While I feel sorry that she’s in this situation, if you are an immigrant (in any country) on a visa and no longer meet the conditions for your visa, then you can’t stay in the country. Every case will have a real person behind it whose life is turned upside down, but how many exceptions should an administration be expected to make? In the end they’d have an exception for everything which would make the whole point of visas redundant.
I totally agree about TV programmes. They should be required to make it clear that ‘John & Wendy have Irish passports’, ‘Sandy has Italian citizenship but has lived in the UK for 30 years’ etc. When we catch one of said programmes we usually ask the TV how the couple expect they can just move here … but never get an answer.
I feel sorry for this lady but as others have said, it does sound a bit as if she has drifted along and assumed that “everything will be OK” and not made sure she was going to earn enough to meet the rules (which are pretty generous in France TBH).
When I lived in Turks & Caicos a “business owner” work permit cost $8,000 a year, and the employee visa I was on was $2,500, before you earned a penny!
It didn’t matter that T&C was a British Overseas Territory and we were Brits - we still needed a work permit/visa, renewable annually. And you had to keep your nose clean and not upset anyone with influence, too.
I do agree about those “living in the sun” TV shows, they usually gloss over the practical stuff.
I reckon the participants have to sign a waiver before going ahead not to sue the makers of the programme should things turn pear shaped when they buy a property. They did start making a series of “what happened after (some years later)” but no new ones for several years since those were broadcast. Most buy for holiday use which is not quite so arduous getting visas etc but some buy to move completely and seem oblivious to what hoops they will have to go through to enable them to stay longer than a holiday home owner.
It was the later ones close to the Brexit time that got caught out, on that review program there was one couple alternating back and forth to the point they barely saw one another just to keep their project going. Very unfortunate timing and no one had a crystal ball.
…also there is no obligation for people taking part to actaully buy one of the suggested properties.
It’s an entertainment show at the end of the day - I would guess that despite all the “offers accepted” and champagne drinking they feature, quite a few of those couples probably don’t go ahead with a purchase. But who knows?
Although the couple in question seem far from the champagne drinking lifestyle, the photos of where they live suggest that they are comfortable. New equipment, floors, carpentry, solar panels (grant aided?) etc. Money has been spent there. And the maire likes them because “elle fait travailler des artisans”. So perhaps they thought that a small side hustle would be fine and never planned more.
We met a couple who were on one of those shows and found out that the show is actually backwards. In reality the couple has already bought a house before the filming. The TV show then finds a few other properties for them to look at, which obviously can’t be as appealing as their actual choice. The couple visits their own choice and the two ringers. They always find something to object to–paint colors or the current owner’s collection of ceramic fish. The couple appears to dither over the big decision. The last scene is the owners all moved into their new home. I think the crew spends two days filming.
PITS takes ~5 days to film, the presenter and house hunters have to wear the same clothes throughout the “property search” to make it look like it’s all done in one day.
Breuer had four distinct architectural styles - one was controversial, the others less so, whereas his furniture is still very highly regarded and many pieces have been in production since before WWII.
an ex work colleague was on a Spanish hunt. I noticed him not long ago, I phoned him for a chat, Still looking.