Non-OA health insurance Chaeng Wattan madness

[TerraplaneGuy]

I’m at CW for retirement extension right now (non-immigrant OA).   Came in advance, current extension expires 12 February.  Already adjusted my Aetna policy to begin and end that date for full year coverage to match my new extension.   But have been told it’s not good enough because I don’t have proof of insurance for the remaining (current) period of my existing extension.   So I have to come back on 12 February.   In fact I have insurance now but the OPD is only 35k not 40k as is required for a new extension.  The result of their interpretation is that you must have a certificate for the current year as well as for the extension year, at the new required levels!     I can’t get that since my OPD is only 35k until the new policy year (February 12) when it goes up to 40k. My choices, they say, are to again change my insurance policy dates (a major pain) and then come back on exactly the date of the policy OR sit tight with my existing insurance policy date and certificate and come back to CW on exactly that date, February 12.   So in effect they’re denying me the normal ability to apply in advance for an extension by imposing a retrospective requirement for the 40k OPD during what’s left of my existing extension which I cannot get. I escalated to a supervisor who said the same and am now waiting for the pleasure of speaking to her Inspector.  

 

Anyone else experience this madness?

[ubonjoe]

Yours is the 2nd report of CW doing that which IMO is wrong.

If you had insurance that went into effect on the day you apply that is date the new extension would start instead of when your current extension ends.

[mokwit]

I just knew this would be a date juggling nightmare.

[TerraplaneGuy]

9 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

Yours is the 2nd report of CW doing that which IMO is wrong.

If you had insurance that went into effect on the day you apply that is date the new extension would start instead of when your current extension ends.

I agree with you (btw still waiting for the Inspector).   They showed me the English version of the new regulation which we have all seen and it clearly only requires that the insurance cover the period of the extension being applied for. It says nothing about the period before that (i. e. the stub period of the existing visa/extension).  Yet somehow they’re reading that into it.  It makes no sense not only because it’s just not in the law but also because if I do as they suggest and just stick with the insurance certificate I have and return on my current extension expiry date (12 February) I’ll be presenting exactly the same paperwork I have right now (except I’ll have to get an updated bank letter which is a pain but irrelevant to this issue).   So what on earth would it gain them to make me come back other than deprive me of my right to apply in advance?

Edited January 22, 2020 by TerraplaneGuy

[TerraplaneGuy]

Shot down!  Waited four hours for Inspector.  He never showed but the Supervisor said he told her she was right.  It became obvious they focus on the submission of application date rather than the extension date as the relevant date for insurance coverage, which flies in the face of the regulation which refers to “stay” not submission of application.   And get this:   They will not give an extension even on the date of the insurance if it’s before the TIME of the policy. They are terrified it seems that their system might show that they entered an extension an hour or even a minute before the coverage took effect.  So guess what, my Aetna policy starts on 12 February at 4:30 pm which means CW will be closed so I won’t be able to get the extension that day.  Nor the next of course because then I wouldn’t be covered for the last day of the extension.    So now I have to ask Aetna to change not the date but the TIME to something like 9 AM so I’ll have a chance of getting my extension (not to mention my re-entry permit which of course requires first getting the extension).  All in all, a magnificent job by Immigration In misinterpreting the law and wasting my entire day, and by Aetna in issuing a policy at a time that makes it useless!

Edited January 22, 2020 by TerraplaneGuy

[OJAS]

31 minutes ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

They are terrified it seems that their system might show that they entered an extension an hour or even a minute before the coverage took effect.

Not terrified but more likely a bunch of sadists, I strongly suspect, who have derived (and are no doubt continuing to derive for the rest of the day at least) considerable psychopathic satisfaction from hassling you with their inexcusably heinous actions.

 

If your appalling experience does not represent a strong case for Chaengwattana to be added to the forever-lengthening list of rogue offices when it comes to retirement extensions, then I don't know what does.

 

@Pib and @TallGuyJohninBKK - this thread will probably be of considerable interest to you both (as well as to many others).

