Jump to content

News Forum - Thailand News Update | Test & Go compulsory insurance policies


Recommended Posts

As the dust settles on yesterday’s announcement of the reopening of the Test and Go program, the details are slowly emerging of a Test & Go, version 2, which will now require additional paperwork and expenses, including an additional PCR test on Day 5. This means you have to book an SHA+ hotel for both Day 1 and Day 5 of your stay, with both the accommodation and the cost of the PCR test prepaid.The CCSA also announced that the compulsory insurance policies will need to cover ALL contingencies if you happen to test positive, including your additional accommodation costs.Anyway, for […]

The story Thailand News Update | Test & Go compulsory insurance policies as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

  • Like 1
3 hours ago, Thaiger said:

The CCSA also announced that the compulsory insurance policies will need to cover ALL contingencies if you happen to test positive, including your additional accommodation costs.

Stand by for the whaling fleet ... 😲

  • Haha 1
1 minute ago, Stonker said:

Stand by for the whaling fleet ... 😲

I am sure but this is what people have been complaining about.

 

Now there looks like their will be insurance to cover hotel quarantine 

And then will complain it will cost them 2000 baht more or so......

  • Like 1

Insurance to cover hotel stay if asymptomatic? That's ludicrous. Just pay for the extra nights yourself. Just don't allow hotels to price gouge. Insurance to cover symptomatic and asymptomatic hospital and detention centre expenses, sure. Most decent policies already cover that. This TnG v2 is a joke. So within 5 days of your 2 week holiday you will potentially be going through 3 different check-ins - that sounds relaxing (unless you love your quarantine hotel so much you just stay there for the first 5 days).

  • Like 2

I gotta say, the insurance requirements are ridiculous. I have a genuine travel insurance policy, that I have organised. I'm not going to go Thailand or anywhere, without proper insurance cover. Medical cover for Covid is "unlimited", meaning whatever it costs, the insurer will pay. 

But the Thai Government wants an insurance certificate that states it covers US 50,000. I think any rational human being would know that "unlimited" is far superior to "US 50,000"? But no....they can't cope with that or allow for it. That's why I think their requirement is ridiculous. 

  • Like 1

For me, this would add approximately an additional $500 to my trip that I normally wouldn't have to incur.  I went to Thailand on the last test and go in November and stayed in Phuket for 7 days but that was because I had previously applied for the COE which was denied because test and go began.  I had 29 days to enjoy then so not a problem really but I got a condo in Chiang Mai now and was hoping to return for a couple weeks in April before coming back in June/July long term.  Depending on how they progress on the entry schemes it may be better to wait until I have more time to be there.  It's chaotic but I suppose if I want to be there, I choose to participate.   

  • Like 1

this is why I asked get insurance certificate about unlimited and add at least US 50.000 ,
even for quarantine, worked for visa now but not for Thai Pass  ?

but I will not pay for another thai insurance, thai government does not like any tourists now,
bad for all workers in tourism

On 1/21/2022 at 3:16 AM, Cabra said:

Insurance to cover hotel stay if asymptomatic? That's ludicrous. Just pay for the extra nights yourself. Just don't allow hotels to price gouge. Insurance to cover symptomatic and asymptomatic hospital and detention centre expenses, sure. Most decent policies already cover that. This TnG v2 is a joke. So within 5 days of your 2 week holiday you will potentially be going through 3 different check-ins - that sounds relaxing (unless you love your quarantine hotel so much you just stay there for the first 5 days).

I do not find it ludicrous.

On the contrary, I would not leave a loophole for my insurance company to reject my forced quarantine expenses in case of being tested positive but asymptomatic. The whole point of insurance is to give me the flat cost of my vacation, with no nasty surprises which are out of my control. I want to know for sure the total cost and then I can decide if I am going to TH or passing.

So, I am really waiting for this regulation to be imposed before I purchase my COVID-19 insurance. I have enough uncertainty with my February trip even without this "quarantined but asymptomatic and therefore not covered" risk.

  • Like 1
1 minute ago, Dmitrii said:

I do not find it ludicrous.

On the contrary, I would not leave a loophole for my insurance company to reject my forced quarantine expenses in case of being tested positive but asymptomatic. The whole point of insurance is to give me the flat cost of my vacation, with no nasty surprises which are out of my control. I want to know for sure the total cost and then I can decide if I am going to TH or passing.

So, I am really waiting for this regulation to be imposed before I purchase my COVID-19 insurance. I have enough uncertainty with my February trip even without this "quarantined but asymptomatic and therefore not covered" risk.

Totally agree. Quality tourists want certainly, not surprises. 

Unless the surprise is how good the weed is in the Cannabis Sandbox ;-) 

11 hours ago, Dmitrii said:

The whole point of insurance is to give me the flat cost of my vacation, with no nasty surprises

That's really not suppose to be the point of medical insurance. Unless you are talking about travel insurance, then I would agree. Generally speaking, insurance is an exchange for the assumption of the risk a large loss. Not a "coverer you for everything and anything" buffet. I'm opposed to forced insurance on principal. If I'm willing and able to assume the risk myself. I can pay on a cash basis in advance. If that's what the hospital/hotels/quarantine centres requires  Thailand has implemented forced medical insurance on the individual to cover the loss (of non-payers) on the healthcare industry as a whole. That's unfair to the payers.

12 hours ago, Vince said:

Totally agree. Quality tourists want certainly, not surprises

I'm opposed to forced insurance on principal. If I'm willing and able to assume the risk myself, that should be my right. I can pay on a cash basis in advance. If that's what the hospital/hotels/quarantine centres requires

  • Like 1
6 minutes ago, Cabra said:

I'm opposed to forced insurance on principal. If I'm willing and able to assume the risk myself, that should be my right. I can pay on a cash basis in advance. If that's what the hospital/hotels/quarantine centres requires

I'm not a fan of any restrictions on healthy people, and if sick old or obese high risk people want to risk COVID (as they risk death riding a scooter or hang gliding) that's what it means to be an adult. 

I favor something like clear identification of risk situations and individuals, and letting them choose.

I think Sweden had it right from the beginning - protect the weak as best you can, let the healthy function with the fewest reasonable restrictions. 

But gosh I don't run Thailand. 

So if I want to go there and they want to lock me into a hotel for N days it's their country, etc. I can go eat tacos in Cabo or Bogota if I don't like it. 

I want to know what (stupid) restrictions I'm going to face. That's my risk-to-benefit ratio. If there are surprises, that's hard to make. 

Being sick on vacation is a risk any traveller takes.

I have postponed my travel plans until the surprises are gone. 

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By posting on Thaiger Talk you agree to the Terms of Use