THINK TWICE before subscribing to thai IO-approved health-insurance

[Peter Denis]

All OA Visa holders are now confronted with the requirement to have thai IO-approved health-insurance when applying for an extension of stay based on their original OA Visa.  And some – even when already well covered by foreign insurance - subscribe to that bogus thai insurance, because they – incorrectly – think that it is required to stay long-term in Thailand. 

 

But did you know:

1.    That subscribing to any thai health-insurance policy, might make it difficult to get your claim paid when you already have a foreign health-insurance policy (claim forms often start with that question, and this might result in a long-lasting administrative nightmare about which insurer should pay);

2.    That a thai health-insurance policy is void when staying less than 6 months per year in Thailand;

3.    That a thai health-insurance policy typically does not provide coverage for any accidents/illnesses when making trips abroad;

4.    That the specific thai IO-approved health-insurance policies typically only provide 400K THB in-patient coverage and 40K THB out-patient coverage (a ridiculously low coverage in case of serious accident/illness, and thus providing a false sense of security);

5.    That when over 75 years of age or with pre-existing conditions, thai insurers do not allow you to subscribe to their IO-approved health-insurance policies;

6.    That the premiums for the specific thai IO-approved health-insurance policies are exorbitantly high for the coverage they provide, and typically become higher every year (e.g. at age 83 the annual premium would be 380.000 THB for a 400.000 THB max coverage);

7.    That many thai insurance companies have a reputation of challenging your claims;

8.    That several IOs insist on an ORIGINAL copy of the thai IO-approved health-insurance policy, to approve your OA-extension of stay (typically thai insurers just provide you with a copy, resulting in your OA-extension of stay being denied);

9.    That your thai insurer should upload the data of your thai IO-approved health-insurance policy on the IO Health-Insurance database (failing to do so, will also result in your OA-extension of stay being denied);

10.That some rogue IOs – incorrectly - refuse to handle your first application for an extension of stay before the start-date of your thai IO-approved health-insurance policy (the crazy reason their claim that ‘you are not yet insured’), and that some even insist that the B is done on the day and hour of the policy start-date.

 

>> But finally there is also some good news, mainly

11.That it is surprisingly simple to switch to another extension-type (e.g. marriage) or convert to a Non Imm O – retirement Visa which when extended has the exact same requirements and conditions as an OA Visa extension.  And in both cases, there is NO requirement for health-insurance…

Edited February 11, 2020 by Peter Denis
lay-out

[MeePeeMai]

19 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

And in both cases, there is NO requirement for health-insurance…

 

yet.  (seemed appropriate so I added my 2 satang worth)

Edited February 11, 2020 by MeePeeMai

[UKresonant]

Well listed! 

 

I think point 1 is crucial, even if I could have a local health insurance policy, I would also always have travel insurance, so probably correct, they would not pay in many circumstance, if at all.

 

I have to also comment on point 2. that when I enquired about a local Thai insurance policy July 2019, P.C.  straight away noted that they could not sensibly provide a policy, as I could not be sure of being in Thailand for more than 6 month out of 12.  

 

This compulsory mess may be of little use to the many who purchase it,  your list would be most appropriate to be included in the Embassy websites under the O-A. visa section????

[JustAnotherHun]

32 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

 

yet.  (seemed appropriate so I added my 2 satang worth)

Exactly. YET!

There is no reason why they would not extend their rule to O-applyers. Amazing, they did not from the start. There's money to be made.

Edited February 11, 2020 by JustAnotherHun

[Matzzon]

Thanks for pointing out the obvious. I think all of us already are well aware that the Thai health insurances are worthless. The only right thing to do is have another international health insurance that you use. Then you just have to let them fight over who should pay.

The thing is that all who absolutely need to go the hard way and live on a Non-OA visa, just have to face it. They must have the insurance or change their visa status.

[tlandtday]

Yeah but the whole point of this is that some connected cronies will make off with a a bundle.

[UKresonant]

26 minutes ago, MeePeeMai said:

 

Yet....

Yes point 11.

