

Do we seriously not have a single first hand report of an acceptance or refusal of a OA extension ?? Anywhere in the kingdom ?? 

Chaeng Wattana has been closed since last Friday, expect problems from tomorrow.

[ThaiBob]

This sign is now at Jomtien immigration. They are telling non-OA visa holders that they must have health insurance from the Long Stay website for future annual extensions and for those that have done previous extensions. Of course, Jomtien immigration was telling people the 65k method was no good. What we need is a TV member with a history of extensions based on their non-OA visa to post their own personal experience as of Nov 1st. Just a note, Jomtien immigration extensions = retirement visa in their world. (Go to the PCEC FB page.) 

 

 

[GeorgeCross]

1 hour ago, ThaiBob said:

This sign is now at Jomtien immigration. They are telling non-OA visa holders that they must have health insurance from the Long Stay website for future annual extensions and for those that have done previous extensions. Of course, Jomtien immigration was telling people the 65k method was no good. What we need is a TV member with a history of extensions based on their non-OA visa to post their own personal experience as of Nov 1st. Just a note, Jomtien immigration extensions = retirement visa in their world. (Go to the PCEC FB page.) 

 

 

 

seriously how long are we going to keep believing "some immigration" officers have "misread" the order and actually accept WE misread the order and insurance is now mandatory for ALL retirement o-a extensions?

 

[Peter Denis]

2 hours ago, ThaiBob said:

This sign is now at Jomtien immigration. They are telling non-OA visa holders that they must have health insurance from the Long Stay website for future annual extensions and for those that have done previous extensions. Of course, Jomtien immigration was telling people the 65k method was no good. What we need is a TV member with a history of extensions based on their non-OA visa to post their own personal experience as of Nov 1st. Just a note, Jomtien immigration extensions = retirement visa in their world. (Go to the PCEC FB page.) 

 

 

Last line or the note reads > (if your visa expiry After 30 Oct 2019)

If you are on an extension of stay your original visa on which the permission to stay was based, expired BEFORE that date.

So this Note actually says health insurance is NOT applicable if you go for an extension of stay based on your original OA Visa (which means EVERYBODY at the present moment in time).

 

Even with a short note meant to clarify, they are able to confuse us!

[LivinLOS]

2 hours ago, GeorgeCross said:

 

seriously how long are we going to keep believing "some immigration" officers have "misread" the order and actually accept WE misread the order and insurance is now mandatory for ALL retirement o-a extensions?

 

I dont understand how anyone is maintaining that line anyway.. Just read the damn thing !!

 

IMO its irresponsible of mods to continue to push this line with such certainty. Everyone has opinions sure enough, and everyone is entitled to thier 'opinion' but senior posters here have to understand that many people take those comments are being fact, not guesswork, and attempt to make it clear its the latter should be made clear. 

The current insistence that this isnt ever going to apply to airport arrivals on a pre Oct31 issued visa is another aspect where its still unclear. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

Last line or the note reads > (if your visa expiry After 30 Oct 2019)

If you are on an extension of stay your original visa on which the permission to stay was based, expired BEFORE that date.

So this Note actually says health insurance is NOT applicable if you go for an extension of stay based on your original OA Visa (which means EVERYBODY at the present moment in time).

 

Even with a short note meant to clarify, they are able to confuse us!

Of course! They're most likely to be confused themselves. 

[Maestro]

1. There is no retirement visa.

 

2. Not all immigration officials mean the same when they say or write retirement visa.

 

This is the basic problem in communication with Thai immigration officials.

[chubby]

if this were the case, my Non-OA expired in Sept, and am now on re-entry visas, maybe I should start doing EOS in Sept 2020, then, never have to bother with   the new game, of "insurance" . ?

 

as what is the least expensive plan for purchase outside of Thailand average cost going to be? , already with all the  "10 diseases" (no I don't have Elephantiasis) , cost is about $250 with  FedEx'ing passport to consulates, etc etc

[jacko45k]

2 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Last line or the note reads > (if your visa expiry After 30 Oct 2019)

If you are on an extension of stay your original visa on which the permission to stay was based, expired BEFORE that date.

So this Note actually says health insurance is NOT applicable if you go for an extension of stay based on your original OA Visa (which means EVERYBODY at the present moment in time).

 

Even with a short note meant to clarify, they are able to confuse us!

Immigration in Jomtiem always refer to a retirement extension as a Visa, So still confusion reigns!

[Peter Denis]

2 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Last line or the note reads > (if your visa expiry After 30 Oct 2019)

If you are on an extension of stay your original visa on which the permission to stay was based, expired BEFORE that date.

