NL embassy outsources the visa process to VFS
The Dutch Embassy in Bangkok is pleased to announce the opening of the Visa Application Center as of October 19, 2015. The Visa Application Center will be operated by VFS Global.
As of October 19, 2015, the processing of short-stay visa applications has been fully outsourced to the specialized agency VFS Global. This service is available to Thai citizens and persons with a residence permit for Thailand who wish to go to the Netherlands.
Currently, the visa appointment calendar is already managed by VFS Global. As of October 19, 2015, the entire process of applying for a Schengen visa will be outsourced to VFS Global.
To apply for a Schengen visa for a trip to the Netherlands, the first step is to make an appointment via VFS Global. On the day of application, applicants must appear in person at the Visa Application Center along with the required documents. It is therefore no longer necessary for applicants to come to the embassy to submit the application, but instead go to the Visa Application Centre. Fingerprints will also be taken by VFS Global on the day of application. VFS Global will add a fee to the fees in addition to the visa fee payable by the applicant on the day of application.
VFS Global's service is intended to provide a better service in the shortest possible time. VFS Global provides applicants with ongoing assistance and information in the process. The embassy will not answer questions during the application procedure. For more information and to make an appointment, see the VFS Global website www.vfsglobal.com/netherlands/thailand/
VFS Global is not involved in the decision-making process and cannot in any way influence the decision of the application or comment on the possible outcome of the application. On behalf of the Dutch embassy in Bangkok, only the Regional Service Office in Kuala Lumpur is authorized to assess the content of the file and to approve or reject the application.
Applicants are recommended to plan their travel well in advance to allow enough time to make an appointment and have the application processed and then send the passport to the applicant. Read the information on the VFS Global website (www.vfsglobal.com/netherlands/thailand/) where the guidelines provided will help you prepare your visa application in the best possible way and thus avoid any delays in processing.
Long-stay visa applicants, the so-called MVV applicants, can submit their application directly to the Dutch embassy in Bangkok.
Visa applicants who are allowed to use the Orange Carpet procedure can also submit their visa application directly to the Dutch embassy in Bangkok until further notice. Both categories of applicants can submit the application from Monday to Thursday between 14.00:15.00 pm and XNUMX:XNUMX pm.
VFS Visa Application Center
- Contact: http://www.vfsglobal.com/netherlands/thailand/
- Call Centre: +66 2 118 7003
- Email: [email protected]
- Address: The Trendy Office Building, 28th Floor, Sukhumbvit Soi 13, Klongtoey-Nua, Wattana, Bangkok 10110
Source: website Dutch embassy in Bangkok
A bad thing! The embassy sells this as an improvement to the process. That's just the question. In addition, everyone now has to pay 1000 baht more for applying for a Schengen visa. From October 19, the embassy is no longer responsible for taking the documents, but VFS. But what if pieces go missing? What if there are complaints about VFS? The fact that VFS and not the embassy staff now get their hands on all kinds of confidential documents does not give me a good feeling.
In addition, the citizen is being screwed again because in addition to the 2400 baht for the visa application, you now also have to pay an extra 1000 bht for VFS.
I understand that the embassy has no choice. They are forced to implement cuts imposed by The Hague.
If everything has to be cut back anyway, make sure that citizens can apply for a Schengen visa via the internet. Then we no longer have to leave the house and that would also save us costs.
You can commit much more fraud via the internet, so that is not exactly an option.
In addition, the Netherlands unfortunately has to cut costs and that means that if someone wants to go to the Netherlands, they also have to pay for it.
Also comments that everything becomes so expensive, etc. with passports, among other things, may be the case, but people themselves choose to live and work abroad and that it is not the case that we employ a very expensive device for that group to make it easy for them. That's the risk of leaving. And be honest, the Thai civil service is just as bureaucratic and also costs the citizen a lot of money, and that is for more countries in the world. So don't complain too much and just enjoy.
It took a while, but there you have someone who is jealous of emigrants. They can never complain about anything, because they left themselves, didn't they? And in the Netherlands, prices and taxes are also going up, so those 'fortune seekers' have to accept everything that the Dutch (r) government has in store for them. A common case of : nice puh ... I screwed, you too!
