Schengen Visa For Wife Of Eu National

[beano2274]

I phoned the Embassy again, this time I asked about question 19, the woman informed me that it needed to be filled out. I also asked about the other documentation that she had previously asked for, she informed me she had since read the directive and that the documents were not required, she also said it is not often that anyone applies using the EU Directive.

[goatfarmer]

I can confirm that the asterix on question 19 has been removed by the German Embassy, have checked it against the Finnish application form, and the general form on other websites.

That is naughty.

The definitive source to compare with is Annex 1 of the Visa Code. Question 19 has an asterisk. Removing it is a violation of EU law. Tell that the to German Foreign Office. Their Helpdesk sounds quite helpful.

Edited October 31, 2012 by goatfarmer

[goatfarmer]

This topic seems to be getting some good answers but the problem is that the Embassies might not adhere to the rules, thus rejecting a valid reason for a visa, then upon complaining the complaint might take some time to get addressed. Seems like some of the Embassies are not training their staff correctly. (Anyone have the email of the present Ambassador at the German Embassy?)

Also since I am sticking my neck out, what is to stop them from not even accepting the application.

I will be giving my wife the documents needed for the application under the EU Directive and also the other documentation if she cannot argue her case.

Beano, I don't think they are likely to reject your application just because you politely but firmly insist on your rights as an EU citizen and show them the SOLVIT reply, even though the Thai staff will certainly hate for it. You can always demand to see the German in charge and in my experience at European Embassies the expats usually come out quite readily. Anyway, you are covering all the bases, if you do carry a second folder with the information you are willing to hand over if you feel you need to capitulate in order to get the visa in time.

In the worst case you can always try again in a more friendly EU embassy. They don't seem to have any way to check where you went once you have entered the Schengen area and you can always produce a fictional itinerary of travel tickets and hotel reservations that have been made and then cancelled free of charge to show an immigration officer, or even an ECO at an embassy, which makes the business of checking travel tickets and hotel reservations rather pointless anyway. Thus, if you ended up getting the visa in, say, the Dutch Embassy, and enter Germany you could just prepare an itinerary to show the German immigration officer that you are spending more time in Holland than Germany, even if you not planning to go there at all. But anyway in many trips to Schengenland my wife has only been asked questions by an immigration officer once, in Norway, and that was before we had registered our marriage. I just heard of a Brit whose Thai wife was turned down by the French Embassy but given a visa by the Spanish Embassy, so they were still able to do the trip to France. I realise that we are more interested in getting the embassies to adhere to their own laws here but the ease with which some of their rules can be circumvented makes the whole thing seem rather fatuous.

Another nasty wrinkle of the German Embassy last year was that they only returned passports on Tuesday mornings between 8.00 and 9.00 a.m. which is not particularly convenient, if you are doing it yourself, and can nearly add a week to the processing time, if your visa is approved on a Tuesday.

Arkady,

While one doesn't need to show accommodation bookings for the spouse, does not the requirement that you will be travelling together make it difficult to country shop? Or do you make bookings for the purpose and cancel them?

I'd be interested to hear about the case of the Brit whose Thai wife was refused a visa. Do you know the basis? It could only be that they were not travelling together or the marriage was a fake.

The German wrinkle sounds like another violation of the Directive, which requires visas to be processed as fast as possible. I had the French process a visa in three days once when wife and I decided to go to France on short notice. It was a teeth-pulling exercise.

[beano2274]

I have also spoken to the French Embassy and they said they would issue a visa

[goatfarmer]

I have also spoken to the French Embassy and they said they would issue a visa

Visa Code Article 5

Member State competent for examining and deciding on an

application

1. The Member State competent for examining and deciding

on an application for a uniform visa shall be:

(a) the Member State whose territory constitutes the sole destination

of the visit(s);

(b if the visit includes more than one destination, the Member

State whose territory constitutes the main destination of the

visit(s) in terms of the length or purpose of stay; or

c) if no main destination can be determined, the Member State

whose external border the applicant intends to cross in

order to enter the territory of the Member States.

Note the ambiguity in paragraph ( b "in terms of length or purpose of stay" gives a bit of latitude for consulate shopping, "main purpose" being a subjective criterion.

Edited November 1, 2012 by goatfarmer

[Arkady]

Arkady,

While one doesn't need to show accommodation bookings for the spouse, does not the requirement that you will be travelling together make it difficult to country shop? Or do you make bookings for the purpose and cancel them?