Edited January 22, 2020 by OJAS

[DrJack54]

OP, what a nightmare. Enjoy a G&T when you get back home.

IMO ...F em.

Change to a non O. Yes means starting again but this insurance is a nonsense.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

26 minutes ago, OJAS said:

 

@Pib and @TallGuyJohninBKK - this thread will probably be of considerable interest to you both (as well as to many others).

 

All I can say is, I like UbonJoe also saw the other recent similar report of the same kind of B.S. implementation procedure occurring, and both that one and this one make me shake my head in disgust....

 

It just makes no sense, but they appear to be doing it anyway....

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

So I'm trying to understand the practical impact of this... for folks with O-A visa extensions of stay requiring insurance (and they DO require insurance, BTW...)

 

AFAIK, I've heard that some of the Thai insurers are willing to write policies for that month or weeks stub period, at a prorated premium amount, and then have the full year follow-on policy that matches one's extension period...

 

And if someone was able to do that with their Thai insurer on the front end for the first time, then I think they'd be OK for future cycles, as their annual insurance period would match their annual extension period... and they could apply to Immigration early because they'd already have valid insurance in force each successive year.

 

[holy cow cm]

They are just making it as difficult as they possibly can is the bottom line.

[BritTim]

3 hours ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

So now I have to ask Aetna to change not the date but the TIME to something like 9 AM so I’ll have a chance of getting my extension

Is there a chance that immigration would then object that you do not have a policy for the whole period of your extension (you would not be covered from (09:00-23:59 on the last day)? If they want to be stupid, are there any limits?

[DrJack54]

3 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Is there a chance that immigration would then object that you do not have a policy for the whole period of your extension (you would not be covered from (09:00-23:59 on the last day)? If they want to be stupid, are there any limits?

Don't wish to be a Mel Gibson conspiracy post but do Thai imm wish to kill off extensions based on original O-A? 

Seems like, smells like!

[TerraplaneGuy]

32 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Is there a chance that immigration would then object that you do not have a policy for the whole period of your extension (you would not be covered from (09:00-23:59 on the last day)? If they want to be stupid, are there any limits?

I wondered the same since it's hard to see why they would be so worried that the first minute is not covered, if they apparently don't care about the last.  I thought of raising it with the Supervisor but given the way she kept arguing in circles and ignoring the plain logic of my position made me conclude it would be a waste of time.  So to answer your question, no there are none.

[TerraplaneGuy]

And it only gets funnier.  I just got off the phone with Aetna.  They acknowledged the problem but sadly told me they cannot change the time of their certificate, even if they reissue the policy.  Why?  Because under Thai insurance law, they say, all policies of any kind must have an effective time of 4:30.  So nix that fix.  They did suggest a couple of creative solutions.  One would be to stick with my current policy and certificate, and go to CW a day late (i. e. in my case go on 13 Feb although my current extension expires 12 Feb).  Pay the B500 fine for overstaying and get an extension ending 12 Feb next year.   Clever, but my concern is deliberately overstaying; I've never overstayed and don't want to be on record as having done it.  That kind of thing can catch up with you in other situations.  Their second solution was that they would change my policy year to be 11 Feb.   So then I go to CW on 12 Feb and I would have the insurance in place.  They said CW would issue me an extension ending next 11 Feb, not 12 Feb, because it would match the insurance coverage dates.  Apparently they got a green light on this idea from somebody in Immigration.  However, I'm concerned that the CW officers may balk at extending a stay for 364 days when they're used to extending for a full year (and maybe policy even requires it).   So I put it out to you all:  is it common for CW to issue a retirement extension for something less than a year?  @ubonjoe  would probably know that.

[TerraplaneGuy]

3 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

So I'm trying to understand the practical impact of this... for folks with O-A visa extensions of stay requiring insurance (and they DO require insurance, BTW...)

 

AFAIK, I've heard that some of the Thai insurers are willing to write policies for that month or weeks stub period, at a prorated premium amount, and then have the full year follow-on policy that matches one's extension period...