 

If they do extend this subject to non-O extensions, then those will become  non-options (in the future)from my Point of view. In the same way as O-A visa I feel is no longer an option.

 

Permanent existing customers will really be screwed if they don't have a plan B, and that happens. ????

 

[JustAnotherHun]

The only possible plan B would be to buy that insurance <deleted> or leave the country.

Or buy an Elite Visa and enjoy airport transfers in BMW 7 for just 500k - as long as they don't extend their b.s. to that kind of visa too. 

[fforest1]

5 minutes ago, JustAnotherHun said:

The only possible plan B would be to buy that insurance <deleted> or leave the country.

Or buy an Elite Visa and enjoy airport transfers in BMW 7 for just 500k - as long as they don't extend their b.s. to that kind of visa too. 

And why would they not include the elite visa in needing insurance too? The elite visa holders are well off and can afford to buy a rip-off health insurance policy...

Thats what I call some low hanging fruit just waiting to pad some ones pocket.. 

[Dcheech]

Ah, a 40,000 (+) Baht per year fee, for retirees. Great! 

[fforest1]

 at age 83 the annual premium would be 380.000 THB for a 400.000 THB max coverage

 

So as you get older it would be possible to be paying more for the premium than you could receive in coverage....If I am understanding this correctly.....

[Peter Denis]

2 minutes ago, fforest1 said:

 at age 83 the annual premium would be 380.000 THB for a 400.000 THB max coverage

 

So as you get older it would be possible to be paying more for the premium than you could receive in coverage....If I am understanding this correctly.....

Probably the thai insurer wouldn't dare to make the annual premium bigger than the coverage it provides (but this is Thailand, so might be possible after all).  But an annual premium of 380.000 THB for a max coverage of 400.000 is already ridiculous enough!

[steve73]

I understand that the used of an "agent" overcomes the compulsory Insurance requirement, in much the same way it nullifies the financial ones....

[Moonlover]

12 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

8 minutes ago, fforest1 said:

 at age 83 the annual premium would be 380.000 THB for a 400.000 THB max coverage

 

So as you get older it would be possible to be paying more for the premium than you could receive in coverage....If I am understanding this correctly.....

 

12 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Probably the thai insurer wouldn't dare to make the annual premium bigger than the coverage it provides (but this is Thailand, so might be possible after all).  But an annual premium of 380.000 THB for a max coverage of 400.000 is already ridiculous enough!

Should such a scenario come about and given that I live to that ripe old age, it will leave my wife and I just 20,000 Baht per month to live on. A daunting prospect.

 

But I'm not going to worry about it. I very much doubt that it will come to pass and if it did, us old-timers will be 'grandfathered' out of it.

[jacko45k]

17 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Exactly. YET!

There is no reason why they would not extend their rule to O-applyers. Amazing, they did not from the start. There's money to be made.

It would seem odd to require a years health insurance with a Visa that only allows a single 90 day stay. 

I still feel the implementation of the insurance requirement on O-A retirement extensions was an unforeseen consequence nobody wants to back down from. 

[gk10002000]

 

18 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

2.    That a thai health-insurance policy is void when staying less than 6 months per year in Thailand;

Hmmmm.  This one could be the most problematic for me as I know I would be traveling back to the USA once or twice a year for various reasons.  The key thing would be if it has to be

 

Below is a copy paste from the small print "Remarks" section at the end of the Pacific Cross Premium plan I just received from them.

 

9. ผู้สมัครเอาประกันภัยจะต้องเป็นผู้ที่มีถิ่นพำ นักอยู่ในประเทศไทยเป็นหลัก หรือขึ้นต่ำ 6 เดือนในช่วงระยะเวลา 12 เดือน / The applicant must be Thai resident or reside in Thailand at least 6 months in 12 months period.