I'd be interested to hear about the case of the Brit whose Thai wife was refused a visa. Do you know the basis? It could only be that they were not travelling together or the marriage was a fake.

The German wrinkle sounds like another violation of the Directive, which requires visas to be processed as fast as possible. I had the French process a visa in three days once when wife and I decided to go to France on short notice. It was a teeth-pulling exercise.

It's funny but I haven't been asked for evidence of travelling together or the spouse joining me since registering our marriage. If necessary you can make bookings that have no cancellation fee which is often possible direct through airlines. Anyway, if we take the case in point, we could easily posit an itinerary which involved, say: fly to Frankfurt; spend 2 nights there; drive to Holland with friends in their car; spend 5 nights there; drive back to Frankfurt; spend 1 night there; fly back to Bkk. Spending 5 out of a total of 8 nights in Holland would mean that you are obliged to apply at the Dutch Embassy, even though you will never be seen by Dutch Immigration and no travel reservations can be shown as evidence of the plan to drive in the friends' car. Neither the Dutch nor the Germans would have any way of knowing whether you adhered to the itinerary or not post facto without running a detailed cross border police surveillance operation on you. If needed, just about everything could be booked and then cancelled free of charge, including, car hire, hotels, flights and trains. I have to confess that I once juggled the weightings of an itinerary between countries in order to consulate shop before we were married when I found that it would take at least 2 weeks to get an appointment at the Italian Embassy which would have meant we couldn't do the trip. I have also just booked the first hotels that came up on the list, as long as they could be cancelled, without looking at them when I was in a hurry to put an itinerary together for a visa and then gone back to choose the hotels I really want at leisure, e.g. book a hotel in Athens for the whole 10 days and then plan your actual island hopping trip in detail later. However, this type of detail should not be needed once you have registered your marriage.

Sorry I don't know the details of the Brit whose wife was denied by the French but granted by the Spanish. It was a friend of a friend but I would not be surprised if he didn't know about the directive and had applied through the outsource agency.

I agree that the German policy of returning passports only once a week, if they still do that, sounds like a violation of the requirement to issue the visas without delay. Even worse they give you a slip telling you to pick up the passport on Tuesday between 8.00 and 9.00 am which implies that the Tuesday is the earliest day you can pick it up without mentioning that the service is not available on Wed, Thu, Fri or Mon. In our case, we were busy on the Tuesday and went to pick it up on the Wednesday instead at 8.55 am. A thoroughly unpleasant male Thai security guard inside argued with my wife for more than 5 minutes that it was the wrong day and then when it was past 9.00 am that it was also the wrong time and told her to come back next Tuesday at 8.00 am. Finally she managed to push her past this arsehol_e and asked to see an officer. The same hatchet faced but quite young Thai woman who had argued with us in the interview came out and scolded her very rudely for coming late and on the wrong day. My wife stood her ground arguing that she was only late because the guard had wasted time arguing with her and that the slip had not mentioned that passports could only be returned on Tuesdays and that the website says that are open for visa issuance every working day. Finally hatchet face reached into a box in front of her and returned my wife's passport. Just another pointless show of power by petty bureaucrats with mountainous chips on their shoulders.

[Arkady]

I phoned the Embassy again, this time I asked about question 19, the woman informed me that it needed to be filled out. I also asked about the other documentation that she had previously asked for, she informed me she had since read the directive and that the documents were not required, she also said it is not often that anyone applies using the EU Directive.

The omission of the asterix is certainly deliberate as it provides them the opportunity to probe deeper the applicant's employment details and implies that non-working housewives and mothers are ineligible. It must come from a senior policy level too. It's an utter disgrace.

Sounds as if their policy to actively discourage applicants from using the EU Directive is highly successful. Clearly most applicants who are entitled to do so, don't know their rights under EU law and either apply to the outsource agency and pay the fee or apply directly to the embassy free of charge but otherwise submit to the same terms and conditions as ordinary applicants, as well as the degrading treatment meeted out by the obnoxious Thai staff.

[beano2274]

I have also spoken to the French Embassy and they said they would issue a visa

Visa Code Article 5

Member State competent for examining and deciding on an

application

1. The Member State competent for examining and deciding

on an application for a uniform visa shall be:

(a) the Member State whose territory constitutes the sole destination

of the visit(s);

(b if the visit includes more than one destination, the Member

State whose territory constitutes the main destination of the

visit(s) in terms of the length or purpose of stay; or

c) if no main destination can be determined, the Member State

whose external border the applicant intends to cross in

order to enter the territory of the Member States.