“In addition, the Netherlands unfortunately has to cut costs”? You can classify everything under that heading. Working effectively and thus preventing wasted money is different from scrapping specific embassy tasks. The embassy asked an amount of 2400 THB for this service, which I think is cost-effective. By adding a link in the process (VFS Global), there is unfortunately nothing to save for the consumer, but it becomes more expensive. Or would the embassy adjust the rates? It would make sense because after all, work will be cancelled! And all those Thai travelers, most of whom join their Dutch lovers, also provide the Dutch treasury with quite a bit of money. Money that would otherwise have been spent in Thailand, because if a visa was not obtained, the Dutch would of course travel as much as possible to his partner in Thailand. It is not clear from the article whether the embassy can be contacted if a visa is rejected.
I totally agree with (khun) Peter's response; this is a very bad thing!!
Wouldn't it have been better if Thai people for a short visit to Holland, say 30 days, no longer need a visa.
I can still remember that the former ambassador Mr. de Boer thought the same way at the time .
Countries such as Japan , Singapore and their nationals can travel to Holland without a visa .
Every day I am more and more annoyed by the completely crazy current government policy.
The Netherlands is flooded with asylum seekers.
Tensions are increasing daily among the Dutch population.
This will already cost our country a fortune financially and then the increasing dissatisfaction .
I read it and see it daily in the media.
Please stop with this pointless visa thing.
Do you want to stay longer in the Netherlands for 30 days, on the basis of an MVV or something, OK, another story.
But just as in my case going to Holland to visit the grave of my parents with both of us already encounters problems.
Not a financial problem though.
Rules, rules and more rules.
Get rid of that Schengen dragon.
So they no longer see me and my Thai spouse there in Holland.
USA is a lot more visa friendly and also has a great consulate in Chiangmai.
Jan Beute.
The Netherlands does not decide on its own which nationals do or do not require a visa. The Schengen member states jointly decide on this and little by little fewer countries are required to have a visa. For example, almost all of South America is now visa-exempt. Of course, many requirements still apply to Americans, Japanese, etc.: maximum stay of 90 days, financially solvent, etc. But without a visa sticker.
Together, the member states could therefore put Thailand on the visa-free list as a result of lobbying, trade agreements, etc.
According to the rules, the visa costs 60 euros (that could change, the EU keeps the option open to evaluate this empty amount and could decide to change the fee). A service fee may only apply to external service providers, so the embassy cannot levy it itself. Such service charges may not exceed half of the visa fee. Now VFS asks 1000 baht, which will certainly go up in the future, I suspect, but should never be more than 30 euros (provided the fees remain 60 euros).
But as stated elsewhere: VFS may only levy a service fee if (all) applicants also have direct access to the embassy. So if it becomes VAC Ctive later, you MAY opt for that (a 1000 baht service fee) but you don't have to. If the embassy no longer offers people direct access (iservice fee free of submitting an application to the embassy), VFS is not allowed to charge a service fee because VFS will then be pushed down your throat.
I therefore suspect that soon you will still be able to go directly to the embassy, although this will not be publicized, after all, those are the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' instructions to the embassy. The fact that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is actually at or beyond the limit of what the rules allow will be a concern for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as long as citizens accept that. Thank you The Hague.
I completely agree with Khun Peter, this is a cutback (that's because of The Hague, embassies haven't had it easy for a while). It is certainly not an improvement: as an applicant you will have to pay extra for the same service. You could easily go to the embassy and you knew that they had expertise. This is often lacking at VFS (just read on ThaiVisa, Foreign Partner Foundation or other forums where people have experience with Visa Application Centers (VAC) outsourced to VFS. The EU Commission also confirms that it is known that things are still too often wrong goes (from memory a report from 2013 following a public survey and further investigation) Officially the VFS staff is well trained and the service must be in order (Embassy remains responsible to supervise this), in practice it works VFS with standard lists and in more complex situations they go wrong. The staff does not know the Schengen Visa Code, so special situations cannot be handled correctly. All in all, as a customer you now get less service for more money… A bad thing.
