Jump to content
BANGKOK
brianj1964

O/A visa and insurance experience today

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

 

Attached below scans of a fully documented first-hand-case of re-entry on an original not expired OA Visa.

Some TV Forum members (including myself), are/were very worried whether they will be denied the 1 year permission to stay when they re-enter Thailand and some even postponed or cancelled trips outside Thailand for that reason.

But the report indicates that re-entering on a pre Oct 31 issued and still valid OA Visa is safe.  Also there are NO reports of people being refused when re-entering on an already expired OA Visa with a valid re-entry permit.

CONCLUSION > Entry or re-entry in Thailand with a pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa does NOT require health-insurance.

 

Note: The travel-insurance shown to the IO when he did query about health-insurance is NOT a thai-approved health-insurance, but a UK travel-insurance policy.  Was probably just a routine-question asked by the IO on which the answer didn't matter anyway, because after a quick look on it the IO proceeded with stamping the OA Visa holder in for the full-year.

 

Note: documented report is from 2 days ago, but I only post now as I waited for permission of @Forresttrump

to share it.  Many thanks for that!

 

Do we know where that reentry took place.

It also appears that there is a separate ME stamp in his passport.  My passport with a still valid O-A (1st year) has not such stamp.  It has just the ME which is on the visa itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

 

 

CONCLUSION > Entry or re-entry in Thailand with a pre Oct 31 issued OA Visa does NOT require health-insurance.

 

Note: The travel-insurance shown to the IO when he did query about health-insurance is NOT a thai-approved health-insurance, but a UK travel-insurance policy.  Was probably just a routine-question asked by the IO on which the answer didn't matter anyway, because after a quick look on it the IO proceeded with stamping the OA Visa holder in for the full-year

 

Poster arrives.. gets asked to show insurance.. does show insurance.. and the conclusion is you dont need insurance.. 

 

Interesting perspective.. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

If Immigration weren't actually enforcing the insurance rule against pre-Oct. 31 O-As, then why would the IO have asked for proof of insurance?

 

The traveler's experience would have been more on point to your conclusion if the traveler, when asked for proof of insurance, was unable to produce any insurance paperwork. In that event, it would have been very interesting to have seen what the IO would have done on his entry.

Thanks for your response. 

Imo - which is of course just that: an opinion - it only demonstrates that border-immigration still does not have its act completely together, and individual Immigration officers are trying to cover their ### by asking for health-insurance because they are still confused even after the Nov7 Big Boss clarification meeting.

Also, I did not make the statement NOT required, solely on this 1 report, but there are at least 2 similar reports of re-entry with a still valid OA Visa.

One of them was asked for insurance and showed a non-approved foreign policy document and was stamped in for 12 months, exactly like case above.

The other one - even more interesting - was asked for insurance and not being able to show that, was after some internal deliberation still stamped in for 12 months.

 

 

Edited by Peter Denis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Thanks for your response. 

Imo - which is of course just that: an opinion - it only demonstrates that border-immigration still does not have its act completely together, and individual Immigration officers are trying to cover their ### by asking for health-insurance because they are still confused even after the Nov7 Big Boss clarification meeting.

Also, I did not make the statement NOT required, solely on this 1 report, but there are at least 2 similar reports.

One of them asked for insurance and showed a non-approved foreign policy document and was stamped in for 12 months.

The other one - even more interesting - asked for insurance and not being able to show that, was after some internal deliberation still stamped in for 12 months.

 

 

i will know exactly Friday 22,i go to my immigration office for 90 days and will ask if i can in the country convert my OA extension to O based on  marriage before  march 24,or go out the country the 22 march to Laos(extension and basis visa OA invalid) to make a new visa Non O based on marriage for 90 days and extend later for one year.My basis OA visa was expired in 2014 and never go out the country.

Share this post


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

Do we know where that reentry took place.