 

It would be good to read the fine print on some policies.   Make sure what 12 month period they mean. Do they mean any 6 months in any 12 month period going across calendar years? Do they mean 6 months in one calendar year?   If one starts the policy in June, getting it synched up with your visa or extension, make sure they do not mean 6 months contiguous without breaks.  What seems obvious may not be so.  And even in the insurance gives you a straight answer, I am sure some IO's will not care or may do what they want anyway.  Things just are not going to be coordinated.  Man this really is a sad state of affairs

Edited February 11, 2020 by gk10002000

[unheard]

18 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Exactly. YET!

There is no reason why they would not extend their rule to O-applyers. Amazing, they did not from the start. There's money to be made.

Very much doubtful.

Their actual losses will be far greater than the potential gains.

By implementing insurance requirement for all non-imm O appliers they would effectively stick a fork in the retirement industry in Thailand.

What would be more likely is a gradual increase in the required amount of parked money in the bank, kept untouched for the duration of the extension - a much more lucrative (for them) arrangement.

[zoza]

19 hours ago, Peter Denis said:

ut finally there is also some good news, mainly

11.That it is surprisingly simple to switch to another extension-type (e.g. marriage) or convert to a Non Imm O – retirement Visa which when extended has the exact same requirements and conditions as an OA Visa extension.  And in both cases, there is NO requirement for health-insurance…

Edited 19 hours ago by Peter Denis

well the good news might be dependant on which IO Office you use.

it took me and my wife of 14 years plus a friend of hers three days to get my extension based on being Married to a Thai considered.

we then had five police around to the condo and they wanted a signature of someone as witness, and now we wait for a month for their decision.

that is common so i'm told for Chon Buri. 

Edited February 12, 2020 by zoza
sticking key

[Peter Denis]

55 minutes ago, unheard said:

Very much doubtful.

Their actual losses will be far greater than the potential gains.

By implementing insurance requirement for all non-imm O appliers they would effectively stick a fork in the retirement industry in Thailand.

What would be more likely is a gradual increase in the required amount of parked money in the bank, kept untouched for the duration of the extension - a much more lucrative (for them) arrangement.

Fully agree.

Also many posters assume that Immigration is the driving force behind the health-insurance requirement, while they are only executing (and doing a very bad job at it) what the Ministry of Public Health instigated.

Imo Immigration would actually oppose a further roll-out of the present scheme, as it only means more work for them (with no revenue).

- Border-immigration now has to check OA Visas for issuing date and the health-insurance note when issued after Oct 31, 2019;

- In country Immigration offices have to check OA extension applications for compliance with the health-insurance requirement;

- In country Immigration offices are being faced with OA Visa holders who instead of extending their permission to stay for reason of retirement, switch to marriage Visa or abandon their OA Visa and apply for a Non Imm O Visa/extension.

And not even mentioning the applicants enquiring on their options before applying or being turned down for the health-insurance requirement.

 

[Peter Denis]

49 minutes ago, zoza said:

well the good news might be dependant on which IO Office you use.

it took me and my wife of 14 years plus a friend of hers three days to get my extension based on being Married to a Thai considered.

we then had five police around to the condo and they wanted a signature of someone as witness, and now we wait for a month for their decision.

that is common so i'm told for Chon Buri. 

A Non Imm O - extension for reason of marriage has other requirements than one for reason of retirement, and needs to be approved by divisional headquarters (so takes longer). 

But the main good news is of course that you successfully got rid of the expensive and basically worthless thai IO-approved health-insurance requirement, by switching to an extension for reason of marriage.

And the lower financials to be proven for a marriage-extension are of course an additional bonus.

[OJAS]

21 hours ago, JustAnotherHun said:

Exactly. YET!

There is no reason why they would not extend their rule to O-applyers. Amazing, they did not from the start. There's money to be made.

Would almost certainly necessitate a further rewrite of existing police orders, but, with sufficient zeal and gusto which, for all we know, could well exist in the sadistic corridors of power in the Immigration Bureau, could readily be achieved.

 

2 hours ago, unheard said:

Very much doubtful.

Their actual losses will be far greater than the potential gains.

By implementing insurance requirement for all non-imm O appliers they would effectively stick a fork in the retirement industry in Thailand.

