New Visa-O rules on Health Insurance

[Sheryl]

1 hour ago, cnxgary said:

I"ve asked before and I"ll ask again can a holder of a OA doing extensions for retirement change to extensions for marriage without having to exit the Kingdom? Does a person with a OA-marriage require insurance? Anyone, Ubon Joe, Peter your input please?

1. Yes. You can change reason for extension without needing to leave the country. Though there have been occasional reports of some Imm offices unnecessarily telling people to do this.

 

2. Opinions on this vary. Some Imm offices have told people it is necessaty even when the reason for extension changes from retirement to marriage. In which case point 1 doesn't matter as you'd still want to go leave the country to get a non-O.

 

[ubonjoe]

39 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

But people do get O visas in neighboring countries still, yes? 

Yes and at some other embassies and consulates.

[Grumpy John]

As far as I can see the confusion is the only thing that is consistent.  Now if the immigration laws and the application of said laws were consistent country wide there would be no confusion.....and all ex-pats could sleep soundly in their beds at night....or during the day! 

[Peter Denis]

3 hours ago, cnxgary said:

I"ve asked before and I"ll ask again can a holder of a OA doing extensions for retirement change to extensions for marriage without having to exit the Kingdom? Does a person with a OA-marriage require insurance? Anyone, Ubon Joe, Peter your input please?

When your extension of stay for your original OA Visa is due, you submit an application for extension.  On that application you have to mention the REASON for extension.  When you extend for reason of RETIREMENT most IOs now require that you meet the health-insurance requirement.  However, when you extend for reason of MARRIAGE you obviously need to prove that you are married and that you meet the other requirements for a marriage extension, but there is NO need for health-insurance.

The PoliceOrder is crystal clear on that issue, but unfortunately there are rogue IOs (like the Phetchabun one) that also require health-insurance for extensions of OA Visas based on marriage.

So to answer your actual question > NO, you do not have to leave the Kingdom as you can change the reason for extension of stay, at the moment you do your application.

[KhunBENQ]

6 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Agent or over the desk?

He meets the agent today at the immigration office.

As soon as I know I will report in the thread that I had opened.

[Martyp]

3 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

When your extension of stay for your original OA Visa is due, you submit an application for extension.  On that application you have to mention the REASON for extension.  When you extend for reason of RETIREMENT most IOs now require that you meet the health-insurance requirement.  However, when you extend for reason of MARRIAGE you obviously need to prove that you are married and that you meet the other requirements for a marriage extension, but there is NO need for health-insurance.

The PoliceOrder is crystal clear on that issue, but unfortunately there are rogue IOs (like the Phetchabun one) that also require health-insurance for extensions of OA Visas based on marriage.

So to answer your actual question > NO, you do not have to leave the Kingdom as you can change the reason for extension of stay, at the moment you do your application.

It would also be a good idea to go as early as possible so that if there are any problems with your Immigration office you have time to go to plan B.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes of course. Well over a decade ago! But people do get O visas in neighboring countries still, yes? 

555 ... so now it is "Yes of course" ... like you didn't post a know it all comment that basically says "Oh, you poor uniformed fools, getting a Non Immigrant O in the USA is a piece of cake..."  Let me remind you what your original comment was,, "Funny. My O visa was obtained in the U.S. Last time I checked, not in Thailand." "Funny" ... but not in the way you intended.

[Jingthing]

5 minutes ago, bangkokequity said:

555 ... so now it is "Yes of course" ... like you didn't post a know it all comment that basically says "Oh, you poor uniformed fools, getting a Non Immigrant O in the USA is a piece of cake..."  Let me remind you what your original comment was,, "Funny. My O visa was obtained in the U.S. Last time I checked, not in Thailand." "Funny" ... but not in the way you intended.