Note the ambiguity in paragraph ( b "in terms of length or purpose of stay" gives a bit of latitude for consulate shopping, "main purpose" being a subjective criterion.

I actually sent the French Embassy my itinerary, I will be flying from Germany to Paris and staying exactly the same amount of days in France, and leaving CDG to BKK via SVO, they were very helpful and indeed were prepared to let me apply under the Directive,

[goatfarmer]

It's funny but I haven't been asked for evidence of travelling together or the spouse joining me since registering our marriage. If necessary you can make bookings that have no cancellation fee which is often possible direct through airlines. Anyway, if we take the case in point, we could easily posit an itinerary which involved, say: fly to Frankfurt; spend 2 nights there; drive to Holland with friends in their car; spend 5 nights there; drive back to Frankfurt; spend 1 night there; fly back to Bkk. Spending 5 out of a total of 8 nights in Holland would mean that you are obliged to apply at the Dutch Embassy, even though you will never be seen by Dutch Immigration and no travel reservations can be shown as evidence of the plan to drive in the friends' car. Neither the Dutch nor the Germans would have any way of knowing whether you adhered to the itinerary or not post facto without running a detailed cross border police surveillance operation on you. If needed, just about everything could be booked and then cancelled free of charge, including, car hire, hotels, flights and trains. I have to confess that I once juggled the weightings of an itinerary between countries in order to consulate shop before we were married when I found that it would take at least 2 weeks to get an appointment at the Italian Embassy which would have meant we couldn't do the trip. I have also just booked the first hotels that came up on the list, as long as they could be cancelled, without looking at them when I was in a hurry to put an itinerary together for a visa and then gone back to choose the hotels I really want at leisure, e.g. book a hotel in Athens for the whole 10 days and then plan your actual island hopping trip in detail later. However, this type of detail should not be needed once you have registered your marriage.

Sorry I don't know the details of the Brit whose wife was denied by the French but granted by the Spanish. It was a friend of a friend but I would not be surprised if he didn't know about the directive and had applied through the outsource agency.

I agree that the German policy of returning passports only once a week, if they still do that, sounds like a violation of the requirement to issue the visas without delay. Even worse they give you a slip telling you to pick up the passport on Tuesday between 8.00 and 9.00 am which implies that the Tuesday is the earliest day you can pick it up without mentioning that the service is not available on Wed, Thu, Fri or Mon. In our case, we were busy on the Tuesday and went to pick it up on the Wednesday instead at 8.55 am. A thoroughly unpleasant male Thai security guard inside argued with my wife for more than 5 minutes that it was the wrong day and then when it was past 9.00 am that it was also the wrong time and told her to come back next Tuesday at 8.00 am. Finally she managed to push her past this arsehol_e and asked to see an officer. The same hatchet faced but quite young Thai woman who had argued with us in the interview came out and scolded her very rudely for coming late and on the wrong day. My wife stood her ground arguing that she was only late because the guard had wasted time arguing with her and that the slip had not mentioned that passports could only be returned on Tuesdays and that the website says that are open for visa issuance every working day. Finally hatchet face reached into a box in front of her and returned my wife's passport. Just another pointless show of power by petty bureaucrats with mountainous chips on their shoulders.

In principle I am against consulate shopping on the basis that a visa does not give the right to enter. One could, in theory, be refused at the point of entry if the immigration officer suspects that the visa was obtained by consulate shopping. In practice I can't see that happening since Article 5 of the Visa Code is ambiguous, as I mentioned above. From a legal point of view, one could argue that consulate shopping is legitimate if the original consulate does not follow the law.

For example, if the Italians refused to provide you with an appointment that met your schedule I would say that they are in breach of Article 5(2) of the Directive: "Member States shall grant such persons every facility to obtain the necessary visas." I would interpret "every facility" as the right to a walk in appointment or at least an appointment which met your schedule. If they are in breach of the law I would say you would be entitled to consulate shop. As a backup, I would take with us proof of relationship which, according to 7by7's argument, should be sufficient to enter without a visa in any event.

