Schengen rules have changed

[LJH]

Originally Posted by svBeBe

Under the Schengen rules in effect prior to the rulings changed effective 18 October 2013 that Katiusha originally posted in this thread, it was perfectly legal to enter a Schengen country for a day to start a 'first entry' of a 180-day period, of which one was allowed to be within Schengen countries for a total of 90 days, each subsequent entry being labeled 're-entry.' At the end of that 180-day period, one was required to be outside Schengen countries at midnight of that day. The following day one could again check into a Schengen country to begin a second 180-day period, during which one would be allowed to be within Schengen countries for a total of 90 days. This allowed a back-to-back period of 89 days of the first 180-day period followed by 90 days of the second 180-day period. That was established with the Bot case in either 2005 or 2006.

The 6 people in this marina planned to follow what was the law up until 18 October 2013, as they had no knowledge of the rules being changed at that time (Thanks to Katiusha for informing us!). All 6 planned the back-to-back periods (as previously allowed) and cleared into a Schengen country for one day to start their first 180-day period. Marinas for next winter have already been paid; flights back to home countries have already been purchased for the required minimum 90 days out (which would have been during that second 180-day period). So, what do these people do now? Forfit the marina fees? Forfit the airline ticket costs? Go to unsafe Tunisia? I'm sure you have a simple answer. And, after all, it is their own fault for not finding out about the changes in Schengen rules even though they all researched this last summer.

Judy

Like the 6 people you mention, this has affected me as well and I have had to re-plan my 2014 cruising that was based on an early first entry for back to back periods at the 6 month point.

While we all put a lot of effort into planning, we must remember that we must be adaptable as there are many events that can influence them (political, health, weather etc). Yes it can be frustrating.

The marina and the airlines may allow reservation changes, for a fee. Perhaps planning a road or rail trip outside the Shengen area could be an option (Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria before they join Shengen, Serbia etc.).

Personally, I never purchase airline tickets more than 30 days in advance and I frequently purchase one way tickets for flexibility even though it may cost a few dollars more.

[LJH]

Originally Posted by monte

some real world experience...

arriving in Portugal, not so likely yo be checked at anchor as other countries, but all marinas have a marina desk, and adjacent to the desk a full time immigration desk. They WILL check your foreign passport and they WILL count the days inside the schengen zone. They will also probbaly give you a lecture about how you have X amount of days left and if you overstayed I don't doubt they would eject you on the next flight along with fines, vessel impounding etc.

Arriving in Spain, the marinas don't have immigration on site but they are required to notify immigration. They will ask you to stay on board till the immigration officer arrives to check your documents. Spain is also more likely to board you while at anchor or sailing as they have a more on water staff and a lot of customs vessels patrolling the areas. Spanish officials generally seem very friendly and are mainly interested in completing there paperwork quota, unlike the Portuguese who seem very eager to bust someone.

French are somewhere between the Spanish and Portuguese and have a similar size customs fleet to the Spanish. You are very likely to be boarded at anchor or en route and they will check your documents. They will count your days inside the zone and explain how many days you have remaining.

Italians, much less likely to board you but some ports have a large immigration staff on site. They will board any foreign vessels and ask you to come to the office with documents and paperwork to check. They tend to argue among themselves about how the forms should be filled in, waving their hands about in typical Italian style. This can be a bit unnerving as its always in Italian or very broken English when they nominate the one with the best English to explain something or ask a question. Usually in the end they get frustrated and throw their paperwork in the bin..

After 2 seasons sailing in the Med I think we were boarded and checked about 5 times by the French, 5 or six by the Spanish, none by the Italians or Portuguese as they tend to handle things on land. I am positive if my documents weren't in order I would have been deported, probably with a 5yr ban from reentering the EU.

The first season we managed with a 12 month french visa which was difficult to get, but made easier as Jen is French. The second season we went to Croatia after 3 months in France and Italy. This year is undecided but I will apply for a cart de sejour for France.

It really is a PITA but it is also worthwhile...

Applying from Australia for a 12 month visa is pretty difficult as well. You have to fly to Sydney after making an appointment, then a meeting in France, Doctors checkups, and 1000 euro later you might have a Visa.

My experience

Portugal - they count the days over six months looking for multiple entry and exit stamps. Cruisers that overstayed in Horta a couple of years ago were fined, albeit only 1 Euro per day each.

Spain (Canaries) - marinas report your entry and you are expected to visit immigration for a stamp, even if it means renting a car to travel to a port of entry. Officials came along side to check on us, but did not board.

[MBLittle]

So, let's pretend I still don't get it.

You can be in schengren for 90 days out for 90 days in for 90 days out for 90 days. Meaning 6 months a year, 3 months at a time?

Sent from my LG-E980 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[chala]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Actually cruisers have nothing to do with the problem. I know folks who have taken motorcycle trips in Europe that lasted more than 90 days. Backpackers. Hikers. All kinds of folks who were doing a low-budget "grand tour" of the same kind taken since at least the 1800's.
90 days may help keep out the gypsies, tramps, and thieves...oh wait, that's so PI now these days, isn't it? Still...cutting off all tourism at 90 days surely isn't going to stop illegal immigration. Or be the best way to address it. (Doesn't work in the US, either.)