Don't put words in my mouth. I was replying to a post suggesting that O Visas were only issued in Thailand. Obviously not true. I never said that O visas were currently available in the US for retirement purposes. As above they are possible in neighboring countries. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Jingthing

[Speedhump]

On 12/16/2019 at 1:39 PM, ubonjoe said:

The immigration order requiring insurance for OA visas. Immigration order for OA insurance (eng only).pdf

 

I was thinking to switch to O from OA to avoid having to purchase getting a second insurance (mine not in the government list). An insurance friend feels they will eventually make insurance compulsory for O also, because there's no reason to do for one and not the other. 

[EricTh]

10 hours ago, cnxgary said:

I"ve asked before and I"ll ask again can a holder of a OA doing extensions for retirement change to extensions for marriage without having to exit the Kingdom? Does a person with a OA-marriage require insurance? Anyone, Ubon Joe, Peter your input please?

There has been at least one case reported in this forum that an OA visa extension for marriage do need health insurance.

 

It's better to change to O visa first.

Edited December 17, 2019 by EricTh

[EricTh]

17 minutes ago, Speedhump said:

I was thinking to switch to O from OA to avoid having to purchase getting a second insurance (mine not in the government list). An insurance friend feels they will eventually make insurance compulsory for O also, because there's no reason to do for one and not the other. 

Obviously, the O visa is a loophole because everyone on OA visa will just switch to O visa and that defeats the reason for requiring health insurance in the first place.

 

Eventually, it might extend to O visa but at least for now, O visa holders are safe.

 

Plan B would be living in another country like Philippines if O visa also requires health insurance.

Edited December 17, 2019 by EricTh

[EricTh]

7 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

.  However, when you extend for reason of MARRIAGE you obviously need to prove that you are married and that you meet the other requirements for a marriage extension, but there is NO need for health-insurance.

 

See my reply above regarding OA visa for marriage.

 

[Peter Denis]

11 hours ago, EricTh said:

There has been at least one case reported in this forum that an OA visa extension for marriage do need health insurance.

It's better to change to O visa first.

1. That was a case of a single rogue IO, which was clearly not following the PoliceOrder and enforcing its own incorrect interpretation.  The OA Visa holder could have contested it and would most probably have won it, but he preferred not to, as he reckoned the local IO might make life difficult for him later if the decision would be reversed.  The consequence of this blatantly incorrect interpretation by the local IO, was that he had to do an 800 km trip to Vientiane to get the Non Imm O Visa, while normally his OA Visa could have simply been changed from retirement to extended for reason of marriage.

2. It's surely not better to change to O Visa first, since it is foreseen in IO regulations that at the moment of extension of your Non Imm OA Visa you can change the reason for extension from retirement to marriage, and thus avoid the health-insurance.

[Peter Denis]

11 hours ago, Speedhump said:

I was thinking to switch to O from OA to avoid having to purchase getting a second insurance (mine not in the government list). An insurance friend feels they will eventually make insurance compulsory for O also, because there's no reason to do for one and not the other. 

Logic and consistency don't apply to IO regulations, and there are many reasons why 'eventually' might not happen at all, or will be designed and rolled-out in a very different way than the present farce.

[Speedhump]

10 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

Logic and consistency don't apply to IO regulations, and there are many reasons why 'eventually' might not happen at all, or will be designed and rolled-out in a very different way than the present farce.

Yes of course. I don't have a crystal ball but there's little reason to suppose they won't bring O into line with OA. None at all, especially when they wake up and see that their shiny new insurance scam, sorry plan, is being avoided by the simple expediency of visa change. Unless they truly intended it to apply only to new applicants for visas from outside Thailand, which has been suggested. In the meantime OA holders must live with the current mess, cancelling perfectly good insurance plans that don't comply, and spending many thousands on new ones. Shoddy, indeed. 