Hatchet-face needs to be brought down to earth. Scolding your wife very rudely violates the Visa Code:

The reception arrangements for applicants should be

made with due respect for human dignity. Processing

of visa applications should be conducted in a professional

and respectful manner and be proportionate to

the objectives pursued. (Preamble para 6).

I would have recorded what she said, verbatim, and complained to the EU by way of petition if I had encountered Hatchet face. (And sent her a copy). One should not be required to run the gauntlet of such miscreants in order to get that to which one is entitled by law.

[Arkady]

I have also spoken to the French Embassy and they said they would issue a visa

Visa Code Article 5

Member State competent for examining and deciding on an

application

1. The Member State competent for examining and deciding

on an application for a uniform visa shall be:

(a) the Member State whose territory constitutes the sole destination

of the visit(s);

(b if the visit includes more than one destination, the Member

State whose territory constitutes the main destination of the

visit(s) in terms of the length or purpose of stay; or

c) if no main destination can be determined, the Member State

whose external border the applicant intends to cross in

order to enter the territory of the Member States.

Note the ambiguity in paragraph ( b "in terms of length or purpose of stay" gives a bit of latitude for consulate shopping, "main purpose" being a subjective criterion.

I actually sent the French Embassy my itinerary, I will be flying from Germany to Paris and staying exactly the same amount of days in France, and leaving CDG to BKK via SVO, they were very helpful and indeed were prepared to let me apply under the Directive,

Be a bit careful, if you're spending exactly the same amount of time in each country because in that case rule 1.5.c requires you to apply to the consulate of the country that you will enter first. On closer scrutiny they might send you back to the German Embassy. I encountered this issue with another embassy after they had already taken a preliminary look at the application and accepted the fee (before marriage). They said politely they had no flexibility on border line cases and wanted to refund the fee. A slight rejig of the itinerary fixed the problem the next day though.

That was one of the nicest Schengen embassies that posted detailed information about EU Directive applications on its website. It's funny that they allow themselves no flexibility to overlook something utterly inconsequential like an extra night in a country but when it comes to deliberate and flagrant violations of EU law and human rights, as the Germans do, they lose not a blink of sleep.

[goatfarmer]

I phoned the Embassy again, this time I asked about question 19, the woman informed me that it needed to be filled out. I also asked about the other documentation that she had previously asked for, she informed me she had since read the directive and that the documents were not required, she also said it is not often that anyone applies using the EU Directive.

This is remarkable. The Directive has been around for 8 years. There is no excuse to be unaware of it.

On the other hand, the design of the application form obscures the existence of the Directive. There is nothing conspicuous on the form to alert someone that they might have special rights - including the right to save 60 euros on an application fee. There is merely a paragraph tucked away in the middle of the application form saying that these questions need not be answered by family members exercising their right to freedom of movement. How are these family members supposed to know about their rights if no one tells them?

The application form of the German Embassy in Bangkok is even more remarkable. The size of the writing is about three points compared to five points on the original German version of the application form. You would need a magnifying glass to read it. No wonder few people apply under the Directive.

The omission of the asterix is certainly deliberate as it provides them the opportunity to probe deeper the applicant's employment details and implies that non-working housewives and mothers are ineligible. It must come from a senior policy level too. It's an utter disgrace.

Sounds as if their policy to actively discourage applicants from using the EU Directive is highly successful. Clearly most applicants who are entitled to do so, don't know their rights under EU law and either apply to the outsource agency and pay the fee or apply directly to the embassy free of charge but otherwise submit to the same terms and conditions as ordinary applicants, as well as the degrading treatment meeted out by the obnoxious Thai staff.

In fact, nothing turns on it. If you write your occupation as a circus clown or chief nose picker, it should not have any influence on the outcome of the application. It is nonetheless curious that the German Embassy in Bangkok does not use the official German form being Annex ! of the German Version of the Visa Code. (See link above)

On the other hand, the fact that family member applications are fudged into the same application form as that which ordinary applicants use does suggest that the drafters of the form have scant regard for the Directive. I wouldn't say that it's a deliberate policy to discourage. However, it should be the duty of the embassy to alert family members of their special rights. A separate form for family members and a separate category "family member" on the website would alert eligible applicants that they have special rights. By obscuring the special rights of the Directive embassies are failing in that duty, not just in the German Embassy in Bangkok but in every embassy all around the world. This is the real scandal.

[durhamboy]

It's worth remembering that strictly speaking, if she is traveling with or to join you, she actually doesn't need a visa at all!

