Jump to content

Visa Insurance requirements for Non Imm'O'


bt2017

Recommended Posts

Hi a friend just returned from doing his 90 day report at CM IMM and also to get a re-entry as he's going to Viet. he was told that if he leaves Thai. and returns he will need compulsory health insurance. I have never heard this but he said he questioned 2 IMO's I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit?? Cheers

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is only if he submits a 1 year extension of stay application on basis of his non-O/A; that is when proof of insurance will be requested.   It is also possible that on a fresh entry of non-o/a, insurance might be requested.

 

The re-entry permit "should" not be an issue on the re-entry.   You are not requesting new permission to enter.  You are re-entering on a previous permission to stay that is still valid.

 

And yes, non-o is different type of visa than non-o/a.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi a friend just returned from doing his 90 day report at CM IMM and also to get a re-entry as he's going to Viet. he was told that if he leaves Thai. and returns he will need compulsory health insurance. I have never heard this but he said he questioned 2 IMO's I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit?? Cheers

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is still a lot of grey area about returning with an existing OA visa (not re-entry permit that should be safe), currently it seems border officers are stamping the full 12 months but its a bit of an unknown.. 

On a O visa no issues. 
On a re-entry permit no issues.. 
On a OA issued before Oct 31 (law says needed but IOs seem to be ok with it for now). 
On a OA issued after Oct 31 should have needed insurance to be issued it, hence may be asked for proof. 

 
 

oa.JPG.3f930e728595391b277b485e589d4829.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WOW, 2 obvious incorrect responses when asking for information from 2 CM immigration officers!

 

1. When re-entering Thailand with a re-entry permit, as he will be doing, it will NOT be required as the re-entry permit will keep his granted permission to stay alive (irrespective whether it is O or OA).

2. He has an O Visa.  Making statements about health-insurance being required is incorrect.

Only if he has an OA - retirement Visa will he ever be queried about it (when he applies for an extension of stay).

 

No wonder everybody gets confused, when the responses of those who are expected to enforce the requirements are blatantly incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Peter Denis said:

WOW, 2 obvious incorrect responses when asking for information from 2 CM immigration officers!

<snip>

2. He has an O Visa.  Making statements about health-insurance being required is incorrect.

<snip>

No wonder everybody gets confused, when the responses of those who are expected to enforce the requirements are blatantly incorrect.

So many folks are clueless to what thier visa class actually is.. lets not be so sure its the immigration officer who is wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bt2017 said:

I asked if he stipulated that he had an 'O' visa which he confirmed is this legit

If he is married to a Thai as I am and has an non 'O' visa, then no insurance is required, that said as others have also said, if it's a non 'O/A' visa, i.e. not married to a Thai, then insurance will be required when he renews his extension in due course, that said, best be looking at his passport for clarification.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 4MyEgo said:

If he is married to a Thai as I am and has an non 'O' visa, then no insurance is required, that said as others have also said, if it's a non 'O/A' visa, i.e. not married to a Thai, then insurance will be required when he renews his extension in due course, that said, best be looking at his passport for clarification.

 

You seem to be suggesting that all non-O visas except marriage are non-OA. This is not correct. For example I originally entered on a non-OB visa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, neilrob said:

You seem to be suggesting that all non-O visas except marriage are non-OA. This is not correct. For example I originally entered on a non-OB visa

And there were Non-O issued not for retirement, not for marriage, not for business, not for work.......just simply Non-O for longer stay than voa.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can tell you that CM Immigration are as confused about health insurance when it comes to extensions of stay for Non O-A retirement as the rest of us. A friend, 3 weeks ago, did his extension of stay at CM and health insurance was never mentioned. Yet when enquiring at the CM Imm office whether it is needed or not they say yes. So I asked them about my friend getting his extension and not being asked about health insurance, and I just got a blank stare back from the IO. No effort to ask anyone else to ascertain what is and isn't required.

 

So I'd be interested to see posts from anyone who has done an extension of stay ( Non O-A based on retirement ) since 31 Oct at CM to see what their experience was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is from an email I got from a visa service I used years ago (but no longer use). Make of it what you will: 

 

"This is (name) from (visa agent) with a November update.

We have had many retirees on a O-A type visa contacting us about the new rules. It is now REQUIRED for you to have an insurance policy for one of the approved insurers here if you want to continue to have a O-A type visa.

We have been advising those who do not want, or need insurance to transition to a NON-O type visa which does not have this requirement."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Trujillo said:

This is from an email I got from a visa service I used years ago (but no longer use). Make of it what you will: 

 

"This is (name) from (visa agent) with a November update.

We have had many retirees on a O-A type visa contacting us about the new rules. It is now REQUIRED for you to have an insurance policy for one of the approved insurers here if you want to continue to have a O-A type visa.

We have been advising those who do not want, or need insurance to transition to a NON-O type visa which does not have this requirement."

The announcement should be a little bit more precise.

Yes, it is required when applying for an extension of stay for RETIREMENT based on an original OA Visa.

However, if you are married, you can apply for an extension of stay for MARRIAGE based on an original OA Visa.  In the latter case, health-insurance is not required (and the financials required are lower than for an extension based on retirement).

Actually, many retirees who entered on an OA Visa - retirement, and later on married a thai national can go that road.  Because of the additional paperwork - both for the IO and the applicant - many simply stayed on their 'retirement' reason when applying for an extension of stay.  But now with the new health-insurance requirement, it would be the easiest way to avoid the expensive and basically worthless thai insurance required. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cnxgary said:

Can a single person who entered the Kingdom with a OA-retirement and now on yearly extensions get married and have the yearly extensions amended from retirement to marriage without having to leave the Kingdom?

YES, when you are married and it is time to extend your annual permission to stay for your Non Imm OA Visa, you apply for your extension of stay but this time not for reason of RETIREMENT, but for reason of MARRIAGE.

> See previous post #20

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Won't be long,  mandatory health insurance for all expats living in Thailand,  it's just logical so don't jump visa types to currently avoid it. 

 

Also, the policy must be from one of the dodgy health insurance providers gazetted by Immigration. 

 

What about those estimated 4 to 5 million migrants from Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam that are working in Thailand. (ref: IOM Thailand)

 

I bet the Thai government won't be pursuing them for health insurance, it would defeat their goal of cheap labour for Thai companies. 

 

What a fast, go after the Farangs and BTW force them into using the kickbacks from Thai nominated health insurance providers; no other policies accepted...... 

 

Under the UN discrimination act I would see this singling out of one group of individuals as discrimination by the Thai government.  

 

I am in agreement for health insurance in Thailand for all foreigners; tourists, visitors, workers and expats; but not the current dictatorial style being forced on expats.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, berrec said:

Won't be long,  mandatory health insurance for all expats living in Thailand,  it's just logical so don't jump visa types to currently avoid it. 

 

 

An opinion not supported by logic or fact.

 

Health insurance will not pay hospitals for costs related to pre-existing conditions.  Plus policy limits are low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...