I would prefer to see a VAC set up jointly by the embassies/EU so that skilled people employed by a (Schengen member state) embassy can accept the applications.
Direct access remains available under current regulations. As also stated in the Schengen dossier, VFS cannot be made compulsory. The current appointment calendar via VFS is therefore not mandatory, nor is the VAC. Source: the visa code and its interpretation in the manuals available on the EU Home Affairs webpage. Direct access to the embassy without the intervention of an external service provider must remain possible. In the visa code that has been worked on since 2014 - but which has not yet been finalized - this direct access principle will disappear.
About external service providers and Direct Access, the manual (which interprets the Visa Code) for embassy staff writes:
“4.3. The service fee
Legal basis: Visa Code, Article 17
As a fundamental principle, a service fee may be charged to an applicant using the facilities of
an external service provider only if the alternative is maintained of direct access to the
consulate incurring the payment of just the visa fee (see point 4.4).
This principle applies to all applicants, whatever the tasks being performed by the external
service provider, including those applicants benefiting from a visa fee waiver, such as family
members of EU and Swiss citizens or categories of persons benefiting from a reduced fee.
These include children from the age of 6 years and under 12 years and persons exempted from
the fee on the basis of a Visa Facilitation Agreement. Therefore, if one of these applicants
decides to use the facilities of an external service provider, the service fee shall be charged.
It is the responsibility of the Member State to ensure that the service fee is proportionate to
the costs incurred by the external service provider, that it duly reflects the services offered and
that it is adapted to local situation.
In this regard, the amount of the service fee has to be compared with the prices usually paid
for similar services in the same country/location. Elements related to local circumstances,
such as the cost of living or the accessibility of services are to be taken into account.
In the case of call centers, the local tariff should be charged for the waiting time before the
applicant is transferred to an operator. Once the applicant has been transferred to the operator,
a service fee shall be charged.
Harmonization of the service fee is to be addressed in the framework of Local Schengen
Cooperation. Within the same country/location there should not be any significant
discrepancies in the service fee charged to applicants by different external service providers or
by the same service provider working for different Member State consulates.
4.4. Instant access
Maintaining the possibility for visa applicants to lodge their applications directly at the
consulate instead of via an external service provider implies that there should be a genuine
choice between these two possibilities
Even if direct access does not have to be organized under identical or similar conditions to
those for access to the service provider, the conditions should not make direct access
impossible in practice. Even if it is acceptable to have a different waiting time for obtaining
an appointment in the case of direct access, the waiting time should not be so long that it
would render direct access impossible in practice.
The different options available for lodging a visa application should be presented plainly to
the public, including clear information both on the choice and the cost of the additional
services of the external service provider (see Part I, point 4.1).”
---
Source: “Handbook for the organization of visa sections and local Schengen cooperation” http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/pdf/policies/borders/docs/c_2010_3667_en.pdf op http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/visa-policy/index_en.htm
The EU Commission is aware that the Visa Code is not always properly implemented by embassies, see for example the conclusions of the public survey conducted in 2013:
http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8478-2014-ADD-1/en/pdf
The European Commission also confirmed this in an email to me (early 2015):
“It is true that according to the Visa Code, Article 17(5), visa applicants should be allowed to lodge their application at the consulate instead of at the external service provider who charges a service fee. But nothing prevents the consulate itself from using an appointment system. (…). According to Article 47 of the Visa Code, “Member States' central authorities and consulates shall provide the general public with all relevant information in relation to the application for a visa.” This obligation of course is also valid when visa applications are lodged at the premises of an external service provider and the Member States are responsible for ensuring that correct information is given.
The European Commission has recently carried out a study on the Member States' respect of the provisions of the Visa Code regarding information to the public. The result of the study was that the information is generally sub-optimal. So, the Commission is aware that some Member States fail to offer precise information in all locations.
For a recast of the Visa Code, the principle of “guarantee of direct access” has been abolished. The Commission proposes to delete this provision for several reasons: the ambiguous formulation (“maintain the possibility of … to lodge their application directly”) makes it difficult to enforce the provision; the main reason for using outsourcing is that Member States lack resources and reception facilities to receive applicants in high numbers or for security reasons and therefore the requirement to maintain access to the consulate is a disproportionate burden for Member States in the current economic situation.
