expatican said:
If we go by the conditions in the form it also says
"Als u of uw referent een arbeidsovereenkomst heeft die op het moment van
de aanvraag minder dan 1 jaar geldig is
– Uw huidige arbeidsovereenkomst(en), waaruit blijkt dat u over werk beschikt
– De volledig ingevulde en ondertekende Bijlage(n) werkgeversverklaring (niet
ouder dan 3 maanden)
– Over de afgelopen 3 jaar:
- alle salarisspecificaties; en
- alle jaaropgaven; en
- alle arbeids- en uitzendovereenkomst(en); en
- toekenningsbesluit(en) en uitkeringsspecificatie(s)"
What does this mean? The form does not strictly say you need to have contract for more than 1 year.
*facepalm*
DO be careful not to read what documents a form asks you for as being the same thing as a requirement. I've seen too many people get trapped in that. Or similarly: "the IND asked me to send them my werkgeversverklaring, my last three payslips, and my contract for the application for my partner's residence permit, and I did that, and his application was still rejected! I don't get it!"
In other words: just because the IND asks you to send them documents X, Y, and Z does not mean that you are already satisfying the requirement just by doing that. YOUR documents X, Y and Z have to actually check out in terms of proving you have the right contract length and right salary level.
This is the deal for a permanent residence permit: you need EITHER
- a contract valid for a year FROM TODAY (so not just any old 'year contract', but one that has at least one year of validity left on it), with which you earn a salary that meets or exceeds the minimum welfare norm for a person in your family situation;
OR
- a contract valid for six months from today with which you earn the required monthly salary norm, PROVIDED you can also prove you have actually earned the required monthly salary norm EVERY MONTH for the past three years. DO NOT assume that the IND already has that information-- they may have seen your contracts in the past, but they need to see proof that you actually got paid every month for the past three years.
That is the law. There are no deviations possible from it (i.e., there's no decisionmaker at the IND who can pat you on the head and give you an 'A for effort' even though you didn't actually satisfy the requirements). Unfortunately, the form does not explain it like that. If you only go on what the form says, you may actually believe that you can have less than 6 months left on your current contract and you can still get a permanent residence permit. You will pay the fee and then you will be rejected (although the IND will probably send you a letter to give you a chance to get it right, asking you whether your contract has been extended for a year or six months in the meantime and if you can just send them the new one).
Flevoland, I agree that your lawyer has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. Either you heard him wrong (the way you relayed his advice sounds like someone mixing up the requirements for naturalization-- which has no salary requirement-- and the requirements for a permanent residence permit), or he really doesn't know what he's talking about.
avocado said:
expatican said:
If we go by the conditions in the form it also says
"Als u of uw referent een arbeidsovereenkomst heeft die op het moment van
de aanvraag minder dan 1 jaar geldig is
– Uw huidige arbeidsovereenkomst(en), waaruit blijkt dat u over werk beschikt
– De volledig ingevulde en ondertekende Bijlage(n) werkgeversverklaring (niet
ouder dan 3 maanden)
– Over de afgelopen 3 jaar:
- alle salarisspecificaties; en
- alle jaaropgaven; en
- alle arbeids- en uitzendovereenkomst(en); en
- toekenningsbesluit(en) en uitkeringsspecificatie(s)"
What does this mean? The form does not strictly say you need to have contract for more than 1 year.
*facepalm*
DO be careful not to read what documents a form asks you for as being the same thing as a requirement. I've seen too many people get trapped in that. Or similarly: "the IND asked me to send them my werkgeversverklaring, my last three payslips, and my contract for the application for my partner's residence permit, and I did that, and his application was still rejected! I don't get it!"
In other words: just because the IND asks you to send them documents X, Y, and Z does not mean that you are already satisfying the requirement just by doing that. YOUR documents X, Y and Z have to actually check out in terms of proving you have the right contract length and right salary level.
This is the deal for a permanent residence permit: you need EITHER
- a contract valid for a year FROM TODAY (so not just any old 'year contract', but one that has at least one year of validity left on it), with which you earn a salary that meets or exceeds the minimum welfare norm for a person in your family situation;
OR
- a contract valid for six months from today with which you earn the required monthly salary norm, PROVIDED you can also prove you have actually earned the required monthly salary norm EVERY MONTH for the past three years. DO NOT assume that the IND already has that information-- they may have seen your contracts in the past, but they need to see proof that you actually got paid every month for the past three years.
That is the law. There are no deviations possible from it (i.e., there's no decisionmaker at the IND who can pat you on the head and give you an 'A for effort' even though you didn't actually satisfy the requirements). Unfortunately, the form does not explain it like that. If you only go on what the form says, you may actually believe that you can have less than 6 months left on your current contract and you can still get a permanent residence permit. You will pay the fee and then you will be rejected (although the IND will probably send you a letter to give you a chance to get it right, asking you whether your contract has been extended for a year or six months in the meantime and if you can just send them the new one).