[Peter Denis]

5 minutes ago, Speedhump said:

Yes of course. I don't have a crystal ball but there's little reason to suppose they won't bring O into line with OA. None at all, especially when they wake up and see that their shiny new insurance scam, sorry plan, is being avoided by the simple expediency of visa change. Unless they truly intended it to apply only to new applicants for visas from outside Thailand, which has been suggested. In the meantime OA holders must live with the current mess, cancelling perfectly good insurance plans that don't comply, and spending many thousands on new ones. Shoddy, indeed. 

Whatever you do, I would strongly advise you NOT to cancel your present health-insurance if that policy suits your needs,  There are several options to escape the expensive and basically worthless thai-approved insurance.  The main one being to switch to an O type retirement-extension (which involves a border-run and application for a 90-day Non Imm O - retirement Visa).

Attached a link to my post #93 in a different thread in which I outlined the reasons why I don't think thai authorities will also require health-insurance for Non Imm O - retirement Visas anytime soon (and even less likely for Non Imm O - marriage type Visas).  And if they do it will not be done in the incommunicado bulldozer way they mishandled the present debacle.

 

[Speedhump]

48 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Whatever you do, I would strongly advise you NOT to cancel your present health-insurance if that policy suits your needs,  There are several options to escape the expensive and basically worthless thai-approved insurance.  The main one being to switch to an O type retirement-extension (which involves a border-run and application for a 90-day Non Imm O - retirement Visa).

Attached a link to my post #93 in a different thread in which I outlined the reasons why I don't think thai authorities will also require health-insurance for Non Imm O - retirement Visas anytime soon (and even less likely for Non Imm O - marriage type Visas).  And if they do it will not be done in the incommunicado bulldozer way they mishandled the present debacle.

 

Thanks, it's kind of you to provide this clarification. I find that I'm lucky enough that although I have an international policy where the insurer is not on the approved list, a local insurer is their Thai representative and both names are on the policy. But I worry for others who may not be so lucky. Cross fingers that the O visa will remain a viable option, as you suggest. 

[EVENKEEL]

My reason for believing the Ins requirement won't effect "O" visa in the future is because if they were to do this their would be little incentive to keep 800K in Thai bank. I got my "OA" in Sept - 19, plan on going the "O" route next time.

As I visit the US every year and Ins may be required for O in the future why would I continue to keep $$ in Thai Bank.

 

One theory among many...…...

[jacko45k]

12 hours ago, Speedhump said:

I don't have a crystal ball but there's little reason to suppose they won't bring O into line with OA.

I do. A Non-Imm-O gets you stamped in for 90 days, an O-A for 365 days. It would not make sense to require a one year policy for a 90 day entry. 

[Martyp]

1 hour ago, jacko45k said:

I do. A Non-Imm-O gets you stamped in for 90 days, an O-A for 365 days. It would not make sense to require a one year policy for a 90 day entry. 

I don’t understand the crystal ball talk. You just have to weigh the effort and expense of switching to an O against the future possibility that the insurance requirement will extend to other visas. Even if you believe it will extend to O visas why would switching to an O now still not be a good choice? There is no announcement now. The nearest change would be 2-3 years in the future. If your insurance problem/issue is now then you have to make a decision now.

 

 I guess I am also suggesting that the effort to switch is not that great give the importance in terms of getting an extension of stay.

Edited December 19, 2019 by Martyp

[Speedhump]

43 minutes ago, Martyp said:

I don’t understand the crystal ball talk. You just have to weigh the effort and expense of switching to an O against the future possibility that the insurance requirement will extend to other visas. Even if you believe it will extend to O visas why would switching to an O now still not be a good choice? There is no announcement now. The nearest change would be 2-3 years in the future. If your insurance problem/issue is now then you have to make a decision now.

 

 I guess I am also suggesting that the effort to switch is not that great give the importance in terms of getting an extension of stay.

If you actually want decent insurance cover then the higher expense is on the OA side. The cost of cover from one of the int'l insurance companies on the approved list is tens of thousands of Bht more than I pay now, and I have 3 million cover. The hassle of renewing an O visa is a consideration though.