Yours sincerely,
Jan DeCeuster
European Commission's visa issuance department”
Under the current rules, there should therefore still be direct access, but that will lapse in due course. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is making an advance on this by working with VFS as much as possible. Earlier this year, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs wrote to me by e-mail:
“The Dutch government has been using the external service provider VFS for some time now. The main reason for doing this is in the first place that this increases the ease of application for the customer: VFS works supply-oriented, and is able to add capacity faster than an embassy can when the number of applications increases. This prevents waiting times, etc. In addition, the processing of visa applications is faster: VFS has much more counter capacity than the average embassy. Last but not least, the use of VFS leads to considerable cost savings on the budget of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The above reasons mean that the instruction from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is that the use of VFS should be encouraged as much as possible and that the less desirable alternative – applying directly to the embassy – is not prominently displayed on the websites. Nevertheless, it is possible to apply directly to the embassy. If an applicant requests this - even if he does so at VFS - he will be able to make an appointment. ”
In short, people are already taking a preview of the new rules. As soon as they actually take effect, there is really no escaping it and you will have to pay extra for less service. As I wrote before, VFS personnel are fairly basic trained. They know the simple actions but this does not always go well because these personnel do not actually know the regulations, they just follow an instruction list. Sometimes an applicant receives incorrect instructions as a result, or the applicant does not realize that VFS is only a conduit. For example, there are various stories that applicants for Schengen/UK visas omit documents from the file on the “advice” (urging) of VFS staff or are incorrectly informed that their application is not complete. Or that people are tempted/pushed to use extra services with which VFS earns extra money. Such a company must of course rely on turnover: in the shortest possible time, in the cheapest way to get the most money out of the customer's pocket. A non-profit application desk, run by the EU member states, could work cheaper and better.
A publication was previously published about the new - not yet adopted - Visa Code:
https://www.thailandblog.nl/achtergrond/nieuwe-schengen-regels-mogelijk-niet-zo-flexibel-als-eerder-aangekondigd/
So much for my contribution to this topic. Based on all the info and links above, it should be clear that I deeply regret this state of affairs and we can thank The Hague for that…
They can't make it more fun, they can make it more expensive.
The Dutch government, and everything related to it, always comes up with something to shift their ignorance to someone else. And citizens pay more.
With this measure, too, they neatly shift the responsibility onto someone else and let the citizen bear the costs.
How glad I am that I no longer live and work in the Netherlands, and only have to renew my passport once every 1 years, for as long as that is still possible or affordable.
As soon as the possibility arises that I can get another passport, I will grab it with both hands, and hand in the Dutch one very soon. The Netherlands is no longer doing anything for us Dutch people, only chasing us at high costs.
What a sad display this is again.
Moderator: Please stay on topic.
Service provision is becoming an outdated concept. The text that Rob V. places is crystal clear. In practice, this is therefore not achieved. As a citizen you must be able to address directly the government that is appointed and paid by you. A Dutchman who would like a visa for his wife should therefore not be sent to a commercial party. If that party can do what the government cannot do, you should at least conclude that the government is incompetent with regard to a primary task and perhaps, but that is suggestive that the government is lazy and prefers to outsource unpleasant work.
Don't know….. I used to learn at school that 'joyful' brings about a feeling of happiness. Apparently that has changed.
It would be to the credit of the government/embassy if instead of 'official PR language' they simply say the truth: 'Sorry, we have to cut costs. We outsource the visa applications. You have to pay more." Something like that.
But maybe I'm completely wrong.
Haven't been able to read 'happy comments' yet...
They won't come either or maybe from the embassy staff themselves.
Another example of how the Dutch government believes it should treat people.
So now non Dutch citizens who want to visit the Netherlands, and because I think most visa applications are sponsored by Dutch people, once again Dutch people are being kicked out.
And outsourcing, it has been proven, is more expensive in the long run for the outsourcer, i.e. the Dutch, more expensive for the users of the outsourced “service” and usually a source of annoyance, duplication of work, long waiting times, errors and so on
Just ask the "satisfied customers" who already have to use this excellent service.