 

And if someone was able to do that with their Thai insurer on the front end for the first time, then I think they'd be OK for future cycles, as their annual insurance period would match their annual extension period... and they could apply to Immigration early because they'd already have valid insurance in force each successive year.

 

I do think that would work.  The Supervisor said if I could prove that I NOW have the requisite insurance levels as well as the certificate stating that on 12 Feb (my extension date) my new policy will kick in with the same levels, she would have gone ahead as usual and issued me my extension in advance.  That's why I said in my first post that they in effect are requiring two certificates.  Unfortunately Aetna didn't anticipate this problem when they adjusted my policy to match my extension dates so didn't boost coverage on the stub period and didn't of course give me a certificate for it.  And I had no idea at all that I'd find myself in the Matrix.

[ubonjoe]

7 minutes ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

However, I'm concerned that the CW officers may balk at extending a stay for 364 days when they're used to extending for a full year (and maybe policy even requires it).   So I put it out to you all:  is it common for CW to issue a retirement extension for something less than a year?  @ubonjoe  would probably know that

The extension would still be for one year but would start on the day you apply for the extension.

There are a few situations where your extension would start on the date you apply.

Less than a year normally only happens when your passport has less than 12 months of validity.

[DrJack54]

OP, along with all your victim mates entered in some cases many years ago on an non O-A visa. 

CHANGE to non O. Yes short term pain in A## but why wouldn't you. 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

11 minutes ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

Because under Thai insurance law, they say, all policies of any kind must have an effective time of 4:30.  So nix that fix.

 

I just looked at my Pacific Cross policy, and it indeed is valid from 16:31 hours this year to 16:30 hours a year from the issuance date... Only in Thailand!!!!

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

15 minutes ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

However, I'm concerned that the CW officers may balk at extending a stay for 364 days when they're used to extending for a full year (and maybe policy even requires it).   So I put it out to you all:  is it common for CW to issue a retirement extension for something less than a year? 

 The curious part is, the TM7 form doesn't have the year term prepopulated. It asks the applicant to fill in the requested term. Obviously, everyone always writes one year or 365 days, I'd assume. I've never thought of a situation where you might want to write 360 days or such.... until now.

 

[Lovethailandelite]

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 The curious part is, the TM7 form doesn't have the year term prepopulated. It asks the applicant to fill in the requested term. Obviously, everyone always writes one year or 365 days, I'd assume. I've never thought of a situation where you might want to write 360 days or such.... until now.

 

You will only now get an extension end date that matches the expiry date of Insurance. That's how it now works

Edited January 22, 2020 by Lovethailandelite

[TerraplaneGuy]

4 hours ago, OJAS said:

Not terrified but more likely a bunch of sadists ...

 

 

In fairness and to make the story even more complex, I should add that the Supervisor who jerked me around for over 4 hours in the end seemed to take pity on me (I may have been in tears at that point, can't remember exactly but I know I'd eaten my now stale-dated bank letter and bank book copies) and made this offer:  If I just stick with my existing Aetna certificate and return to CW on 12 Feb (my expiry date) at around 4:00 PM, and ask for her, she would make sure my extension gets registered that day (presumably around 4:31 PM as everybody is leaving).  I pointed out that, magnanimous as that was, it would mean that I would not get my re-entry visa because for sure those people would not wait around for me to get the copy of the extension, etc.  She acknowledge this and suggested I get one in the airport on the way out whenever I travel next.  I told her I am often too rushed at the airport to consider such a thing and then she suggested I just come back to CW another time to get the permit.  I guess to her going to CW every day is just what life is about - after all, she does it.  But this may in fact be the way the story ends for me since Aetna's various workarounds all seem uncertain.

[OJAS]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

Don't wish to be a Mel Gibson conspiracy post but do Thai imm wish to kill off extensions based on original O-A? 

Seems like, smells like!

Unlikely that that would go down too well with their TGIA insurer bedmates, though!