So this Note actually says health insurance is NOT applicable if you go for an extension of stay based on your original OA Visa (which means EVERYBODY at the present moment in time).

 

Even with a short note meant to clarify, they are able to confuse us!

 

2 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

Immigration in Jomtiem always refer to a retirement extension as a Visa, So still confusion reigns!

 

Yes, confusion all over.

And even if the note meant to say that the health-insurance only pertains to applications for extension of a permission to stay that will expire after 30 Oct 2019, the Note still does not make sense.

Because most OA Visa holders whose permission to stay would expire say November 3, would have applied for their extension of stay well before Oct 31.  And I did not see any reports of OA Visa holders whose extension of stay was denied because of the health-insurance requirement when applying before Oct 31.

Or am I missing something?

 

[LivinLOS]

2 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

 

 

Yes, confusion all over.

And even if the note meant to say that the health-insurance only pertains to applications for extension of a permission to stay that will expire after 30 Oct 2019, the Note still does not make sense.

Because most OA Visa holders whose permission to stay would expire say November 3, would have applied for their extension of stay well before Oct 31.  And I did not see any reports of OA Visa holders whose extension of stay was denied because of the health-insurance requirement when applying before Oct 31.

Or am I missing something?

 

The logical conclusion that 

 

1) this is extensions of permission of stay (as its an incountry office) 
2) this applies to all 'applications' they take after that date, not the already applied for ones. 

[jacko45k]

2 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

And I did not see any reports of OA Visa holders whose extension of stay was denied because of the health-insurance requirement when applying before Oct 31.

Or am I missing something?

Well the police order hadn't been out long before Oct 31st, and pretty sure they are as confused as we are. They should just make insurance compulsory for all extensions....... WHAT AM I SAYING????

[Sheryl]

5 hours ago, ThaiBob said:

This sign is now at Jomtien immigration. They are telling non-OA visa holders that they must have health insurance from the Long Stay website for future annual extensions and for those that have done previous extensions. Of course, Jomtien immigration was telling people the 65k method was no good. What we need is a TV member with a history of extensions based on their non-OA visa to post their own personal experience as of Nov 1st. Just a note, Jomtien immigration extensions = retirement visa in their world. (Go to the PCEC FB page.) 

 

 

 

Actually they seem to be telling people this only if their OA visa expiry was after Oct 30.

 

In other words they interpret the 31 October effective data as applying to all OA visas active as of that date, regardless of when issued. But  not as applying to people whose OA already expired prior to the effective date which would be the majority of extensions, I should think.

 

Or are they confusing visa expiry with permission to stay expiry?

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

The logical conclusion that 

 

1) this is extensions of permission of stay (as its an incountry office) 
2) this applies to all 'applications' they take after that date, not the already applied for ones. 

Yes, I agree that's the logical conclusion, after interpreting the Note and what it might mean.

Although that does not guarantee that it will be applied like that.

I think we are still in the 'full confusion' stage, and unless Immigration HQ will come up with clear and understandable guidance (not the cryptic Police order, which I read multiple times) we will get mixed signals from everywhere on how this is being handled.

I am from Belgium - the home of surrealism - but even in my home-country they did not succeed in reaching this level of confusion. 

[LivinLOS]

1 hour ago, Peter Denis said:

Yes, I agree that's the logical conclusion, after interpreting the Note and what it might mean.

Although that does not guarantee that it will be applied like that.

I think we are still in the 'full confusion' stage, and unless Immigration HQ will come up with clear and understandable guidance (not the cryptic Police order, which I read multiple times) we will get mixed signals from everywhere on how this is being handled.

I am from Belgium - the home of surrealism - but even in my home-country they did not succeed in reaching this level of confusion. 

I dont see whats confusing at all.. 

 

OA visa applications overseas post nov need it.

Extensions of permissions of stay generated from OA visas post nov need it.

Arrivals to Thailand with pre nov OA visas will be stamped in to the end date of the insurance. 

Arrivals to Thailand with pre nov OA visas who do not hodl insurance can purchase it on the spot or get a 30 day entry stamp to sort it out. 

 

Seems to cover all bases, be pretty clear, and was how I suggested it would likely be for months. 

 

I believe re-entry permits should, logically, be allowed to re-enter without insurance. 

[Peter Denis]

24 minutes ago, LivinLOS said:

I dont see whats confusing at all.. 

 

OA visa applications overseas post nov need it.

Extensions of permissions of stay generated from OA visas post nov need it.

