eu-com-schengen-coop

more useful than the previous ones still in use, also in order to identify trends locally and predict
future ones.
‣ cases of fraud
Given the high incidence of false, falsified and forged documents and the linked high risk of illegal
migration from India, MS increasingly shared information on specific fraud cases identified in their
visa process, both for Schengen and national visas applications. A specific system of alert frauds, in
the form of a standardized format for visa alerts/enquiry was set up. The exchange of information in
this field became enhanced and operational. In the second half of the reporting period, for instance,
over 250 operational mails were exchanged. This led to the adoption of a streamlined electronic
information exchange, according to which when asked cross-checks on questionable applications,
relevant MS would cooperate and reply promptly only on cases known to them. MS considered this
as a remarkable improvement in their daily working methods from the previous reporting period.
‣ travel medical insurance (TMI) (i.e. insurance companies offering adequate TMI)
As a follow up to the activity incepted in 2012-13, the relevant SG confirmed that all local
insurance companies offered inadequate TMI, after having repeatedly reached out to the Indian
private sector and the relevant regulatory body. See section 3.4, topic (1) for further details on the
practical result achieved.
‣ Other issues
The LSC information exchange increased considerably if compared to 2012-13. It included several
substantial topics of MS immediate interest, to streamline which a system of 'tours de tables' (i.e.
synoptic tables) was implemented, whenever a MS suggested a specific point for discussion to the
plenary. For some of the topics discussed MS proposed that a specific SG was set up to assess
common concerns. This led to specific initiatives, as detailed infra, section 3.4.
In addition to the exchanges detailed in the sections above, the Plenary took note or discussed and
assessed the following topics: I) exhaustive list of Indian (and Bhutanese) travel documents,
including a debriefing on a specific outreach to Indian Authorities; II) diplomatic and service
passport holder visa application processing; III) external service providers and their network
coverage; IV) Erasmus Mundus visa applications from neighbouring countries; V) multiple entry
visas local practice; VI) criteria for the implementation of optional visa fee exemptions (on which,
as mentioned, MS agreed to disagree), as well as update of information sharing on visa and service
fees in local currency; VII) difficulties encountered with the new rules for calculating short stays
and duration of ninety days in any six month period; VII) local implications of the study on
economic impact of short stay visa facilitation on the tourism industry and the overall economies of
the EU MS part of the Schengen area; VIII) "Nordic" list of accredited travel agents; IX) Indian
"electronic travel authorisations"; X) "non official" supporting documents checking/ tacking; XI)
applicants' "accompanying staff" (maid, nurses, nannies, etc.); XII) local authorities request for
bank statement and flight booking as mandatory supporting documents for EU visa applicants;
XIII) TMI for service passport holders; XIV) UK visa bonds, further to a specific outreach made by
the EUD; XV) several monitoring and follow up, like, for instance on the visa application form
hindi translation, etc.
3.4 Any other initiative taken in LSC
Given the complexities of the harmonisation challenge in India, and its inherent political
sensitiveness, this "collective task" was carried out, as mentioned, through several temporary LSC
sub-groups (SG) each dedicated to a specific operational issue related to the harmonised application
12893/14 PR/lm 94
DG D 1 A
EN