Promotional talk from commercial companies towards governments is no more than that.
The actual performance is almost never what was promised.
More expensive and worse.
Bahbah.
Bad thing, do not understand that it is necessary to outsource this and therefore must be made more expensive for the future spender in NL. And if it is not cost-effective and the Embassy saves costs by outsourcing it, why does the Embassy not charge that 1.000 bath extra itself and make it cost-effective?
Strange, soon the government of the Netherlands will also be outsourced from the point of view of cost savings!? Maybe not even such a crazy plan.
With the issuing of passports, people have also switched to a higher cost price, cost-covering, that is also possible with visas.
I am not in favor of leaving important personal documents to an external service provider, by the way, is it allowed to hand over your passport to VFS?
And then with a dual nationality you can also struggle with not being able to obtain a new passport, which means you get into the visa problem, thank you the Netherlands/Schengen/EU. You know what, we just ignore NL en masse. A very disappointed Dutchman in NL, well, Dutchman, we will stay at home.
Nico B
I have asked a number of acquaintances and friends how things are arranged at their embassies.
It's still the same as before. Are therefore EU residents. Germany, Belgium, France, Austria.
I have no more friends and acquaintances. Visiting the new Ambassador at a party won't help you either. This man himself made that decision in anticipation of what will happen next with the EU countries
happened. He does his job well. You can only wonder what a dot on the map does to a
Embassy grounds in Bangkok which is the same size as that of the USA. Our Belgian friends
live in an apartment building. It's going well there too. The only way to protest this is a letter
write to the National Ombudsman.
I would also like to say that the question is whether you are treated worse by the VFS than by a Thai behind a desk who does not know Dutch and does not yet speak 35% of the English language.
They do qualify for the Orange Carpet procedure. Those are the boyfriends or girlfriends.
They are not a flight risk. They will not work in massage parlors in the Netherlands either.
If I have to pay 1000 Bht more I don't mind. As long as I don't come away frustrated with my wife.
Cor van Kampen.
I would like to mention that the visa procedure for Belgians also means that you have to go through VFS Global for your appointment at the embassy. First pay to their bank account, the next day you can call for an appointment. One of the major shortfalls at VFS Global here is that they hold their account with a bank that only has offices in a dozen locations across Thailand. For example, my girlfriend has to make a bus trip of 2 hours there and 2 hours back just to pay to the bank. VFS Global is also not ashamed to adjust the price changes appropriately. So if you are dealing with a small price increase (last time 20 baht), then you can go on buses for a few hours to add 20 baht. And you have no choice, because otherwise you won't get your appointment anyway. And they charge a service fee of 275 baht for that…
What is about to happen is a typical case of delegating government tasks to a private company. That is essentially completely wrong.
“Our” VVD government is simply focused on shedding tasks as much as possible.
The Government does not care that the citizen will pay more as a result. Typical policy of a VVD government.
The underlying idea is that the Government wishes to keep as few tasks as possible on its plate. But that does not mean that citizens will pay less, but more. That should be clear to the public by now.
Leaving clear government tasks to private companies is a very bad thing.
Do I understand correctly that 'foreigners' are now going to determine whether or not I can bring my girlfriend to the Netherlands – the world is getting crazier by the day…
The next step will be that they will also outsource the passports.
Why don't they just abolish the Embassy, that will save money!
No, the assessment is done by Dutch people. Only the collection of the papers is done by VFS.
VFS Global was and remains no more than a conduit (and according to the current EU Schengen visa rules it is a purely optional intermediary!). Until now, they only managed the appointment calendar (although you could also schedule an appointment via the embassy). Now VFS will also receive the applicant at their office: the Trendy building ni Bangkok. They will take the documents, ask some questions etc. just like the embassy itself did before.
VFS does not have any authority, although they can of course advise that papers can be added or omitted for the application. In practice, someone will therefore be able to be persuaded by VFS personnel, even if they have no say or authority whatsoever with regard to the assessment and collection of documents. On forums (Thai Visa Forum, foreignpartner.nl, etc.) you can read that due to incompetent VFS personnel it sometimes happens that an incomplete file is submitted or that an applicant is advised that the application is not complete (while this was the case). This will mainly apply to more complex and rarer types of requests with which VFS staff itself has little or no experience. Then, of course, real knowledge of the visa rules breaks them. Or people are unnecessarily foisted extra services by VFS (making extra copies, making extra/new passport photos, etc.) on which VFS earns a nice extra.
