ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Stay

Only for queries regarding Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). Please use the EU Settlement Scheme forum for queries about settled status under Appendix EU

Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15156
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Obie » Sat Jan 17, 2015 11:48 am

He will most likely receive a notice of invalidity.

He can only apply after Section 3C elapses.

The barrister did not do his work properly, unfortunately.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:15 am

hi all,

i am in the similar situation.
i applied for tier1 entrepreneur in may 2012, got refused in feb 2013. appealed was heard in jun 2013 and was allowed upto
limited extent for HO to reconsider it under old rules(before july 2012 rules), home office reconsidered it and refused again
in jan 2014, appeal heard FTT in july 2014, got refused and then asked for permission from FT to appeal to UT, refused again
and then sought permission from UT to appeal to UT.... AGAIN they refused on 15th Jan 2015. what is the best option for me to be eligible for long residency?
I have compleed 8.5 years.

do i noq have right to work (last grated PSW)
the options i am getting from lawyers are flr(0), ILR ( THEY SAY IS GOING TO GET REFUSED),
important question is IF I apply for flr(0) or ILR, will this time count towards 10 years long residency?

I am so coonfused and have no idea what to do.

please help ..
thanks guys

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:43 am

Hi all,
i have posted my quries earlier today but eager to get some comments asap.
i came in uk in jun 2006. my last granted was psw. and then i applied for tier 1 entrepreneur which was refused by HO.
then i appealed against that decision and got refused and then not even UT refused the case for permission to appeal to
UT.
so my questions are
am i an overstayer ?
if i am allowed to make fresh application, how long do i have ? and what categories ?
flr o and ilr was suggested by some lawyers but i would like to know from people been through all these.
ilr was suggested saying it ll get refused and WE WILL GET RIGHT OF APPAEAL(IS THIS TRUE)?
am i allowed to work ? or self employment ?
and finally wha is 3c leave, do i have anything to do with 3c?

please reply guys
waiting for you..
thanks

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Wed Jan 21, 2015 1:02 am

hi all,
i have a lot of to ask aswell, please dont mind.
i came here in jun 2006. then last granted was PSW and then applied for tier 1 entrepreneur which got refused in 2013-jan.
got appeal right which was heard in jun-2013 and was allowed upto limited extent for HO to reconsider the application.
which HO reconsidered and refused again. again to FTT which was refused, I then sought for permission to appeal to UT from
FTT and they refused. then i sought permission from UT to appeal to UT WHICH was refused on 15-jan 2015. with no further
rights of appeal.

now my questions are

am i an overstayer ?
can i make a fresh application under flr(0), ilr ? or what you guys suggest ?
what happens to my right to work ? or self employment ?
if i apply for flr 0, or ilr , if gets refuse will i have right to appeal ?
please help guys
its bit difficult situation i am in.

thanks

Zee ali
Diamond Member
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:42 am

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Zee ali » Wed Jan 21, 2015 1:19 am

jp1524 wrote:hi all,
i have a lot of to ask aswell, please dont mind.
i came here in jun 2006. then last granted was PSW and then applied for tier 1 entrepreneur which got refused in 2013-jan.
got appeal right which was heard in jun-2013 and was allowed upto limited extent for HO to reconsider the application.
which HO reconsidered and refused again. again to FTT which was refused, I then sought for permission to appeal to UT from
FTT and they refused. then i sought permission from UT to appeal to UT WHICH was refused on 15-jan 2015. with no further
rights of appeal.

now my questions are

am i an overstayer ?

Yes u r an overstayer but if u apply any visa in 28 days from UT refusal decision and get visa than your 10 years long residency wont break.
can i make a fresh application under flr(0), ilr ? or what you guys suggest ?

Apply the visa which u can get otherwise if u refuse this time than no right of appeal and your 10 years continuity will break as well.
what happens to my right to work ? or self employment ?
No work allowed Section 3c ended
if i apply for flr 0, or ilr , if gets refuse will i have right to appeal ?
No
please help guys

its bit difficult situation i am in.

thanks
I am not an immigration adviser
Any views expressed are my own opinion and should not be considered as legal advice
No liability is accepted for the content and for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided

smir
Member of Standing
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:18 pm
India

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by smir » Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:21 am

Informing tribunal and home office about representing ourself and remove representative


Hello
My appeal is in February 10th

I no longer want to deal with my stupid solicitor

Please advise me how to inform tribunal and home office including presenting officer about this change

Please guide as I am dealing directly with home office and tribunal and taking barrister services directly

Obie wrote:Again I say the person you sought advise from does not know what he or she is saying .