Flevoland, I agree that your lawyer has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. Either you heard him wrong (the way you relayed his advice sounds like someone mixing up the requirements for naturalization-- which has no salary requirement-- and the requirements for a permanent residence permit), or he really doesn't know what he's talking about.
So one can also apply for PR with 6 months contract left based on satisfying certain conditions. Thanks for this explanation avacado.
If I remember correctly the old forms had two criterias: contract has to be either >1 year or <1 year but > 6months but the new forms just ignore the min 6 month conditions which is strange. why would they change this for no reason???
igor said:
1. you can. You need to have an income at the moment of the application.
2. just that.
3/4. One cards serves both. same application.
5. Yes, you can, as long as you have another RP covering the priod of waiting.
6. This idea is a good one, yet it costs ~400 eur extra. Permanent RP may take up to 6 month. (I know examples of both 3 month and up to 6 month happening in 2011) Naturalization may take anything from 4 month up to 12 (for the IND only) Again, one need to have a valid RP to cover the period.
7. You do not send originals anywhere. Gemeente would make a copy of it for 5 eur for the IND. Naturalisation process starts at Gemeente, so they make a copy of it again for free. Cheers.
hello,
As My question was related to this topic, just thought to repond to this conversation only.
My question is related point no.6, i.e. application for PR and Naturalization at around same time
-Is the process of Naturalisation faster for the person who already has PR or he / she has applied for PR??
-Is it must/equired to apply PR for minor kids also if parents apply for it?? otherwise we can atleast save that cost for kids, What is the benifit of PR for kids if they are dependent on parents till the age of 18?
-What if the parents have PR and kids have normal residence permit?
Thanks in advance for your help in this matter, best regards
Iamsterdam said:
igor said:
1. you can. You need to have an income at the moment of the application.
2. just that.
3/4. One cards serves both. same application.
5. Yes, you can, as long as you have another RP covering the priod of waiting.
6. This idea is a good one, yet it costs ~400 eur extra. Permanent RP may take up to 6 month. (I know examples of both 3 month and up to 6 month happening in 2011) Naturalization may take anything from 4 month up to 12 (for the IND only) Again, one need to have a valid RP to cover the period.
7. You do not send originals anywhere. Gemeente would make a copy of it for 5 eur for the IND. Naturalisation process starts at Gemeente, so they make a copy of it again for free. Cheers.
hello,
As My question was related to this topic, just thought to repond to this conversation only.
My question is related point no.6, i.e. application for PR and Naturalization at around same time
I think, if you are applying for naturalization then there is no need to apply for the PR unless your current residence permit is about to expire or you have uncertainty about your job, relationship or some other relevant thing depending upon your situation that could have an adverse effect on the outcome of naturalization app as I believe that getting PR takes around three to max four months and it can easily be that naturalization takes nine months or more.
-Is the process of Naturalisation faster for the person who already has PR or he / she has applied for PR??
I think, it might make the job of IND people easier to come up with a conclusion and positive decision if one already has a PR. But I don't think that it would make a lot of difference in the processing time.
-What if the parents have PR and kids have normal residence permit?
I think, it does not matter as long as the kids have valid residence permits.
-Is it must/equired to apply PR for minor kids also if parents apply for it?? otherwise we can atleast save that cost for kids, What is the benifit of PR for kids if they are dependent on parents till the age of 18?
I think, kids won't have any benifit from PR as long as you are applying for the naturalization for yourself together with your kids. Otherwise you should apply their PR also. Because then you/they won't have to meet any specific conditions for the purpose of stay in NL and won't have to extend but only renew PR and they will be considered EU-students when it comes to paying for their study costs.
Thanks in advance for your help in this matter, best regards
Regards...
ouloveit3 said:
flevoland said:
The only reason why I can't ignore that lawyer's view is that his firm applied and successfully got all my visas/permits so far...
But .. you don't need a lawyer to fill in allthese forms. You have to have some self assurance in order to live in another country and navigate the immigration stuff. If not ... you will eventually get burned.
I didn't hire a lawyer and I came here on a Working permit in 2000 and have never used one for immigration issues. I did sit down and read the forms etc .. that's why I said - this is what you need to do. It's a study .. that you need to undertake in order to be successful.
As the above poster said .. the lawyer can tell you whatever (and charge you) but if something falls through .. it's gonna fall on your head. Now .. that's the truth.
The only time you need a lawyer .. is if something exceptional, out of the norm is going on where there is no provision in the forms or you have already been denied .. so you have to appeal etc. These are all messy situations that are not ordinary and indeed .. you would need a lawyer.
But if you are just doing regular stuff like applying for a KM permit, applying for a Perm. res permit etc .. these things are all straight forward.
