Health insurance now mandatory for long-stay foreigners

[magsandbilly]

They seem to be forcing you to take a policy that has much less cover than what we have with BUPA. At least we had a choice but the cost of their basic policy is the same as my BUPA but with less coverage. Nipping my brain this one and seems no way out

[benmo]

Answer is to change to O visa which doesn’t require insurance

[wenshidi]

O-A visa is a long stay visa based on retirement (by any other name).

So is that the same as a retirement visa where you need to have 800k in the bank?

[magsandbilly]

Yes! Must have thb800,000 in bank and now must have their medical insurance. A double bubble hit. I thought proof of THB 800,000 in bank was so that you could pay your medical fees and living costs. Now they have doubled up the requirements.

[DSB]

I renewed my non o retirement visa yesterday, and mandatory health insurance was not mentioned. As far as I know it is not compulsory for a Non O retirement style visa. The money in the bank is mandatory.

[Edmin]

I renewed my non o retirement visa yesterday, and mandatory health insurance was not mentioned. As far as I know it is not compulsory for a Non O retirement style visa. The money in the bank is mandatory.

Non o retirement visa is not Extension to stay. Did you apply for that when your other VISA (whatever it was) expired?

[Ratsima]

If it's foreign insurance and if insurance is required, then there's a BS form that has to be filled out by your insurance company. Looking at the form, I can't see any company able to complete it. Apart from other info, it has to be signed by a director of the company.
The rule desigd to force people into buying Thai insurance.

As I stated above, Blue Cross completed the form for me. I didn’t actually ask them to because I won’t need it until next year. I just asked if they would be able to complete the form when the time comes. Instead they completed it.

But, one wonders why the form was created if Immigration won’t accept non-Thai health insurance.

[Dannie Boy]

The whole things a farce - why make O-A visa extensions liable for health insurance, but not O visa’s?

[Ratsima]

And it seems that the letter sent out by the US consular services was very misleading:

"U.S. citizens will need to download the Overseas Insurance Certificate and have it completed, signed, and stamped by their insurance company if using a non-Thai insurance policy to qualify."

Here’s a link to the cited insurance certificate:

http://longstay.tgia.org/document/over ... ficate.pdf

[Nereus]

Do you happen to know the ratio of O-A visas to retirement visas?

O-A visa is a long stay visa based on retirement (by any other name).

From the Thai Embassy London:

For applicants aged 50 and over who wish to stay in Thailand for an extended period without the intention of working.

It is nothing to do with "retirement". It is a "long stay, multiple entry" visa. Retirement is NOT mentioned. The only reasons that I can see for obtaining an 0-A visa are: 1. it is multiple entry, 2. If you do any entry before the end, or at anytime in between, your will get a "permitted to stay" for one year from that date of entry.

As to be expected, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs STILL does not mention anything about health insurance!

http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/services/4 ... Stay).html

[caller]

Nereus, by your own admission, you are a pedant. I don't think it's helping.

If as you say, the only reason you can see for applying for an OA visa, is because of multi entry and the extra year that can be added, can you tell me on what basis I can stay here without an OA visa? I would love it if there was an alternative. I am not married, not working and aged between 50 and 65.

Further, to get the visa in the first place, I had to fill in a visa application form issued by the Thai Embassy in London stating I am retired and that was the basis of my seeking to live in Thailand. I then had to meet various requirements to enable the visa to be granted. For the time the UK Embassy here were notarising documents, I had to provide proof of my pension to enable me to extend my visa (rather than keep 800k in the bank). At some unnoticed time by me, this changed to income.

I completely accept that it is a long stay visa, indeed that is hand written above O-A on my actual visa as pasted into my passport and I stated the same in the part of my post you highlighted. But I would vouch that 99% of OA visa holders are here on the basis of retirement. Indeed that is the reason stamped into my passport when extending my visa annually, whether in Korat or Hua Hin.

pp.jpg (65.91 KiB) Viewed 1078 times

[Nereus]

If as you say, the only reason you can see for applying for an OA visa, is because of multi entry and the extra year that can be added, can you tell me on what basis I can stay here without an OA visa? I would love it if there was an alternative. I am not married, not working and aged between 50 and 65.

Exactly as myself and many others do; with an "0" visa! I am in the same circumstances as you!

Further, to get the visa in the first place, I had to fill in a visa application form issued by the Thai Embassy in London stating I am retired and that was the basis of my seeking to live in Thailand. I then had to meet various requirements to enable the visa to be granted. For the time the UK Embassy here were notarising documents, I had to provide proof of my pension to enable me to extend my visa (rather than keep 800k in the bank). At some unnoticed time by me, this changed to income.

Absolutely not required! Come here on a Tourist visa and convert it to an "0" without any of that BS! OR, do it in some other place, not necessarily your home country. You get 90 days, extendable for 1 year at least 30 days before the visa expires.(proof of funds required BEFORE extension). If you need multiple or single re-entry simply pay extra at the time of extension, or buy a single at the airport on the way out.

Indeed that is the reason stamped into my passport when extending my visa annually, whether in Korat or Hua Hin.

Simply means that your extension of stay was granted on the basis of retirement, for either visa type, NOT that it was a requirement to obtain either visa, EXCEPT, that NOW you are going to have to prove that you have acceptable health insurance with an 0-A, but NOT with an "0".

[Nereus]

Nereus, by your own admission, you are a pedant. I don't think it's helping.

First up I had to look up exactly what this means. Secondly, I have searched but cannot find where I admitted to being a "pedant".

What I WILL admit to is being a perfectionist! And believe me, this is an AFFLICTION like some disease! More so in this country where the prevailing total civil structure is based on "Mai Pen Rai".

And as I HAVE posted previously, this affliction ranges from trying to learn how to ride a bike, to working on lethal electrical systems, to flying bloody helicopters set on crashing, to driving a car in Thailand! All my life I have had to deal with facts, not what somebody else thinks is a fact because they do not understand it.(and this is NOT directed at you).

It is NOT being "pedantic" to state that there is no such thing as a "retirement visa", it is simply not a class of visa.

As pointed out many times, a "retirement" stamp simply means that the "permission to stay" was granted on the basis of retirement, meaning that you have met the immigration rules applying to your application, using your original visa regardless of it being an "0" or an "0-A", and regardless of why a particular visa was issued in the first instance.

Just maybe, if some of the people that post such comments were to bother to find out what the rules are, there would be less confusion.

This thread is about health insurance requirements under the new rules. Yes, there is plenty of confusion, but it has been made very clear in several places that the insurance requirement ONLY applies to a "long stay" visa type 0-A.

As myself and others have suggested: let the bloody "0-A" expire and obtain a simple non-immigrant type "0" visa.

[buksida]

Just to clarify my confusion now, regardless of basis of extension (retirement in this case) what is the difference between O and OA? I have the former.

[Dannie Boy]

Just to clarify my confusion now, regardless of basis of extension (retirement in this case) what is the difference between O and OA? I have the former.

And for the likes of myself, if I go down the route suggested by Nereus (which sounds like good advice) how easy/difficult is it to get an “O” visa on return? In my specific case, my O-A visa extension will be due when I’m out the country, so if I don’t renew it before I leave, I assume I will also not need to pay for a re-entry permit, on the basis of entering on a 60 day tourist visa And then apply for an O visa once here - is that correct?