What would be more likely is a gradual increase in the required amount of parked money in the bank, kept untouched for the duration of the extension - a much more lucrative (for them) arrangement.

If the Immigration Bureau were really so sufficiently determined, they could effectively stick a fork in the ability of every non-immigrant aged 50+ period to stay long-term in Thailand, regardless of their original visa type and current extension of stay reason, through said rewrite of existing police orders.

 

And IMHO the intention to increase the required amount of parked money in the bank for retirement extensions might already have been signalled by the changes introduced a year ago - from 800k seasoned 3 months before extension application to, in effect, year-round seasoning now (800k 2 months before + 3 months after + 400k for the remaining 7 months). One would like to think that the Immigration Bureau would refrain from introducing further increases while the THB remained at its current high level against most Western currencies - but, this being Thailand, this would, by no means, be a given, of course.

 

Edited February 12, 2020 by OJAS

[Martyp]

Everyone's living circumstances and insurance needs and opportunities are different.

 

Point 1 - I don't have my US insurance anymore. It didn't cover me living in Thailand.

Points 2, 3 - I am living in Thailand full time. I go to the US for 3 weeks a year. Last time I bought travel insurance for my US trip though I think I do have a limited amount of US travel coverage with Pacific Cross

Point 4 - I have a 10,000,000 baht policy. The low coverage policy though may be the only option for new O-A applicants who haven't been living in Thailand.

Point 5 - I am 64. 75 is a ways off but this is certainly a future concern

Points 6, 7 - Welcome to the private insurance market. This is common practice in the US insurance market - policies that don't cover you when you need them. Challenges to claims. Premium increases as you age.

Point 8 - I'm not sure why this is a problem. There is a stack of documents you have to bring to get an extension of stay. Why is this document any different?

Point 9 - Also not a problem. When you get you policy ask them if they did this.

Point 10 - This indeed could be a problem if you encounter a rogue IO. Not common and also not the only problem with a rogue IO.

 

All your points are valid though not so much in my case. The insurance requirement is indeed a problem for many people. Those from countries with universal health coverage will be shocked by the realities of a private insurance market. Those with military coverage are indeed being screwed by having to buy the Thai policies. Those who travel frequently and all over the world have little use for a policy that is not adequate for international needs. Those, and there appear to be a lot of them, who live in Thailand part time. I'm sure there are others.

 

 

 

[lapamita]

On 2/11/2020 at 7:53 AM, fforest1 said:

 at age 83 the annual premium would be 380.000 THB for a 400.000 THB max coverage

 

So as you get older it would be possible to be paying more for the premium than you could receive in coverage....If I am understanding this correctly.....

I had a  calculation of insurance from KT axa, years ago . start premium (50year) 55.000+27500 special premium for health risk (smoking), an apeal to the quote 3 months laster ends up lower but they want exclude smoking related issues  , it ends up with 75 years at 473.000 THB ..and after no calculation. and even the 473k was under normal conditions calculated ( average inflation  and age)

BUTE THE MAXIMUM COVERAGE NEVER GOES UP STAY SAME ALL TIME

 

an Insurnace with 400k is worthless.. to low already ..and for example how mch are the 400k worth in 15 years ??  its HALF due to inflation

 

But your premium will always go up !!

 

I have since years a insurance with 5MB coverage ( kt axa aplication was for 10mb)and every year wonder , bow much the rise in premium is due to their inflation calculation average 10%.... and that exclude the increase for change age group, and good luck i not sick, waht could lead up to 100% of increase in base premium as well

 

As best Insurance in Thailand i still recommand KT axa , bcs fair pricing,if you do not have any pre condition and already stay in thailand more than 180 days en row, and if y able to make the free checkup in Bangkokhospital orderd by KT axa...as well no waiting time on critical illness  than and even hiv insured (after 5 yrs)

I wish i would get KT at normal premium , a gemstone under all the other sh*t out here, included my insurance

 

and a 400k insurance is a money printer for the insurnace, but a full loss for you and worthless..better look out at real insurance, cost a little more, but by far better

Edited February 13, 2020 by lapamita

[ThailandRyan]

On 2/11/2020 at 2:16 PM, Moonlover said:

 

Should such a scenario come about and given that I live to that ripe old age, it will leave my wife and I just 20,000 Baht per month to live on. A daunting prospect.

