Court complaints

ONE PLUS reviews administrative proceedings in which an authority has failed to take required action or has handled a foreign national’s case for an excessive period. We check whether a formal reminder has been used and whether the record supports a complaint to the Voivodeship Administrative Court (WSA) for inactivity or undue delay.

Our assessment covers the timeline, UPO confirmations, office letters, the applicant’s replies, delivery evidence, MOS records and current documents supporting the residence ground. If court action is justified, we prepare the complaint and evidence and explain filing; otherwise, we recommend a more suitable administrative step.

Before filing, the client understands the procedural purpose, costs and risks. The court reviews the authority’s conduct but does not issue a residence card or decide the merits, so we do not promise a hearing date or a positive immigration outcome.

Long waiting is not always unlawful silence

A temporary residence card case that runs for many months does not automatically mean the office broke the law. In 2026 voivodeship offices remain overloaded. MOS 2.0 made filing easier, not staffing. The legal question starts when the file looks frozen: no required steps, no answers, no next stage even though the party already filed what was asked.

ONE PLUS has operated officially since 2018, and supports migration and administrative proceedings. A court does not issue a residence card and does not replace the office. WSA, the voivodeship administrative court, reviews whether the authority handled the procedure lawfully. We work from Wrocław and support clients across Poland.

This page is general guidance. Grounds, deadlines and evidence depend on the filing date, case stage and what each side did. Final decisions belong to the office and the court. We prepare the procedural pack to reduce formal risk. We do not promise a hearing date or a guaranteed outcome.

What foreigners usually take to WSA

Inactivity

Inactivity means the authority fails for a long time to take steps it is required to take. Feeling that the wait is “too long” is not enough. Courts look at the timeline: when the application was filed, which requests arrived, whether you replied, whether fingerprints were taken, and what the office actually did.

Undue delay

Undue delay covers cases that are formally pending but clearly exceed a reasonable timeframe. The office may send letters or collect material, yet the file never returns to a real merits track. Again, evidence matters more than emotion.

Refusals and other decisions

A refusal on a residence card, employer change, citizenship or another basis follows a different logic. Appeal deadlines, the refusal reasoning and the evidence you can still strengthen all matter. Challenging silence and challenging a refusal are different tools. Choosing the wrong subject costs months.

Official guidance for foreigners is published on gov.pl/udsc. Compare it with the actual procedural stage.

When court makes sense, and when another step comes first

Situations clients bring most often

• a residence case pending for more than a year with no clear progress;
• long silence after MOS 2.0 filing even though formal stages look closed;
• no reply to status questions;
• months of stillness after fingerprints;
• a refusal that needs a deadline and appeal-route review;
• a file that looks frozen despite timely party replies and documents.

Not every long wait equals a strong complaint. Sometimes the real problem is an unanswered document request, outdated employer papers or an error in the application. Close those gaps before litigation.

Acceleration before litigation

A softer administrative step often comes first: controlled correspondence and formal pressure to move the case. We explain that route on the TRC acceleration page. A WSA complaint usually follows when softer tools fail or when inactivity and undue delay are already clear.

What a complaint can change in practice

After filing, the office must explain the case to the court. In practice this often reactivates the file: inspector contact, a new request, or the next procedural step. Sometimes the path to a decision shortens.

A complaint still does not turn an unsupported residence basis into a strong one. If the file lacks income, insurance, a coherent stay logic or a reply to an earlier request, reactivation may expose those gaps faster. That is why ONE PLUS runs a risk review before drafting.

We do not promise a decision date and do not guarantee a positive outcome on a residence card, permanent stay, citizenship or any other matter. The office decides the substance. The court reviews procedural legality.

What we check before filing

Timeline and evidence

WSA cares about dates and documents:

• filing proof / UPO;
• office requests and dated party replies;
• fingerprints and stage confirmations;
• correspondence, posting proofs, decisions, refusals;
• which steps the authority already took and which are missing.

Without that base, a complaint is only a declaration. With it, you can show where inactivity or undue delay begins.

Matching the tool to the stage

Sometimes a reply or a document update is enough. Sometimes acceleration at the administrative stage is the better first move. Sometimes grounds for an inactivity complaint already exist. Sometimes the dispute is a refusal and the logic is different. The tool follows the case stage, not someone else’s another person’s experience.

Office refusals need a separate track

A refusal is not fixed with the same complaint used for office silence. First record the delivery date and the appeal deadline. Then review the reasoning and what can still be strengthened on the merits.

If the refusal is business-related, you may also need to repair a business plan, company papers or a JDG. If identity or address data is broken, sort PESEL first. A court text without fixing the substance rarely solves the root problem.

How ONE PLUS handles court complaints

We do not file a template “just in case”. Work starts with diagnostics.

Support usually includes:

• reviewing case stage and office correspondence;
• checking whether an acceleration step should come first;
• preparing a complaint for inactivity or undue delay;
• preparing a challenge to a refusal when grounds and deadlines allow;
• building the evidence pack: dates, UPO, letters, proofs;
• communication support after filing;
• a clear risk discussion if reactivation may expose document gaps.

The ONE PLUS team works daily with foreigner cases and office practice. The same waiting time in Wrocław, Warsaw or Gdańsk can mean a different procedural picture.

Mistakes that weaken otherwise valid complaints

Filing too early

If the office is waiting for a party or third-party reply, the court may see no inactivity. Close file gaps first.

Filing without evidence

No timeline, no posting proofs, no copies of requests. Only the emotion of waiting remains, and that is not enough.

Fear of “angering” the inspector

A WSA complaint is lawful procedural control, not a personal fight. Still, if documents are incomplete, reactivation can trigger new requests. Risk analysis is mandatory.

Confusing acceleration with litigation

Administrative acceleration and a court complaint solve different problems. Sometimes the first step is enough. Sometimes the case will not move without court. Strategy comes after diagnostics.

Ignoring official sources

Cross-check general rules with gov.pl/udsc and local office practice. Chat advice ages faster than people expect.

If your office case has long been stuck or a refusal needs a procedural review, contact ONE PLUS. We will examine the timeline, risks and a clear next-step plan.