And this lawyer is giving you bad information .. you can read this for yourself ... so I would not trust him. He's not so bright. (or somethings not right ..)
In 2000, your work permit had to have been applied for and issued to your employer, not you, so you didn't have any involvement in the process. Individual employees had no involvement in the work permit process back then, just like they don't have any involvement in it now.
You can bet your employer used a lawyer (or at least their HR professional) to get your work permit. Because the work permit was issued to your employer, not you. When the work permit was issued, the same lawyer would have prepared your residence permit application. All you had to do was sign it. Hardly a reason to suggest others do it on their own regardless of their training, ability, time constraints, etc. Someone else did it for you. Apparently they got it right and you're taking credit for it.
We have hundreds of clients who are too busy doing other things here than to teach themselves Dutch immigration law and risk getting it wrong. And every day someone calls who has been rejected for some stupid mistake or another. How about some sympathy for them? You tell them they don't need legal advice knowing that a large percentage of them will have problems without it. Just look at the IND statistics on rejected applications.
If it was all so straightforward, you wouldn't have lawyers like Avocado and myself posting so many corrections to the posters on these forums. Substitute the words 'medical advice' for 'immigration advice' and the advice to avoid using professionals seems silly. The Aliens Circular is thousands of pages. In Dutch.
For example, the analysis of the form in question missed the point that the real purpose of the second test (the six month contract situation) is to accomodate employees of temp agencies and uitzendbureaus who routinely get contracts of short and varying duration.
It wasn't intended to cover people with less than a full year on their annual contracts, although it might look like that to the uninitiated. It's intended to allow people who have worked continuously for three years on very short term contracts ranging from days to months with different employers to satisfy the income requirements without a one-year contract.
The IND assumes everyone else has a year contract at the minimum so you can always apply just before your next contract year starts, instead of looking for a special exception to let you file a few months early.
You can't figure out everything by downloading a form. If this was true, I could do my own taxes.
Christian Barth, Attorney
christianbarth said:
For example, the analysis of the form in question missed the point that the real purpose of the second test (the six month contract situation) is to accomodate employees of temp agencies and uitzendbureaus who routinely get contracts of short and varying duration.
It wasn't intended to cover people with less than a full year on their annual contracts, although it might look like that to the uninitiated. It's intended to allow people who have worked continuously for three years on very short term contracts ranging from days to months with different employers to satisfy the income requirements without a one-year contract.
The IND assumes everyone else has a year contract at the minimum so you can always apply just before your next contract year starts, instead of looking for a special exception to let you file a few months early.
You can't figure out everything by downloading a form. If this was true, I could do my own taxes.
Christian Barth, Attorney
Do you mean to say only employees of temp agencies and uitzendbureaus can use this provision and others cannot.
For example can someone who has worked in the same company for 5 years but now has been asked to leave at the end of 7 months from now assuming that the employee has agreed with this and resigned.
Thank you.
christianbarth said:
For example, the analysis of the form in question missed the point that the real purpose of the second test (the six month contract situation) is to accomodate employees of temp agencies and uitzendbureaus who routinely get contracts of short and varying duration.
It wasn't intended to cover people with less than a full year on their annual contracts, although it might look like that to the uninitiated. It's intended to allow people who have worked continuously for three years on very short term contracts ranging from days to months with different employers to satisfy the income requirements without a one-year contract.
The IND assumes everyone else has a year contract at the minimum so you can always apply just before your next contract year starts, instead of looking for a special exception to let you file a few months early.
Christian Barth, Attorney
Till last year I have been working on one permanent contract with one company (no temp agencies and uitzendbureaus). After that I had to change the job and got initially one year contract with another company (again no temp agencies and uitzendbureaus) of which 5 months are already passed.
Now, I have applied for PR including last 3 years jobs (basically two jobs: current and previous one) details. I have also included a letter (in addition to the employer's declaration) from the director of my current company that they are highly satisfied with my performance and so they are going to change this contract to permanent before it ends.
Have I done it right... ?
Regards...
christianbarth said:
ouloveit3 said:
flevoland said:
The only reason why I can't ignore that lawyer's view is that his firm applied and successfully got all my visas/permits so far...
But .. you don't need a lawyer to fill in allthese forms. You have to have some self assurance in order to live in another country and navigate the immigration stuff. If not ... you will eventually get burned.
I didn't hire a lawyer and I came here on a Working permit in 2000 and have never used one for immigration issues. I did sit down and read the forms etc .. that's why I said - this is what you need to do. It's a study .. that you need to undertake in order to be successful.
As the above poster said .. the lawyer can tell you whatever (and charge you) but if something falls through .. it's gonna fall on your head. Now .. that's the truth.
The only time you need a lawyer .. is if something exceptional, out of the norm is going on where there is no provision in the forms or you have already been denied .. so you have to appeal etc. These are all messy situations that are not ordinary and indeed .. you would need a lawyer.