The European Commission sitesays

Arriving at the border without an entry visa

It's always best for your non-EU family members to be well informed in advance and have all the necessary documents before starting their journey.

However, if they arrive at the border without an entry visa, the border authorities should give them the opportunity to prove by any means that they are your family members. If they manage to prove it, they should be issued with an entry visa on the spot.

Some countries may fail to apply EU law correctly, and your family members may be denied their rights. If your family members are having difficulties getting a visa, you can contact our assistance services.

So arriving at an EU entry point with you, your passport and your marriage certificate and they should let her in.

However, to avoid possible delays while immigration staff check I would advise getting a visa beforehand.

Note that the freedom of movement regulations, and therefore the above, does not apply if entering the country of which the EU/EEA national is a citizen; except in certain circumstances such as the Surinder Singh ruling.

I have been reading this thread with great interest. It seems that many people dont know that they can travel freely around Europe with their Thai/Foreign spouses and families. This must be happening thousands of times a year and people are applying for and paying for unnecessary visas plus putting up with the admin nightmare.

The first problem is whether the carrier (airline/boat co.) would accept a Thai passenger without a visa.

May I make a sugestion. Could someone send an email to some of the major carriers and destinations e.g. :-

BA to Barcelona

Air France to Paris

Lufthansa to Frankfurt

Alitalia to Rome

KLM to Amsterdam

Eurostar to Brussels

Norfolkline to Dunkirk (from Dover)

and say something on the lines of "I would like to take my Thai wife on a vacation to ................. on your carrier. I understand from the EU Directive issued in 2004 (Quote exact reference) that she is entitled to travel to said destination without a visa. Could you please confirm that if I were to purchase tickets that you would not deny her boarding your carrier for reasons of not having a visa. We will of course be bringing along a copy of our marriage certificate as proof of our relationship"

See what they come back with. Then if any of them say that a visa is required then send a follow up email saying that they would be in breach of European Law and make themselves likely to be sued for denying someone's right to free movement in the EU. Again see what they say.

When positive replies have been obtained from the carriers then send an email to the embassies/consulates of the countries concerned posing the same question.

Anyone up for doing that? I would do it myself but I am in Thailand right now and just applied for the UK spouse visa.

[goatfarmer]

I have been reading this thread with great interest. It seems that many people dont know that they can travel freely around Europe with their Thai/Foreign spouses and families. This must be happening thousands of times a year and people are applying for and paying for unnecessary visas plus putting up with the admin nightmare.

The first problem is whether the carrier (airline/boat co.) would accept a Thai passenger without a visa.

May I make a sugestion. Could someone send an email to some of the major carriers and destinations e.g. :-

BA to Barcelona

Air France to Paris

Lufthansa to Frankfurt

Alitalia to Rome

KLM to Amsterdam

Eurostar to Brussels

Norfolkline to Dunkirk (from Dover)

and say something on the lines of "I would like to take my Thai wife on a vacation to ................. on your carrier. I understand from the EU Directive issued in 2004 (Quote exact reference) that she is entitled to travel to said destination without a visa. Could you please confirm that if I were to purchase tickets that you would not deny her boarding your carrier for reasons of not having a visa. We will of course be bringing along a copy of our marriage certificate as proof of our relationship"

See what they come back with. Then if any of them say that a visa is required then send a follow up email saying that they would be in breach of European Law and make themselves likely to be sued for denying someone's right to free movement in the EU. Again see what they say.

When positive replies have been obtained from the carriers then send an email to the embassies/consulates of the countries concerned posing the same question.

Anyone up for doing that? I would do it myself but I am in Thailand right now and just applied for the UK spouse visa.

I don't think it is correct to say that the family member of an EU citizen is entitled to travel to the EU without a visa. Article 5(2) of the Directive says that family members shall only be required to have a visa and that such visa shall be issued free of charge as soon as possible and on the basis of an accelerated procedure. It sounds to me that the Directive requires them to have a visa and that the exception should only be in exceptional cases.

Article 5(4) of the Directive:

4. Where a Union citizen, or a family member who is not a national of a Member State, does not have the necessary travel documents or, if required, the necessary visas, the Member State concerned shall, before turning them back, give such persons every reasonable opportunity to obtain the necessary documents or have them brought to them within a reasonable period of time or to corroborate or prove by other means that they are covered by the right of free movement and residence.