That is all I can say .

I cannot defend my opinion against a legally baseless view expressed by your so called barrister .

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Sat Jan 24, 2015 11:26 am

Thanks Zee Ali,
I heard that i can still ask for permission again to UT. is this true, i need to apply within 14 days.
appreciate your answer.

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Sat Jan 24, 2015 11:31 am

and sorry,if within 28 days, if i make any application e.g ilr or flr(0), can i apply for another category while one of these is pending ?

Zee ali
Diamond Member
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:42 am

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Zee ali » Sat Jan 24, 2015 1:00 pm

jp1524 wrote:and sorry,if within 28 days, if i make any application e.g ilr or flr(0), can i apply for another category while one of these is pending ?
How can u make ILR application on 10 years basis and be successful when u r short 1.5 years.?

Flr o on what grounds?

No u can't put a new application after 28 days even u put ILR of Flr o in 28 days.

Immigration rules r not set to play with. Your choices r very limited now.

If u don't get any visa now than your continuity will break.
I am not an immigration adviser
Any views expressed are my own opinion and should not be considered as legal advice
No liability is accepted for the content and for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Sun Jan 25, 2015 12:05 pm

I understand that, but one of the solicitors around suggested that i can still ask for permission to appeal to the UT once again.
they have refused the permission to appeal to UT, in this case solicitor said that we can still seek for permission, and this will be
the last permission we can ask for, they might accept that on various grounds which are related to the original application made in 2012.
well, i have my wife and kids living here with me, i have tried to get the franchisee, when applied for they asked me whether i have my passport on me, which was of course is held by HO. so i was kind of stuck.
i appreciate your time mr zee.
thanks

Zee ali
Diamond Member
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:42 am

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Zee ali » Sun Jan 25, 2015 2:25 pm

then i sought permission from UT to appeal to UT WHICH was refused on 15-jan 2015. with no further
rights of appeal.

If u already sought permission from UT to UT than their is now any appeal right left. That solicitor skimming you more for money or wasting your time.

I
I am not an immigration adviser
Any views expressed are my own opinion and should not be considered as legal advice
No liability is accepted for the content and for the consequences of any actions taken on the basis of the information provided

smir
Member of Standing
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:18 pm
India

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by smir » Sun Jan 25, 2015 8:44 pm

VERY IMPORTANT :cry: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Numbers: IA/18243/2013
IA/18244/2013
IA/18245/2013


THE IMMIGRATION ACTS


Heard at Field House
Determination Promulgated
On 3 April 2014
On 9 April 2014




Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MOULDEN

Between

MR RAO MUHAMMAD KAMRAN EJAZ
MRS AMBREEN KAMRAN
MASTER MUHAMMAD AYYAN KAMRAN
(Anonymity Direction not made)
Appellants
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent


Representation:

For the Appellant: Mr Q Anisuddin a legal representative from SZ Solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr C Avery a Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

DETERMINATION AND REASONS

1. The appellants are citizens of Pakistan. The first appellant is the husband of the second appellant and both of them are the parents of the third appellant. The first appellant was born on 27 July 1983, the second appellant on 9 September 1987 and the third appellant on 2 September 2010. I will refer to the first appellant as the appellant, the second appellant as the wife, the third appellant as the son and to them together as the family. The family have been given permission to appeal the decision of First-Tier Tribunal Judge Maciel ("the FTTJ") who dismissed their appeals against the respondent's decisions of 3 May 2013 to refuse to grant the appellant leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant under the Points-based System with the wife and son as his dependents. The respondent also gave directions for their removal from the UK under s 47 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. The appeals of the wife and son stand or fall with that of the appellant.

2. The appellant was granted leave to enter the UK as a student on 24 September 2003. He extended his leave as a student for periods expiring on 31 January 2011. Thereafter he was granted leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Post Study Work) Migrant until 2 August 2012. He made an application for leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant under the Points-based System and the wife and son applied as his dependents.

3. The respondent refused the applications. The reasons were that the appellant had failed to submit Specified Documents in support of the application namely any service contract or bank statements. The appellant maintained that a service contract had been served on the respondent.

4. At the beginning of the hearing before the FTTJ the respondent's representative withdrew the s 47 removal directions. I will need to return to the question of how the appeal hearing developed. The FTTJ found that the appellant had not supplied a service contract in the required format. The document he relied on was in fact a business plan. He had not been able to produce a single contract to evidence that he had been in business for any period before or since his application. The appellant had failed to provide the required documents for the purpose of his application to remain in the UK under the Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant provisions. He had not provided the required documents at any stage and had given no explanation as to why he had not done so. The appeals against the decisions to refuse leave to remain as an Entrepreneur and his dependents were dismissed.