It also appears that there is a separate ME stamp in his passport.  My passport with a still valid O-A (1st year) has not such stamp.  It has just the ME which is on the visa itself.

1. Yes, in his comments between the scans he said Swampy.

2. That's correct, but he mentioned there  also that he bought that at CW after he was stamped in for his full 12 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

1. Yes, in his comments between the scans he said Swampy.

2. That's correct, but he mentioned there  also that he bought that at CW after he was stamped in for his full 12 months.

Thanks, I missed that.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a friend just tried to do an OA extension at jomtien and was rejected for having no insurance. He's been doing extensions for years. Discuss

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

a friend just tried to do an OA extension at jomtien and was rejected for having no insurance. He's been doing extensions for years. Discuss

It’s becoming more commonplace. Seems to be clearer now what’s required. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

a friend just tried to do an OA extension at jomtien and was rejected for having no insurance. He's been doing extensions for years. Discuss

The Police order states, that extensions of stay require insurance, only Thai, and only from participating companies.

 

If John entered 10 years ago and received a permission of stay, today, he is on the same permission of stay (derived from a non O-A).

 

A 10 year permission of stay. Because he kept extending it (with extensions of stay), and kept it valid with re-entry permits.

 

From an Immigration point of view, there is no difference between Mike entering 1 year ago, or John entering 10 years ago, because they both kept the initial permission of stay valid (or the last permission of stay they could get before the visa expired, by doing a visa run, i.e entering one last time before visa expiry, does not matter).

 

That particular permission of stay has been kept alive for 10 years, and is still alive today, when John wants to extend his stay once again.

 

That's why, anyone that has a permission of stay derived from a non O-A, is asked for participating Thai insurance today, if they want to extend.

Edited by lkv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, lkv said:

The Police order states, that extensions of stay require insurance, only Thai, and only from participating companies.

 

If John entered 10 years ago and received a permission of stay, today, he is on the same permission of stay (derived from a non O-A).

 

A 10 year permission of stay. Because he kept extending it (with extensions of stay), and kept it valid with re-entry permits.

 

From an Immigration point of view, there is no difference between Mike entering 1 year ago, or John entering 10 years ago, because they both kept the initial permission of stay valid (or the last permission of stay they could get before the visa expired, by doing a visa run, i.e entering one last time before visa expiry, does not matter).

 

That particular permission of stay has been kept alive for 10 years, and is still alive today, when John wants to extend his stay once again.

It's when your O-A Visa's first year is about to expire, you can leave the country and re-enter and get another year. After the second year it will expire and you'll need a 1 year extension,and if leaving the country using a re-entry permit will not change anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Max69xl said:

After the second year it will expire and you'll need a 1 year extension,and if leaving the country using a re-entry permit will not change anything. 

You can keep any given permission of stay valid, with extensions and re-entry permits, forever (or until they refuse to extend your stay or issue re-entry permits).

 

It can be the first entry on a multiple non O-A, the second, the last, it doesn't matter.

 

What matters is, whichever permission of stay you choose to start extending, it derives from a non O-A.

 

Which is why they ask for insurance today at Local Immigration offices.

Edited by lkv
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

a friend just tried to do an OA extension at jomtien and was rejected for having no insurance. He's been doing extensions for years. Discuss

Bummer. So what's he going to do? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Bummer. So what's he going to do? 

I've not spoken to him but the only thing you can do is go for the O

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

a friend just tried to do an OA extension at jomtien and was rejected for having no insurance. He's been doing extensions for years. Discuss

Jomtien enhancing their credentials as a rogue office these days when it comes to retirement extensions, I think  - coming on top of their current requirements for (1) those using the 800k/400k method to return after 90 days with their bank books; and (2) Americans, Aussies & Brits using the 65k monthly income method to obtain a special bank letter listing details of transfers from abroad including home country currency debits (with standard 6-month/12-month bank statements, which are generally accepted by most other offices, not proving adequate).

Edited by OJAS
  • Sad 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...