"Covered by the right of free movement" does suggest that bringing your marriage certificate with translation should preclude you from being sent back. Presumably, by not being sent back, you would get a visa on the spot. However, as an exception to the rule in Article 5(2), I don't think you are going to persuade airlines that you pose no risk to them being fined due to carrying your spouse without a visa.

I don't see how being in Thailand or having applied for UK spouse visa precludes you from sending emails. If this project intrigues you, best you carry it out yourself.

[beano2274]

Just some extra info ref the French Embassy and TLS, if you are a EU Citizen and your partner is applying then can go to the Embassy directly, however only on Mondays at 10 or 11am limited to 7 people per time, you must book via telephone beforehand.

[Eff1n2ret]

I don't think it is correct to say that the family member of an EU citizen is entitled to travel to the EU without a visa. Article 5(2) of the Directive says that family members shall only be required to have a visa and that such visa shall be issued free of charge as soon as possible and on the basis of an accelerated procedure. It sounds to me that the Directive requires them to have a visa and that the exception should only be in exceptional cases.

Article 5(4) of the Directive:

4. Where a Union citizen, or a family member who is not a national of a Member State, does not have the necessary travel documents or, if required, the necessary visas, the Member State concerned shall, before turning them back, give such persons every reasonable opportunity to obtain the necessary documents or have them brought to them within a reasonable period of time or to corroborate or prove by other means that they are covered by the right of free movement and residence.

"Covered by the right of free movement" does suggest that bringing your marriage certificate with translation should preclude you from being sent back. Presumably, by not being sent back, you would get a visa on the spot. However, as an exception to the rule in Article 5(2), I don't think you are going to persuade airlines that you pose no risk to them being fined due to carrying your spouse without a visa.

I agree with that, although in fact the UKBA instructions on Carriers Liability do say that if a passenger is admissable under EEA Regulations but does not have the correct document the fine should be waived - see Para 1.2 of this:-

http://www.ukba.home...pdf?view=Binary

However, the carriers simply don't want the hassle of deciding who does or doesn't qualify - their constant refrain is "We are not an immigration authority, we shouldn't be required to do their job." Also, there's no guarantee that similar instructions to the above are included in the systems of other EU states, and immigration officers anywhere are not fond of cleverdicks who turn up and start spouting the law at them, even if said cleverdick happens (occasionally) to be right. It's a recipe for spending hours sitting in uncomfortable rooms while the thing gets sorted out.

The Right of Free Movement (to which I subscribe), and Schengen, are wonderful in theory but are subject to abuse and there have been many occasions when countries in Schengen, particularly the French, have wished they weren't. Immigration Officers are in the front line and see the abuse all the time. Not surprising, then, that they don't always respond eagerly to those who think they know their rights.

[VisasPlus]

It's worth remembering that strictly speaking, if she is traveling with or to join you, she actually doesn't need a visa at all!

The European Commission sitesays

Arriving at the border without an entry visa

It's always best for your non-EU family members to be well informed in advance and have all the necessary documents before starting their journey.

However, if they arrive at the border without an entry visa, the border authorities should give them the opportunity to prove by any means that they are your family members. If they manage to prove it, they should be issued with an entry visa on the spot.

Some countries may fail to apply EU law correctly, and your family members may be denied their rights. If your family members are having difficulties getting a visa, you can contact our assistance services.

So arriving at an EU entry point with you, your passport and your marriage certificate and they should let her in.

However, to avoid possible delays while immigration staff check I would advise getting a visa beforehand.

Note that the freedom of movement regulations, and therefore the above, does not apply if entering the country of which the EU/EEA national is a citizen; except in certain circumstances such as the Surinder Singh ruling.

I have been reading this thread with great interest. It seems that many people dont know that they can travel freely around Europe with their Thai/Foreign spouses and families. This must be happening thousands of times a year and people are applying for and paying for unnecessary visas plus putting up with the admin nightmare.

The first problem is whether the carrier (airline/boat co.) would accept a Thai passenger without a visa.