 

But I'm not going to worry about it. I very much doubt that it will come to pass and if it did, us old-timers will be 'grandfathered' out of it.

Grandfathered out of it.  Really, have you been paying attention to those on O-A extensions from prior to October 31, 2019.  Those folks were not grandfathered in, and are now having to show the Thai approved insurance or are being denied there extension of stay.  So if and when it is rolled out to all other Visa categories, prepare to stand by.....

[lapamita]

1 minute ago, ThailandRyan said:

Grandfathered out of it.  Really, have you been paying attention to those on O-A extensions from prior to October 31, 2019.  Those folks were not grandfathered in, and are now having to show the Thai approved insurance or are being denied there extension of stay.  So if and when it is rolled out to all other Visa categories, prepare to stand by.....

grandfatherd ???? grandfatherd , maybe on adjusted requierments????

 

..i learnd what mean grandfatherd ,in 2003/4  under taxin..they cancelld the investment visa, my was grandfatherd, but they told me ..you lucky guy, but must put 3mb thb at 0% to GSB , cannot use normal AC more.

at this time taxsin made a 0% policy for foreigner ( was in place 12 or 18month) my visa would cost at the end intrest loos of 180.000  ( at rate this time 6% average)

give nothing on the word grandfatherd

[potless]

On 2/12/2020 at 6:50 AM, gk10002000 said:

9. ผู้สมัครเอาประกันภัยจะต้องเป็นผู้ที่มีถิ่นพำ นักอยู่ในประเทศไทยเป็นหลัก หรือขึ้นต่ำ 6 เดือนในช่วงระยะเวลา 12 เดือน / The applicant must be Thai resident or reside in Thailand at least 6 months in 12 months period.

 

It would be good to read the fine print on some policies.   Make sure what 12 month period they mean. Do they mean any 6 months in any 12 month period going across calendar years? Do they mean 6 months in one calendar year?

Your policy quote as above definitely needs clarification. I could read it as saying that the 12 month period is taken from the date the policy is taken out. It begs the question of when a policy would actually be usable. Hypothetical scenario. Someone obtains an OA visa plus insurance. They come to Thailand for 3 months but for whatever reason have to leave for 3 months. They come back for 2 months and leave again for 2 months.They return to Thailand but 2 weeks later they become unwell. The policy would not cover them. Thus they have paid an insurance premium for 10 months and 2 weeks for nothing. Or am I missing something?   

[potless]

On 2/11/2020 at 12:17 PM, Peter Denis said:

2.    That a thai health-insurance policy is void when staying less than 6 months per year in Thailand;

See my post above. 

[onebir]

On 2/12/2020 at 3:40 AM, Peter Denis said:

A Non Imm O - extension for reason of marriage has other requirements than one for reason of retirement, and needs to be approved by divisional headquarters (so takes longer).

So... is there currently a retirement visa for people without Thai spouses, and without the insurance requirement?

[Peter Denis]

4 minutes ago, onebir said:

So... is there currently a retirement visa for people without Thai spouses, and without the insurance requirement?

Yes, it's the Non Imm O - retirement Visa, which many OA Visa holders are presently converting to as that Non Imm O does NOT require health-insurance, when applying for or extending it.  And that's actually the ONLY difference with an OA Visa extension.

>> I PM-ed you a comprehensive Roadmap outlining all details/options to apply for or convert to that Non Imm O - retirement Visa.

To access your PM-messages just click the letter-icon next to your profile when logged in to the Forum.

[luckyluke]

On 2/12/2020 at 7:24 AM, unheard said:

What would be more likely is a gradual increase in the required amount of parked money in the bank, kept untouched for the duration of the extension - a much more lucrative (for them) arrangement.

And/or make the required amount of parked money in a Thai bank mandatory for all nationalities, which would certainly be more lucrative.