|
Post by francis on Mar 16, 2009 18:45:26 GMT 1
Not good news today, i was thinking i started a new appeal, which would keep me here for a while, this is not the case after your first appeal has gone, you must leave the country, this is what i have been told today i must leave, they say i can go out one day, and come back on a holiday visa for three month and start all over again, this is after 5 years, paying taxes bookkeeper etc, is it time to sell up?, anyone that has stayed here on QT is in the same boat, sorry for the bad news my friends.
|
|
|
Post by francis on Mar 16, 2009 18:54:53 GMT 1
anyone no about article 8 ECHR, strasbourg?, can i do anything with this?
|
|
|
Post by Ribaric on Mar 16, 2009 19:34:14 GMT 1
Just when I was starting to get a little upbeat I'm assuming Francis that your now expired visa was obtained via the business/employment route, yes?
|
|
|
Post by Ribaric on Mar 16, 2009 19:38:55 GMT 1
I have been overwhelmed with emails. Please folks, I know nothing more than I have posted here. Given that I'm about to change my visa for a "family reunion" type then I'm sure I'll not be the first in a position to know the answers to the private ownership issues. I am still interested in them because it is how I would prefer to obtain my visa but, until the related NN has been issued (and understood) nobody can give clear answers.
|
|
|
Post by francis on Mar 16, 2009 20:25:05 GMT 1
Yes Rib, i have a d.o.o, and to much land, i was OK with setting on it, and enjoying the life, working with planing office, and ready to invest, on the build, someday, but life to short, i really do not no what to do,, i will talk to embassy tomorrow, but not a lot good as we no, ?? do i leave or do i stay,
|
|
|
Post by polako on Mar 16, 2009 22:06:51 GMT 1
francis, I have not been following your posts that closely, but which country are you from? The rules relating to self-employed nationals from the EU would have changed in Feb 2009 so that they can not discriminate between the way that you set yourself up in business and the way that a Cro national sets himself up in business. That arguably means that any business visa requirements would be discriminatory under the SAA.
I put up various links to the SAA on the ministry of justice thread last year. That is a possible argument. As is the bilateral agreement between Cro and the Uk if you were a UK national. Everyone agrees that in relation to the rental laws and UK nationals, Cro's actions are illegal, but no higher official wants to do anything about it.
HO HUM............................
|
|
|
Post by francis on Mar 16, 2009 22:59:21 GMT 1
Rib i am from N ireland, tho i have a irish passport, not sure what way that would work, but will past on to upper level tomorrow thanks.
|
|
|
Post by hansel on Mar 19, 2009 11:34:13 GMT 1
The pdf file at the bottom of this link are the amendments to the Alians Act. www.sabor.hr/Default.aspx?art=26107Sorry don't have time to go to the details of it but the most relevant to us seem to be Clanak 41 about business permit and Clanak 68 about temporary stay for private property owners.
|
|
|
Post by Ribaric on Mar 19, 2009 13:29:39 GMT 1
Article 68 seems to say.....
Foreigners who enter may be granted.....
.....entry (to RH) on the basis of Article 37 Paragraph 1 - 4th point Law on Foreigners (Official Gazette, No. 109/2003) ....
.....temporary stay on the basis of Article 51 Paragraph 2 Law on Foreigners (National Gazette, No. 79/2007) re-approved, and are the owners of property in the Republic of Croatia. Such a temporary residence permit can be granted to 1 year.
It's probably safe to say the private owners can now get 12 month residency visas. Not just because this text seems to say that but mostly because, only bloody yesterday, I got another type of more troublesome and more expensive visa to stay! I've learned that I'll always a victim of Murphy's law.
It's like waiting ages for a bus ..........
|
|
|
Post by polako on Mar 19, 2009 16:54:20 GMT 1
Article 68 seems to say..... Foreigners who enter may be granted.....
.....entry (to RH) on the basis of Article 37 Paragraph 1 - 4th point Law on Foreigners (Official Gazette, No. 109/2003) ....
.....temporary stay on the basis of Article 51 Paragraph 2 Law on Foreigners (National Gazette, No. 79/2007) re-approved, and are the owners of property in the Republic of Croatia. Such a temporary residence permit can be granted to 1 year.It's probably safe to say the private owners can now get 12 month residency visas. Not just because this text seems to say that but mostly because, only bloody yesterday, I got another type of more troublesome and more expensive visa to stay! I've learned that I'll always a victim of Murphy's law. It's like waiting ages for a bus .......... The word "reapproved" in relation to temporary stay on the basis of ownership of propery is slightly ambiguous. Are they saying that you had to have temporary stay in the first place on the basis of ownership of property in order to get it reapproved and be allowed to stay for 12 months? Just checking........
|
|
|
Post by Ribaric on Mar 19, 2009 18:10:47 GMT 1
I don't know. Erindoors says "yes" but thinks there is another section somewhere which says any EU citizen can get such a visa if they buy property here ... which means "no".
There is a section (not yet translated) which seems to state that you must prove you will not be a drain on HR's state. This is different wording than the old law so it remains to be cleared up as to how one proves this. There's also the clarification of what constitutes a "qualifying property". MUP has promised to publish a clarication document "soon".
It's pretty clear that non-EU citizens are out of luck completely.
|
|
|
Post by mrhappy on Mar 19, 2009 19:05:19 GMT 1
It's pretty clear that non-EU citizens are out of luck completely. That's a bugger for Croatians
|
|
|
Post by polako on Mar 19, 2009 21:44:05 GMT 1
I don't know. Erindoors says "yes" but thinks there is another section somewhere which says any EU citizen can get such a visa if they buy property here ... which means "no". There is a section (not yet translated) which seems to state that you must prove you will not be a drain on HR's state. This is different wording than the old law so it remains to be cleared up as to how one proves this. There's also the clarification of what constitutes a "qualifying property". MUP has promised to publish a clarication document "soon". It's pretty clear that non-EU citizens are out of luck completely. Thanks Rib and thanks especially to your good lady aka Erin Doors Hopefully it will not be so restrictive re EU nationals who have not yet got residency on account of property.
|
|
|
Post by Madgolfer on Mar 20, 2009 0:26:35 GMT 1
Pol wrote;
"Hopefully it will not be so restrictive re EU nationals who have not yet got residency on account of property."
The amendments were very specific in this respect and (subject to getting a final judgement on the wording) it also INCLUDED any EU citizen buying property in the future and before Cro joins the EU.
I am trying to get this all clarified asap.....its not easy!
|
|
alby3
Junior Member
Posts: 26
|
Post by alby3 on Mar 20, 2009 3:05:25 GMT 1
MG,
Is there any mention regarding Non-EU citizens?
|
|