May I make a sugestion. Could someone send an email to some of the major carriers and destinations e.g. :-

BA to Barcelona

Air France to Paris

Lufthansa to Frankfurt

Alitalia to Rome

KLM to Amsterdam

Eurostar to Brussels

Norfolkline to Dunkirk (from Dover)

and say something on the lines of "I would like to take my Thai wife on a vacation to ................. on your carrier. I understand from the EU Directive issued in 2004 (Quote exact reference) that she is entitled to travel to said destination without a visa. Could you please confirm that if I were to purchase tickets that you would not deny her boarding your carrier for reasons of not having a visa. We will of course be bringing along a copy of our marriage certificate as proof of our relationship"

See what they come back with. Then if any of them say that a visa is required then send a follow up email saying that they would be in breach of European Law and make themselves likely to be sued for denying someone's right to free movement in the EU. Again see what they say.

When positive replies have been obtained from the carriers then send an email to the embassies/consulates of the countries concerned posing the same question.

Anyone up for doing that? I would do it myself but I am in Thailand right now and just applied for the UK spouse visa.

Although not strictly a response to your question, it is not as simple as that. In my former job I was one of the people responsible for checking documents of passengers attempting to board aircraft. As Eff1n2ret says, airlines are not supposed to act as immigration staff, and the whole process of them doing that is unworkable. For instance, if a passenger is boarding in Bangkok on a flight to Dubai, and then taking a flight on a different airline from Dubai to Paris. What happens if the airline staff in Bangkok and Dubai have different views or different instructions on how to deal with passenger's documentation ?

It's all well and good telling an airline official that your wife is entitled to travel to the EU as an EU dependant, and showing him your marriage certificate as all the evidence required under EU Directive 28/2004, but how is the airline official supposed to know if the marriage certificate is genuine, that the marriage is not one of convenience, that your wife is not an EU blacklist, etc, etc ? As Eff1n2ret says, there would be no charge to the airline ( no fine ) under EU legislation if the documents are genuine, but the airline might still be responsible, in some cases, for other charges ( the cost of detention, return flight, etc), so airlines are reluctant to carry passengers without seeing the correct documents ( normally a visa) if it turned out that there weas false documentation involved. I have worked in many airports in many countries, checking passport and visas. I have seen many "married" couples trying to board aircraft for the UK, holding just a marriage certificate. After a short interview it becomes apparent that the claimed relationship is not genuine. Marriages of convenience, to EU citizens, is big business now. I have dealt with many EU nationals attempting to board aircraft with their new non-EU wife or husband ( even with a genuine marriage certificate and visa), and the airline has declined to carry them as they know that there will likely be problems in the destination or transit country. Airlines, despite EU legislation, are not prepared to risk a fine.

Edited November 3, 2012 by VisasPlus

[goatfarmer]

.. and immigration officers anywhere are not fond of cleverdicks who turn up and start spouting the law at them, even if said cleverdick happens (occasionally) to be right. It's a recipe for spending hours sitting in uncomfortable rooms while the thing gets sorted out.

I agree. It is a waste of time spouting to front office officials. The lower down the food chain the less likely that the official even knows about the relevant law, let alone the Directive. Last year I took a copy of the Directive to TLS Contact to request that my wife get her visa "as soon as possible" and the young French manager denied that the Directive or the Visa Code applied.

[goatfarmer]

Just some extra info ref the French Embassy and TLS, if you are a EU Citizen and your partner is applying then can go to the Embassy directly, however only on Mondays at 10 or 11am limited to 7 people per time, you must book via telephone beforehand.

What's the value of this procedure? Anyone can go to the embassy directly following a telephone booking to apply for a visa.

My reading of the law is that beneficiaries of the Directive should be able to go to the embassy on any day without an appointment and be issued a visa in 24 hours.

[cuddleypete]

hi just got email from swedish embassy saying

Reply: Your wife has to apply for a schengenvisa. She is not covered of dir 2004/39/ec as you are British and you are living in the UK.

She can apply for EU-spouse visa. Show both your orig. passports + mar cert + filled in appl form + 2 photos

See further info on our website.

so will have to do the whole thing book wait form filing etc etc , Directive not work in sweden

[goatfarmer]

hi just got email from swedish embassy saying

Reply: Your wife has to apply for a schengenvisa. She is not covered of dir 2004/39/ec as you are British and you are living in the UK.

She can apply for EU-spouse visa. Show both your orig. passports + mar cert + filled in appl form + 2 photos

See further info on our website.

so will have to do the whole thing book wait form filing etc etc , Directive not work in sweden

Sounds like a distinction without a difference. You are effectively getting the benefit of the Directive by only having to submit the documents required of a family member of an EU citizen.

[beano2274]

Thought I would copy and paste the contents of an email that I received today from the Federal Foreign Office in Berlin, they are responsible for the Embassies and German Consulates.

