Got pre-approvals but could not get appointment with sef…
My application got pre-approved but because of covid situation I missed the chance booking the appointment previously in early 2022 when sef notified my lawyer we coukd make appointment…now I was told that I need to wait for sef to open up slots for us to make appointments again…it has been over half a year now…what could I do to speed things up?
Everyone with pre approval is waiting, read the thread about biometrics appointments
Your situation is normal. You will get used to it. I had to wait 1.5 years to complete Biometric. Just be ready for this uphill battle. Best way is not giving a damn about it and focus yourself on other things. I know it is hard. It is easy talking like this, but doing is not easy…You will get it eventually, just be strong and do not give up.
Cant agree more 
Maybe depends on if you invested in a fund or not. If your fund has 7 years until expiration and you don’t start your legal residency until 2 years in, it’s not clear what happens to you when the fund winds down and you’re not at permanent residence or citizenship yet. There’s been some hope the government will be accomodating given the delay is on their part, but it’s very unclear and no precedent seems to have been set either way. Those folks may not have the luxury of just being patient.
The more I read the more it seems like those fixed-duration funds are just bad investments overall
Certainly it will present some challenges. However there is also no real reason I can see why the shareholders cannot vote to extend the term of the fund. I just glanced through three MRs of three funds, and all stated that they had a timeframe that could be extended by a vote of the shareholders. Even if there isn’t explicit wording, I don’t see a reason that the shareholders can’t vote it to happen, just as the shareholders could choose to vote to toss the manager if they really so felt.
The bigger issue would be that with at least some of the funds, they are predicated on a certain investment prospect that operates on a certain timeline, and the plan was baked in already - e.g. if the plan is to invest in building an office building, it’s only going to take so long to build the office building and get it rented out or sold off… and then what? The fund might end up sitting around on a pile of cash for a few years just to meet the GV requirements (with you paying 2%/yr for the privilege). Or the manager can propose alternative investments using a timeframe that is relevant to the greater body of investors - buy some 2-3yr duration bonds, or do a short flip on another property, or any number of other things. It can all be worked out, and need not necessarily be terrible, just that your investment may take a somewhat different path than intended.
These were questions I asked up front with my funds so I’m not concerned about it at all. YMMV.
But if you’re in the minority that wants to extend? Or the minority that needs your money out?
Just a bad way to do things imo but we’re wandering off topic
I understand that the wait is very frustrating. But it is worth bearing in mind that post COVID the waiting time for a US visa is between 6 and 12 months, and for a UK visa is three months. That is for simple tourist visas. So the whole world is going through this problem, not just Portugal. Just something we all have to live with - like interminable waits at airports and lost luggage on every flight…
But I do understand the problem if you are in a fixed period 7 year fund. A lot of funds went for 10 year time periods because they recognized this potential problem and they should be fine and have no problem.
But investors in shorter term funds do have a real problem.If a majority (normally 2/3) vote to extend the period this would be allowed even if not formally worded in the MR. BUT it will need CMVM approval, so is not a given, particularly if the fund will then sit on cash. It is also not a given that the fund manager will support this (even if expressly allowed for in the MR). Extending the term and sitting on cash means a reduced fund performance which reflects badly on the fund manager and reduces and delays their performance fee. And of course it needs a majority (or normally super majority) to vote in favor, and those that already have their GV’s will want to get their cash out rather than sit in cash and incur fees so the vote may not be favorable.
As I say above though, should not be a problem with funds with duration’s greater than 8 years.