But formally (in theory) the applicant will therefore visit the counter. There the employee (now VFS instead of embassy staff) takes the papers, asks a few questions. The staff member puts the papers + notes in an envelope and it goes to the back office. This back office is Dutch government personnel. The back office (RSO, Regional Support Office) has been in Kuala Lumpur since the end of 2014. The application is therefore forwarded to KL, where they assess the application, after which the entire package is returned. VFS therefore does not do the assessment and does not know whether a positive or negative decision has been taken by the back office in KL.
VFS then sends the envelope to the application. Can't pick up I know, that was possible until now: if you handed in the application at the embassy you could choose to have it sent by registered mail (that was the standard since VFS did the appointment calendar) but you could You can also choose to collect everything at the counter of the embassy. The latter was nice for those who live/work in Bangkok plus you saved a few baht and kept the risk of damage/loss/ID theft to a minimum.
Peter, thanks for the explanation - still find it all annoying who guarantees that my private data will not fall into the wrong hands?
As far as I can remember, the Ambassador said nothing about this when he introduced himself a few weeks ago in Bangkok at Grand Cafe Green Parrot…….
A very bad thing that plan to outsource the (pre)processing of visa applications to VFS.
In itself it is already wrong in principle to outsource such tasks to a commercial company; such tasks specifically belong to the embassy.
In addition, this change has a strong cost-increasing effect; I would rather pay those extra costs to the embassy (if that is necessary from a cost recovery point of view) than to a commercial company (which of course has to earn extra money, because otherwise such a company has no right to exist).
Who is responsible for errors made by VFS, or if items are lost in VFS?
Complaining on this medium is of little use, so my advice: complain en masse about this to the House of Representatives in The Hague (Permanent Committee on Foreign Affairs).
The strange thing is that the government uses the argument that cutbacks must be made and therefore a cheaper way for the government is sought and decided.
The interests of those concerned are completely lost sight of, the Aow does not follow the purchasing power development, pensions are not adjusted to a decrease in purchasing power or are even reduced, I think those involved who are now more expensive have to make extra cuts, their costs run on, the scales clearly turn to 1 side.
What do we see now from this reduction?
Nico B
A very good thing, because I often think when I am at the Dutch embassy that I have ended up at the Thai embassy, because the number of visitors consists mainly of Thai people.
So it will be a real Dutch embassy again with only Dutch people and you will be helped much faster..
So great….
correction Jasmine,
the word savings has been dropped. In principle, this means that EITHER there will be less staff at the embassy OR they will be allowed to work a little slower due to outsourcing. Since the latter does not directly indicate savings, it will therefore have to be done with fewer staff, which means that the service will not improve anyway. And if you now think that Thai staff will be cut? I suspect that you will find fewer Dutch people to help you further and that is - I'm afraid - not such a good thing.
So let's wait and see how this works out in practice. Perhaps there are people who are very happy that they will soon be able to contact VFS within 24 hours instead of a maximum waiting time of 2 weeks for submitting an application to the embassy. Maybe you can still get that 1000 baht out by wasting a lot of time at the VFS counter (you want to use your service from your service fee, don't you?). Let's see how clear the instructions become on the website of the embassy and VFS. Also with regard to the right to submit directly outside VFS.
Maybe someone would like to talk to the embassy after a naand about what the initial findings are and, if necessary, push article 17, last paragraph, under the nose of EU Regulation 810/2009 “Visa Code”. After all, it says:
“5. The Member States concerned shall retain for all applicants the
option to submit an application directly to them
consulate."
The interpretation from the official handbooks (not legally enforceable) of the Regulation (but legally enforceable) make it even more clear how the Ministry of Foreign Affairs/Embassy should act. Guess: in practice almost everyone except some observant Thailand Blog and SBP readers will go to VFS, embassy happy and that can serve the handful of people who want nothing to do with VFS.