Thank you for your further communication to my colleague, Ms **********. Thank you also for drawing our attention to the fact that the application form currently in use at the German Embassy in Bangkok does not correspond to the form as set out in Annex I of the Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code). I apologize for this fact, caused by a simple typing error. Of course, your wife (as wife of an EU citizen) does not have to fill in no. 19, 20, 31 - 33 of the application form. The Federal Foreign Office and the German Embassy will see to it that the correct forms will be used in future.

Yours sincerely

By order

***************

I have deleted the names of the contact persons in Germany.

[goatfarmer]

Well done Beano!

Your efforts will make it easier for the next person who applies under the Directive.

Edited November 7, 2012 by goatfarmer

[beano2274]

In reality using the EU Directive you could get a visa from any EU Country for a holiday. In my case am going to Germany and France, am flying into Germany and out from France, but since I do not have to state how many days I am going to stay then I could theoretically get her a visa from any of the two Embassies.

Edited November 7, 2012 by beano2274

[durhamboy]

I'm still rather confused by this. 7x7 (a very respected member) here says a spouse does not need a visa. Is that 100% true? If so, is everyone just getting these visas for the sake of protecting their travel arrangements to prevent being held up or refused at borders? If so, then surely a couple of emails (one to the carrier one to the respective consulate) would be worth trying first.......maybe I've missed the point somewhere.

[Eff1n2ret]

I'm still rather confused by this. 7x7 (a very respected member) here says a spouse does not need a visa. Is that 100% true? If so, is everyone just getting these visas for the sake of protecting their travel arrangements to prevent being held up or refused at borders? If so, then surely a couple of emails (one to the carrier one to the respective consulate) would be worth trying first.......maybe I've missed the point somewhere.

I don't know what further explanation can be given beyond what I said in posts #52 and #75, and VisaPlus' very detailed exposition in post #76 of why the airlines will not carry passengers who are not properly documented. If you think it's worth trying otherwise, go ahead, let us know how it works out.

Edited November 8, 2012 by Eff1n2ret

[beano2274]

Further to my post 81 above, I have now written another email to the German Foreign Office asking for clarification as to which documents are required. I listed the following:

1. Application form and photo

2. Applicants current passport and copy

3. Applicants previous passport and copy

4. Marriage certificate and copy to show proof of relationship

5. Spouse's Passport and copy to prove being an EU Citizen

6. Air ticket confirmation to prove that the applicant and EU Citizen are traveling together

Just waiting for an answer, will copy and paste it here.

[durhamboy]

"I don't know what further explanation can be given beyond what I said in posts #52 and #75, and VisaPlus' very detailed exposition in post #76 of why the airlines will not carry passengers who are not properly documented. If you think it's worth trying otherwise, go ahead, let us know how it works out."

It will probably be at least 2 years before I even think about a trip to Europe but when I do I will try to get responses from the carrier and embassy about the fact there is no need for a visa. It strikes me that as this directive has been around for 8 years it is because people have not been asserting their rights that there is so much ignorance about this issue. There must be thousands (probably into the tens of thousands) of trips to Europe where a visa is not required. Let you know in 2 years!

[beano2274]

"I don't know what further explanation can be given beyond what I said in posts #52 and #75, and VisaPlus' very detailed exposition in post #76 of why the airlines will not carry passengers who are not properly documented. If you think it's worth trying otherwise, go ahead, let us know how it works out."

It will probably be at least 2 years before I even think about a trip to Europe but when I do I will try to get responses from the carrier and embassy about the fact there is no need for a visa. It strikes me that as this directive has been around for 8 years it is because people have not been asserting their rights that there is so much ignorance about this issue. There must be thousands (probably into the tens of thousands) of trips to Europe where a visa is not required. Let you know in 2 years!

The airlines are your first point of contact, but although the rules are for Immigration officers the airlines do not have to follow them, remember if you get turned away at any airport for having the incorrect or even no visa, the airline has to pay to have you sent back to your departure airport again.

[beano2274]

Just checked the Germany Embassy Website in Bangkok, they are still using the form with the asterix on question 19 removed.

[beano2274]

My wife went this morning to the German Embassy she was asked for a translation and certification from the British Embassy to prove she is married to a British Citizen, she is not happy about this as I had an email from the Embassy staff telling me that the document could be in Thai.