But if you are just doing regular stuff like applying for a KM permit, applying for a Perm. res permit etc .. these things are all straight forward.
And this lawyer is giving you bad information .. you can read this for yourself ... so I would not trust him. He's not so bright. (or somethings not right ..)
In 2000, your work permit had to have been applied for and issued to your employer, not you, so you didn't have any involvement in the process. Individual employees had no involvement in the work permit process back then, just like they don't have any involvement in it now.
You can bet your employer used a lawyer (or at least their HR professional) to get your work permit. Because the work permit was issued to your employer, not you. When the work permit was issued, the same lawyer would have prepared your residence permit application. All you had to do was sign it. Hardly a reason to suggest others do it on their own regardless of their training, ability, time constraints, etc. Someone else did it for you. Apparently they got it right and you're taking credit for it.
We have hundreds of clients who are too busy doing other things here than to teach themselves Dutch immigration law and risk getting it wrong. And every day someone calls who has been rejected for some stupid mistake or another. How about some sympathy for them? You tell them they don't need legal advice knowing that a large percentage of them will have problems without it. Just look at the IND statistics on rejected applications.
If it was all so straightforward, you wouldn't have lawyers like Avocado and myself posting so many corrections to the posters on these forums. Substitute the words 'medical advice' for 'immigration advice' and the advice to avoid using professionals seems silly. The Aliens Circular is thousands of pages. In Dutch.
For example, the analysis of the form in question missed the point that the real purpose of the second test (the six month contract situation) is to accomodate employees of temp agencies and uitzendbureaus who routinely get contracts of short and varying duration.
It wasn't intended to cover people with less than a full year on their annual contracts, although it might look like that to the uninitiated. It's intended to allow people who have worked continuously for three years on very short term contracts ranging from days to months with different employers to satisfy the income requirements without a one-year contract.
The IND assumes everyone else has a year contract at the minimum so you can always apply just before your next contract year starts, instead of looking for a special exception to let you file a few months early.
You can't figure out everything by downloading a form. If this was true, I could do my own taxes.
Christian Barth, Attorney
Umm ... I came here 2000 and I did not hire a Lawyer - and yes my company had to get my Working Permit. Whether they hired a lawyer or had their HR person involved .. I have no clue. But I had to provide the PAPERWORK .. and it was incredible. My company would call me by phone and ask for lots documentation that the [then] Aliens Police or it could have CWI wanted about my work, education etc... I didn't need a need a lawyer to provide the stuff they asked for.
Ummm were you even in The NL in 2000 because what you said about getting the Residence Permit is definitely ... not the way it worked. 
My Residence Permit - the company did not apply for this for me. I had to go to the Aliens Police and apply for it in person myself. I had to have a copy of my Work Contract, a copy of the Working Permit application that the company submitted for me and a letter from my company that proved I had Dutch Health Insurance. The Aliens Police asked me to gather this after the first meeting .. but no, I did not hire a Lawyer. Again I had enough sense to follow directions.
(In fact, I had to do this twice because the new HR girl messed up my Work Contract ... but that's another story). 
Then I had get my Sofi number, my Drivers License and every year for the first 5 years I had to fill out the Residence Permit renewal forms ... all up until I applied for my Permanent (and EU) Residence permit after 5 years. I had fill out a number of things .. I just forget them all now but it was just a matter of reading.
Yes, it was in Dutch so I had to struggle .. but I don't see that struggling to read text (when there are so many online translation tools) .. is an issue. That's why I said when a person moves to a new country ... it falls on that person to apply themselves .. watch their own back or ... they will get burned in the end. It's a study.
One thing ... just basically .... followed the next thing and during all this time I did not hire a Lawyer. What would be the point .. when I can clearly SEE what I have to do next? You ask people what to do (shrugs) .. and they tell you.
That's why I said you DO need a Lawyer .. if something goes wrong or your situation is not so normal etc ... because things are not straight forward in that case.
I think you are way off the mark if you think that every Non EU person that moves here .. needs to hire a lawyer to get their permits. Nooooo.
In fact, I have known quite a few Non EUs that came here for work in the past 12 years that didn't know Dutch immmigation law or Dutch for that matter like myself but they had some basic common sense, were able to follow direction. DUH!
And not one of them hired a lawyer to get their papers UNLESS .. like I said .. they had some sort of special situation.
(You are way too defensive about your work btw. Starts to sound like the other lawyer that is mainly here to pull up customers.) 
This forum is specifically designed for Expats to share their experiences - not for lawyers. If you want to share - fine - it's a free country but there is an ASK THE EXPERT area where Lawyers answer questions.
So sorry, but you are never gonna get me and everybody else to stop posting on a forum .. that is SPECIFICALLY designed for expats to post and share their experiences.
