Ticked the wrong box in DLR Renewal - Refused & dismissed

[apache1]

Hi,
Last year I send my DLR renewal application to the home office, but as I filled it myself I ticked in the wrong box [ domestic worker ] while in fact I am running my own business. So the HO refused my application and asked me to leave the country.

I appealed and explained to them in the appeal with all supporting documents. Yesterday I went to the hearing on my own. The HO representative didn't say a word and when the judge walked in and sat down, she said i clearly made a mistake in the application, so the case is dismissed.

Right now I have no idea what to do; what to expect or how to re-appeal again



I entered the UK in 1997 on student visas; overstayed for 15 years; got DLR in 2012; and since then I started a business.

Any help on what this decision entails, is clearly appreciated

[naveediiqbal]

Hi,
Last year I send my DLR renewal application to the home office, but as I filled it myself I ticked in the wrong box [ domestic worker ] while in fact I am running my own business. So the HO refused my application and asked me to leave the country.

I appealed and explained to them in the appeal with all supporting documents. Yesterday I went to the hearing on my own. The HO representative didn't say a word and when the judge walked in and sat down, she said i clearly made a mistake in the application, so the case is dismissed.

Right now I have no idea what to do; what to expect or how to re-appeal again



I entered the UK in 1997 on student visas; overstayed for 15 years; got DLR in 2012; and since then I started a business.

Any help on what this decision entails, is clearly appreciated

.

For the time being the only you could do is wait for the judgement and pray for a good luck. Please keep posted later once you receive the verdict.

[apache1]

They have sent me an IAFT -4 form to apply to first-tier tribunal for permission to appeal to the upper tibunal.

Seems like is not getting any easier from now on.

[naveediiqbal]

They have sent me an IAFT -4 form to apply to first-tier tribunal for permission to appeal to the upper tibunal.

Seems like is not getting any easier from now on.

Can you send a new application

[apache1]

Thanks Naveed.

Apparently I cannot as some solicitors said I should use different application and forget the long, losing and costly game of appeals.

Just a wrong tick on a checkbox changes whole somebody's life. They already recognized in court it's a case of mistake of ticking the wrong category.

This is the UK where you hear about Human Rights a lot!

[naveediiqbal]

Thanks Naveed.

Apparently I cannot as some solicitors said I should use different application and forget the long, losing and costly game of appeals.

Just a wrong tick on a checkbox changes whole somebody's life. They already recognized in court it's a case of mistake of ticking the wrong category.

This is the UK where you hear about Human Rights a lot!

What do you mean by different application. If this means another category?

[naveediiqbal]

Thanks Naveed.

Apparently I cannot as some solicitors said I should use different application and forget the long, losing and costly game of appeals.

Just a wrong tick on a checkbox changes whole somebody's life. They already recognized in court it's a case of mistake of ticking the wrong category.

This is the UK where you hear about Human Rights a lot!

Sorry mate just a silly and small error costing you a lot. I wish you would find a solution.

[apache1]

It's the FLR (FP) application

[Obie]

They have sent me an IAFT -4 form to apply to first-tier tribunal for permission to appeal to the upper tibunal.

Seems like is not getting any easier from now on.

I believe you should challenge the decision.

Otherwise your case may be treated under the new rules which Is extremely hard, and will take you from a 6 year route to ILR to 10 years route.

The duty of the judge is to determine whether you meet the requirement of the rules or policy on the day of Hearing and not if you qualify made a mistake.

[apache1]

Thank you Obi

I was actually going to do that but the two solicitors i met so far told me it's a dead end. Actually I would like to do that if I find the right solicitor, but most of them they tend to make it sound as a complicated case and then quote silly prices just for filling an application on the day

[Obie]

Thank you Obi

I was actually going to do that but the two solicitors i met so far told me it's a dead end. Actually I would like to do that if I find the right solicitor, but most of them they tend to make it sound as a complicated case and then quote silly prices just for filling an application on the day

Why would it be a dead end. At least it is worth a fight.

If you continue to meet the requirement for continued DLR, then a mistake in filling the form, should not result in a diisdal of you claim, provided you continue to qualify under the policy .

[naveediiqbal]

Thank you Obi

I was actually going to do that but the two solicitors i met so far told me it's a dead end. Actually I would like to do that if I find the right solicitor, but most of them they tend to make it sound as a complicated case and then quote silly prices just for filling an application on the day

Why would it be a dead end. At least it is worth a fight.

If you continue to meet the requirement for continued DLR, then a mistake in filling the form, should not result in a diisdal of you claim, provided you continue to qualify under the policy .

Hi Obie, Just a confusing point for me and I think you may clarify this.

in appeal what are we fighting (eligibility to get a visa or the application), If we made a mistake but still fulfilled all requirements and case worker refused on the basis of that mistake then actually it was correctly refused. but if mistake was ignored then it should be accepted.