[TerraplaneGuy]

11 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

The extension would still be for one year but would start on the day you apply for the extension.  ...

 

I don't think that would work because my insurance would cover me from 11 Feb 2020 - 11 Feb 2021 but my extension would be from 12 Feb 2020 (the first day I could apply given my policy starts 11 Feb at 4:30 PM) expiring 12 Feb 2021, with the result that the last day of my extension would not be covered by my policy.  Aetna obviously thought this too which is why they suggested requesting an extension of 364 days which would begin on 12 Feb 2020 (covered) and end on 11 Feb 2021 (still covered).  I just wonder if the CW officers will do that for me.  

[Lovethailandelite]

1 hour ago, DrJack54 said:

Don't wish to be a Mel Gibson conspiracy post but do Thai imm wish to kill off extensions based on original O-A? 

Seems like, smells like!

Absolutely not. They have a whole lot more business about to come their way not too far in the future

[OJAS]

21 minutes ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

Aetna obviously thought this too which is why they suggested requesting an extension of 364 days which would begin on 12 Feb 2020 (covered) and end on 11 Feb 2021 (still covered).  I just wonder if the CW officers will do that for me. 

It shouldn't matter too much, I would have thought, whether you put 365 or 364 days in the TM7. Immigration should go by your insurance end date as stated in Aetna's certificate and extend you on that basis. Just as they would if your passport were to expire on, say, 11 Feb 2021: your stay would only be extended until that expiry date and not until 12 Feb 2021 even if you had put 365 days in the TM7.

Edited January 22, 2020 by OJAS

[pookondee]

As another poster said, just change to 

Non-O and be done with it..

 

If you love the place that much,

to be willing to put up with all this sort of BS,

then 800k in a Thai bank isnt that much harder to do.

Surely its better to keep your own money than getting ripped off every year for useless insurance!

 

I cant really see why people are putting up with it really.

The Thailand of 10 years ago MIGHT have been worth throwing a few lazy $ away on this sort of silly stuff...

but now, no way hosè

 

 

 

 

 

[Dumbastheycome]

System  gone  mad ! How in any sense of  logic, rationale or simple common sense expect people to have existing  insurance on an extension which pre dates an application for  renewal when on the existing extension it was  not a mandatory  requirement?

Any further  continuation of permission to stay takes  effect (if  approved) on the  date  following the expiry of the last extension, not from the date preceding application.

 

[EricTh]

6 hours ago, TerraplaneGuy said:

Shot down!  Waited four hours for Inspector.  He never 

 

These one to two years, there has been more and more documents and additional requirements making it tougher for aliens to extend their visa in Thailand.

 

Is it possible for the insurance company to add a few days backwards ? or must the insurance policy be exactly one year, no less and no more?

 

Edited January 22, 2020 by EricTh

[DrJack54]

6 minutes ago, EricTh said:

 

These one to two years, there has been more and more documents and additional requirements making it tougher for aliens to extend their visa in Thailand.

 

Is it possible for the insurance company to add a few days backwards ? or must the insurance policy be exactly one year, no less and no more?

 

I don't wish to keep sticking nose in but I have one question. 

Cannot folk that originally entered Thailand on a Non O-A see the writing on the wall. It's obvious. O-A is history. 

Many folk here eg USA and other countries you can obtain good health cover. 

Why subject yourself to this Thai useless health insurance. Change to Non O based on retirement or whatever. Simple. F em

[TerraplaneGuy]

1 hour ago, Dumbastheycome said:

System  gone  mad ! How in any sense of  logic, rationale or simple common sense expect people to have existing  insurance on an extension which pre dates an application for  renewal when on the existing extension it was  not a mandatory  requirement?

Any further  continuation of permission to stay takes  effect (if  approved) on the  date  following the expiry of the last extension, not from the date preceding application.

 

I said the same thing at least 10 times to the frontline officer and the Supervisor.  They both replied every time with the mantra “you don’t have insurance NOW.”   As if I had overlooked that obvious defect in my analysis.