You are right and think what it does to the income of peoples that depend on the high-budget “grand tour”

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

As a person who regularly flies from a EU non Schengen area to an EU Schengen area, I just wish the UK and Ireland would cop themselves on and join, and I could kiss passport control goodbye.

And all this peoples waiting in France to move into Great Britain would be able to enter freely?

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

There has been a massive flap on on France over threats that the Italians were going to let the illegal immigrants go into France. All the borders began reappearing

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The US continually treats EU countries like parts of the third world.

And so are some other EU countries.

Originally Posted by hoppy

Schengen is not about the bloody foreigners, its about making life easier for us EU citizens.

Obviously the Swiss did not see it that way.

Originally Posted by monte

Applying from Australia for a 12 month visa is pretty difficult as well. You have to fly to Sydney after making an appointment, then a meeting in France, Doctors checkups, and 1000 euro later you might have a Visa.

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Note today long stay EU country visas are very difficult to get, most are work or study type bias and unsuitable for cruisers.

( Note Auzzies and especially NZers have special bilateral agreement's that predate Schengen and hence can stay much longer)

So what are these special bilateral agreement's that predate Schengen?

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

if this is potential revenue to countries I would bet they are going to start looking to collect it.

So I'm not sure I would be willing to just go and ignore it.

Wise

File:Supranational European Bodies-en.svg - Wikimedia Commons

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by chala

Obviously the Swiss did not see it that way.

The Swiss did not vote against Schengen. The free movement of people within the EU, EEA and Switzerland has nothing to do with Schengen. The UK for example is not part of Schengen, yet EU citizens (and at the moment the Swiss still) can freely move there...

Schengen was not primarily about making things easier for EU citizens. Crossing borders was already trivially easy, even before Schengen. I rarely had to show my passport when entering Switzerland before that country joined Schengen. Schengen is not about migration.

Schengen is firstly a common visa policy. It is intended to make life easier for visitors to Europe. An Indian or Chinese coming to Europe now no longer has to apply for visa to France, Germany etc...

That is why Switzerland joined as well. Tourism from China and India is increasing, and Switzerland didn't like the idea of tourists avoiding it only because doing so doubled he red tape involved.
And it solved the embarrassing problem of people being taking of the Paris - Venice night train in the middle of the night because they didn't have a Swiss visa...

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The Swiss did not vote against Schengen. The free movement of people within the EU, EEA and Switzerland has nothing to do with Schengen. The UK for example is not part of Schengen, yet EU citizens (and at the moment the Swiss still) can freely move there...

Schengen was not primarily about making things easier for EU citizens. Crossing borders was already trivially easy, even before Schengen. I rarely had to show my passport when entering Switzerland before that country joined Schengen. Schengen is not about migration.

Schengen is firstly a common visa policy. It is intended to make life easier for visitors to Europe. An Indian or Chinese coming to Europe now no longer has to apply for visa to France, Germany etc...

This is not the case, The original Schengen agreement was created between
France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands when they decided in 1985 to create a territory without internal borders. Up to that point EEC and other European states where arguing whether "free movement " of people only meant EU/ECC/EEFTA members and others argued that is was for all.

This is similar to the CTA area between the UK and Ireland, where citizens of each country do not require passports to travel between such countries, but in theory border controls are still there for non citizens. Schengen went one stage further to create a common travel area for ALL travellers crossing the area.

Because common agreement could not be found , those countries went ahead and dismantled internal borders for ALL travellers ( travelling by approved means)
A secondary process was then to agree a common process for inbound travellers and the Schengen Visa system was created. Its implementation was introduced in stages and not immediately co-incident with the free movement initiative

So , it was created to remove internal borders and to facilitate the free movement of people. Its was not "primarily" set up to facilitate people entering the Area from outside.

And believe you me as someone outside the Schengen Area, It is not "trivial" for me to cross EU borders.

Note that Switzerland is an associate member of the Schengen Acquis, hence it is not part of the policy formation . It in effect "asked" to join and was granted permission to join the scheme by the EC Council. to my knowledge the Swiss implemented all parts of the Acquis, unlike Ireland and the UK.

The Schengen Acquis was not originally a EC treaty, but was subsumed with the agreement of the original members into the EC Decision making process, and is not determined by the EC Council of Ministers. ( theres a fancy name for that process but Ive forgotten)
dave

[chala]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The Swiss did not vote against Schengen. The free movement of people within the EU, EEA and Switzerland has nothing to do with Schengen.

Yes you are right but how do you control the free movement of people within Switzerland?
Just to quote Marc Lettau on the initiative. “The explosive element of the initiative is that it aims to prohibit international agreement that stand in the way of such immigration control”

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by svBeBe

Under the Schengen rules in effect prior to the rulings changed effective 18 October 2013 that Katiusha originally posted in this thread, it was perfectly legal to enter a Schengen country for a day to start a 'first entry' of a 180-day period, of which one was allowed to be within Schengen countries for a total of 90 days, each subsequent entry being labeled 're-entry.' At the end of that 180-day period, one was required to be outside Schengen countries at midnight of that day. The following day one could again check into a Schengen country to begin a second 180-day period, during which one would be allowed to be within Schengen countries for a total of 90 days. This allowed a back-to-back period of 89 days of the first 180-day period followed by 90 days of the second 180-day period. That was established with the Bot case in either 2005 or 2006.

