1.6 Google stars still too many: ABH Stuttgart once again with collateral damage

If you search for the Stuttgart Immigration Office on Google, you'll see one thing above all: frustration. A mere 1.6 stars out of over 1,000 reviews – and even that seems almost flattering given the numerous testimonials. What has been going on there for years is not an unfortunate isolated incident, but rather an expression of a structural failure of an authority that seems to have long since lost all sense of responsibility, respect, and reliability under the rule of law. The authority's failure has already been documented in countless scandalous newspaper articles (see, for example, here , here , and here ). Nevertheless, there appear to be no changes at the authority.

The current case: A student , a confiscated passport and government ignorance

The recent case of Taiwanese student Jia Ling Chang is a prime example of how administrative failure has become the norm . She studied in Stuttgart, was accepted for a master's program in Freiburg, and found herself in dire straits due to nothing other than the inertia of the immigration authorities. Despite submitting her application for an extension on time, she received neither a response nor a fictitious certificate , the document that, according to Section 81, Paragraph 4 of the Residence Act, automatically keeps her residence permit valid until a decision is made. When the customs authorities arrived for a routine inspection, this proof was missing, and her passport was confiscated. An administrative failure with grave consequences: Without a passport, without a fictitious certificate, she had no opportunity to begin her studies in Freiburg. And all this because an authority is unable to properly process applications or at least respond to emergencies.

There can no longer be any talk of isolated cases

Anyone who thinks this is an exception should spend just a few minutes browsing the authority's Google reviews. There, people report months of unanswered emails , lost documents , denied entry , and sometimes degrading scenes at reception . The Stuttgart Immigration Office has already made headlines in the past, with reports of massive appointment bottlenecks, overwhelmed employees, and degrading waiting times in front of the building, in all weathers, without restrooms or seating. The state capital has repeatedly responded to these grievances with announcements—organizational "reforms," "digitalization," and "staff expansion." But the reality remains unchanged: people who depend on decisions made by this authority lose time, stress, opportunities, and, in the worst case, their residency status. VISAGUARD.Berlin has had numerous experiences with the ABH Stuttgart and can confirm the conditions there.

The structural problem: enforcement failure instead of digital utopia

The case shows that there is no lack of laws in Germany – but rather of enforcement.

According to Section 81 Paragraph 5 of the Residence Act, the immigration authorities are even obliged to issue a certificate of continued validity to be issued ex officio if an application is received on time. This is not a favor, but a legal obligation. Yet these very obligations are systematically ignored. While the federal government boasts about digital projects like the "Work & Stay" agency, the foundations of constitutional administrative practice are collapsing on the ground. What use is a central online platform if the responsible authorities don't even implement basic procedural rights?

The Stuttgart Immigration Office repeatedly and publicly emphasizes its commitment to addressing these grievances. At the Hohenheim Conference 2024 ( Hohenheim Days on Migration Law ) near Stuttgart, the management of the Stuttgart Immigration Office sympathetically emphasized that it was impossible to hire skilled workers. In front of hundreds of assembled migration experts, they pressed the heartstrings by saying that the shortage of skilled workers, not the authority, was to blame for the situation . The case of Jia Ling Chang refutes this once again: The structural deficits are not due to the legal skills of the staff, but rather to the unwillingness, ignorance, and audacity of the employees there. You don't have to have studied law to behave humanely.

Conclusion: Stuttgart symbolizes a national problem

The Stuttgart Immigration Office is not an outlier; it is a symptom. A symptom of an administration that, out of fear of responsibility and a lack of structure, has long since squandered the trust of the people it is supposed to protect. Those who want to stay, study, work, or start a family in Germany all too often encounter Kafkaesque processes, lost documents, and an administration that deters rather than administers. A 1.6-star rating on Google is therefore not a digital annoyance. It is a reflection of an authority that long ago needed reform—not cosmetically, but fundamentally.