Arrivals to Thailand with pre nov OA visas will be stamped in to the end date of the insurance. 

Arrivals to Thailand with pre nov OA visas who do not hodl insurance can purchase it on the spot or get a 30 day entry stamp to sort it out. 

 

Seems to cover all bases, be pretty clear, and was how I suggested it would likely be for months.

I believe re-entry permits should, logically, be allowed to re-enter without insurance. 

Judging from the reported cases at Suvarnabhumi airport, a 'one size fits all' approach to handling OA Visas has been chosen.  It looks that irrespective when issued ALL OA Visas or permissions to stay based on OA, will need to comply with the health-insurance requirement. 

When this is indeed the official stance it implies that ALL Non Imm OA Visa holders would be affected somewhere within the coming 12 months when

a) entering or re-entering Thailand, or

b) applying for an extension of a permission to stay.

Link to Suvarnabhumi first-hand report  >

 

[tgeezer]

Very nice of the Thai government to show such concern for our welfare, I had always considered that as an adult, I was responsible for myself; over fifty years in that capacity now.  

[ThaiBob]

7 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

Actually they seem to be telling people this only if their OA visa expiry was after Oct 30.

 

In other words they interpret the 31 October effective data as applying to all OA visas active as of that date, regardless of when issued. But  not as applying to people whose OA already expired prior to the effective date which would be the majority of extensions, I should think.

 

Or are they confusing visa expiry with permission to stay expiry?

I hope you are right, of course. But now there is more to the Jomtien story as posted in a different forum. The person that took the picture was there to do a 90 day report. After seeing the sign he went to the retirement desk with passport in hand and asked if the health requirement applied to his particular case (he has a long history of annual extensions). The retirement desk told him he would have to have insurance from the Long-stay website or get a non-O.  I can only hope Jomtien Immigration is disseminating incorrect information (again) but what we need is a true success story (first-hand). 

[Maestro]

11 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Well the police order hadn't been out long before Oct 31st, and pretty sure they are as confused as we are. They should just make insurance compulsory for all extensions....... WHAT AM I SAYING????

 

They should just scrap the whole thing.

[Momofarang]

5 hours ago, Maestro said:

 

They should just scrap the whole thing.

The whole immigration system looks like a 30 years old car driven on tyres from 4 different makers with a states of wear varying from 5 to 25 years.

Edited November 6, 2019 by Momofarang

[GeorgeCross]

1 hour ago, Momofarang said:

The whole immigration system looks like a 30 years old car driven on tyres from 4 different makers with a states of wear varying from 5 to 25 years.

 

i can safely say it is a WHOLE lot better than what they would come up with if they scrapped it and started again *shudder*

[Jip99]

On 11/1/2019 at 6:26 PM, TorquayFan said:

Thank you JIP99 !

 

So why not apply for 'O' Visa not 'OA' - isn't it then possible to get a Multiple Re-entry Permit at ImmiG in Thailand - B 2900 ?

 

No need (atm) for Health Insurance that route . . . . ?

 

ATB

 

 

Depends whether you want a visa - or an extension of stay.

 

Non-Imm 'O' visas are now single entry only from the UK. You can then apply for a 12 month extension of stay (1,900 Baht) and a re-entry permit (1,000 Baht single, 3,800 Baht multiple).

 

Some people prefer to have a visa rather than an extension. A multi-entry 'O' visa would suit me very well (but I can't get one), so an 'O-A' is my only option.

 

Health insurance is sensible anyway but, as you say, not a requirement at the moment for the extension route.

[AussieBob18]

On 10/31/2019 at 7:27 PM, AussieBob18 said:

I have also asked the Australian Thailand Embassy the same questions - no response yet.

What I have been advised is that they have the authority to 'approve' whatever alternative insurance policy is provided in the application.  But in regards to whether it is mandatory to complete the certificate or not, and whether another company's own certifricate which details the coverage provided is enough, I am still waiting an answer.

 

It has been over a week now and I have not received a response from the Thai Embassy in Australia - nor the Sydney Consulate.  So I guess that means they either dont know, or they dont want to say, or they dont care.  Either way it is clear to me that getting a new O-A Retirement Visa is not the way to go in the future for either myself or the old guy I was checking for.  Non-Immigrant O Visa Marriage is clearly the best way for both of us. 

[Peter Denis]

@moderator

Suggest to close this thread as up-to-date information and latest developments on this issue are addressed in

>

 

[ubonjoe]

Since topic was almost dead (no posts for over 2 days) until you posted on it I will close it now.