So if mistakes in applications could be ignored by the judge? need some valuable thoughts on this.

[apache1]

I've decided to go for appeal and fight my corner for as long as it will take.

This is not the first time The HO robbed me of a fair decision. When I applied for ILR in 2011, there was a short gap when I didn't have correspondence to prove that I was in the UK and only for that reason, they gave me a DLR instead. Then I should I have appealed the decision but my solicitor who was a freshy at that time told me I was lucky I got a DLR, so I let it go.

Even now when I received the refusal from the HO, there were many errors proving that whoever processed my case didn't give enough time to go through all the application but the judge overlooked that.

[Obie]

Good for you.

It seem you will have extreme difficulty qualifying under the current rules if you choose to apply.

[Obie]

Please note that you have 14 days to file permission to appeal. It is important that you file it promptly.

[apache1]

Thanks Obie,
What's the weight of having a representative or solicitor in the hearing, by the way.

[Obie]

Very high, if you don't know what you are doing.

Going without a rep has not taken you very far so far.

However you first need to seek permission.

[apache1]

Just consulted another solicitor and advised the same thing: he stated that there has to be an "Error of Law" pointed out in the decision made by the judge. In the reason of decision i received from the judge she formulated the decision based on the error i made [ ticking the wrong box ] as if it's not and error stating

"it's evident that he has indeed applied to further leave to remain as domestic worker..."

It seems to me that the error I made will be overlooked even by the upper tribunal

[Obie]

Well good luck. Hope he does a better good than your previous job, as you will have immense difficulty if you blew the appeal process.

[naveediiqbal]

Just consulted another solicitor and advised the same thing: he stated that there has to be an "Error of Law" pointed out in the decision made by the judge. In the reason of decision i received from the judge she formulated the decision based on the error i made [ ticking the wrong box ] as if it's not and error stating

"it's evident that he has indeed applied to further leave to remain as domestic worker..."

It seems to me that the error I made will be overlooked even by the upper tribunal

Hi apache1,

one quick question Did you send any cover letter with you initial application which said that you are applying DLR? if that was included in the respondent bundle?

[apache1]

I send a cover letter addressed to the home secretary summarizing all what in the application but I haven't actually said I was applying for a DLR. In the response I had. It said " on ... the appellant completed a FLR(0) application form for applying to further leave to remain as domestic worker in a private... the application was refused on ... on the basis that the appellant had not entered the UK with entry clearance as a domestic worker...therefore

What's maddening me right now, is the judge recognized that I made a mistake but still they carried on and build the whole case on that error!

I wouldn't be surprised if the office did this but I expected, at least, a judge to be fair.

[naveediiqbal]

I send a cover letter addressed to the home secretary summarizing all what in the application but I haven't actually said I was applying for a DLR. In the response I had. It said " on ... the appellant completed a FLR(0) application form for applying to further leave to remain as domestic worker in a private... the application was refused on ... on the basis that the appellant had not entered the UK with entry clearance as a domestic worker...therefore

What's maddening me right now, is the judge recognized that I made a mistake but still they carried on and build the whole case on that error!

I wouldn't be surprised if the office did this but I expected, at least, a judge to be fair.

The reason I asked the question was, if you have any thing in your initial application pack which could prove that you applied for some thing different from that domestic worker category and then we could use this to prove that ticking the wrong box was indeed a mistake and judge has made an error to point out this mistake while it was evident. This might be a way to fight in UT.

Further, I asked a simple question to Obie that if we are fighting against refusal of application then its difficult to fight without having some evidence which could prove that it was a mistake and not an intention. However, there HO did not question your eligibility (if there would be no such mistake) for DLR

The judge's statement
"it's evident that he has indeed applied to further leave to remain as domestic worker..."
is a fact and could be argued if we have some evidence saying otherwise and included with original application.

These are my thoughts to prepare you for UT.

I wish you Good luck.

Regards,

[Obie]

Well in law the question you are seeking to ask me has no relevance.

The judge is required to ascertain if a refusal is consistent with the rules or policy , and if a person could have qualified under a provision of the rules.

That is what section 85 appear to require , not withstanding what was inadvertently written on a form or not.

[naveediiqbal]

Well in law the question you are seeking to ask me has no relevance.

The judge is required to ascertain if a refusal is consistent with the rules or policy , and if a person could have qualified under a provision of the rules.

That is what section 85 appear to require , not withstanding what was inadvertently written on a form or not.

Hi Obie, Thank you from your response but the question is how we could prove that it was a mistake (mistake only on application form). if there was no other evidence with case worker then how would they figure out on their own? If there are, then these should already been considered by the judge.

[Obie]

That is a question of discharging of burden of proof on a balance of probability . I am unable to answer that, as it is a fact sensitive case , confine to the particular facts of a given case, and the relevance to determination of the case.

Some judges mix up 85 (5A) which is confined to PBS cases to other cases.