The 6 people in this marina planned to follow what was the law up until 18 October 2013, as they had no knowledge of the rules being changed at that time (Thanks to Katiusha for informing us!). All 6 planned the back-to-back periods (as previously allowed) and cleared into a Schengen country for one day to start their first 180-day period. Marinas for next winter have already been paid; flights back to home countries have already been purchased for the required minimum 90 days out (which would have been during that second 180-day period). So, what do these people do now? Forfit the marina fees? Forfit the airline ticket costs? Go to unsafe Tunisia? I'm sure you have a simple answer. And, after all, it is their own fault for not finding out about the changes in Schengen rules even though they all researched this last summer.

Judy

I think it's a bit of a stretch to imply they were using the system as intended. It was legal but only because of technicality. If you read any of the offical websites, they all say its a rolling period where you can only be in the country for 90 of the past 180.

They were skirting the rules via a loophole and got caught in the noose as it closed. Asking the marina & airline nicely for a refund and hoping for them to be charitable is about the best they can ask for.

I was hoping to use it myself when I found out about it but in no way would I consider it to be within the intent of the law.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by chala

Yes you are right but how do you control the free movement of people within Switzerland?
Just to quote Marc Lettau on the initiative. “The explosive element of the initiative is that it aims to prohibit international agreement that stand in the way of such immigration control”

The swiss need to control movement inside their borders !!

The recent vote on caping immigration to Switzerland, does in fact contravene Schengen ( or more correctly the follow on policy may) , and various Eu treaties in regards to free movement and right to work for EU citizens. Should the EU reciprocate the effects will be far more telling on the Swiss.


Since nobody knows yet what exactly will be the implementation of the vote in terms of actual hard policy, it remains to be seen, I suspect it will be massaged.


dave

[goboatingnow]

They were skirting the rules via a loophole and got caught in the noose as it closed. Asking the marina & airline nicely for a refund and hoping for them to be charitable is about the best they can ask for.

I was hoping to use it myself when I found out about it but in no way would I consider it to be within the intent of the law

Well no thats not right, The Bot judgement by the ECJ, does clearly interpret the rules as LJHs friends are correct. It is the law ( or was the law) . Thats why the law was changed recently. It was not a loophole per say, more an unintended consequence that the french didn't like

[LJH]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

I think it's a bit of a stretch to imply they were using the system as intended. It was legal but only because of technicality. If you read any of the offical websites, they all say its a rolling period where you can only be in the country for 90 of the past 180.

They were skirting the rules via a loophole and got caught in the noose as it closed. Asking the marina & airline nicely for a refund and hoping for them to be charitable is about the best they can ask for.

I was hoping to use it myself when I found out about it but in no way would I consider it to be within the intent of the law.

It was not a loophole, it was a ruling by a Judge that set the precedent for how to apply the rules. It may not have been the initial intent of the rule but it was the rule none the less.

[Matt Johnson]

So, say that the countries are now checking on your 90 days. You're coming from the US to the Azores and plan to winter in Turkey. How can you abide by the rules? I'm trying to do the math, but can't see how it's possible to do this legally and see any countries in the Schengen area.

With an arrival of the boat in June, what route would be suggested? We are planning this jump right now, and with my OCPD, I don't do well with not following the rules. Please help a brother out!
Matt

Sent from my SM-T210R using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[LJH]

Originally Posted by funjohnson

So, say that the countries are now checking on your 90 days. You're coming from the US to the Azores and plan to winter in Turkey. How can you abide by the rules? I'm trying to do the math, but can't see how it's possible to do this legally and see any countries in the Schengen area.

With an arrival of the boat in June, what route would be suggested? We are planning this jump right now, and with my OCPD, I don't do well with not following the rules. Please help a brother out!
Matt

Matt,

Note they count days from the entry stamp to the exit stamp. When you leave the Azores make sure you get an exit stamp. Tell them you are going to Gibraltar or Morocco. You don't want to use up your Schengen time in international waters. Morocco is well worth a visit. If you are in Gibraltar (non-Schengen), you can walk into Spain and they will not check your passport or stamp it. Other non-Schengen stops along the way could be Tunisia and Croatia. Skip Greece until after you reach Turkey and your earlier Schengen days start to fall outside of 180 days.

[chala]

Acording to the Euler diagram @ Schengen Area - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And if correct Turkey is not part of the Schengen area nor is Great Britain or Monaco or Cyprus or Crimea and so on.

[monte]

Im not aware of any Australian special benifits, but NZ does have 180 days instead of 90 days as Dave said, a special rule predating Schengen. Croatia will be Schengen this year, but Montenegro and Albania aren't so they are potential stops along the way. Montenegro is beautiful but 2 or 3 weeks would be more than enough