5. The FTTJ went on to consider the grounds of appeal which had not been raised by the family in their applications to the respondent or in the grounds of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal but at some stage thereafter and in any event at the hearing before the FTTJ. These were that the family had spent more than 10 years in the UK and were entitled to indefinite leave to remain under the long residence provisions of paragraph 276 of the Immigration Rules and the respondent's Immigration Directorate Instructions ("IDIs"). The FTTJ records in paragraph 29 of the determination that the family's representative insisted that this be dealt with at the hearing rather than being remitted to the respondent for consideration.

6. The FTTJ found that these grounds involved the exercise of a discretion and that it was necessary to consider not only whether the family had been lawfully in the UK with leave continuously for a period of at least 10 years but also whether there were matters to be taken into account which would render it undesirable to grant them indefinite leave to remain. She found that there had been a break in the family's period of continuous lawful residence. This was between the expiry of leave on 31 October 2006 and the grant of further leave on 5 December 2006, a period of 35 days which was more than the permitted concessionary periods. She found that the appellant was not a credible witness, he had lied to the respondent and the Tribunal and that his application to remain as an Entrepreneur did not mirror his true circumstances. It had been made for the purpose of prolonging his leave so that the family could "clock up" 10 years in the UK.

7. The FTTJ went on to consider the appeals on Article 8 human rights grounds both under paragraph 276ADE of the Immigration Rules and under the jurisprudence outside the Immigration Rules. She found that the appellants could not bring themselves within paragraph 276ADE. Under the Article 8 jurisprudence outside the Immigration Rules she concluded that the family had established a private life in the UK, that all the tests in Razgar [2004] UKHL were answered in the affirmative except for the last, proportionality, on which the conclusion turned. If the family was removed they would be removed together and they had family living in Pakistan. Notwithstanding the time they had spent in the UK it would not be a disproportionate interference with their right to respect for private and family life to remove them.

8. The FTTJ dismissed the appeals. The family applied for permission to appeal which was refused by a judge in the First-Tier Tribunal. It was renewed to and granted by a judge in the Upper Tribunal who considered that there was an arguable error of law. The FTTJ might have erred in finding that there was a gap of 35 days in the periods of leave granted and it was arguable that the family did have a continuous ten-year period of residence. The grounds of appeal to the First-Tier Tribunal raised additional allegations of errors of law and in more detail than the grounds submitted in support of the renewal of the application to the Upper Tribunal. Mr Anisuddin told me that the family relied on the grounds submitted to the Upper Tribunal, not the grounds submitted to the First-Tier Tribunal.

9. I have a Rule 24 reply from the respondent and a letter from the family's solicitors dated 18 March 2014 submitting further documents which were not before the FTTJ. Mr Anisuddin also provided an extract from Macdonald's Immigration Law and Practice.

10. The beginning of the hearing Mr Avery asked to clarify the respondent's current position on whether there was a break in the period of continuous leave in 2006. Further investigations had been made since the hearing before the FTTJ. He confirmed that in 2006 the respondent's caseworker treated the appellant's application as an in time application and that leave was granted. The application was not treated as invalid and he was therefore instructed to concede that there was no break in the family's period of lawful residence. However this was only one reason for the FTTJ's decision that the family could not succeed under the ten-year rule. The other was the appellant's conduct which, he submitted, brought the family within the provisions of paragraph 276B(ii) on which the respondent relied. The FTTJ dealt with this in paragraph 29.

11. Mr Anisuddin relied on the grounds of appeal to the Upper Tribunal. He said that the concession by the respondent did not take the family by surprise and he did not need to ask for an adjournment in order to consider this. The appellant had persevered with and succeeded in his studies and the family had a good immigration history. He accepted that the family had asked the FTTJ to deal with the ten-year residence question rather than remitting it to the respondent consideration. He also accepted that the FTTJ had dealt with the issues raised in paragraph 276B(ii) but argued that the adverse credibility finding was flawed and the evidence did not support the conclusion that the entrepreneur application was falsely based on made for an improper purpose. He submitted that the 10 years continuous lawful residence was now conceded discretion should have been exercised in the family's favour.

12. Mr Avery submitted that on the evidence it was open to the FTTJ to find that the application had been made for improper reasons in order to achieve 10 years residence. The findings in paragraph 29 were open to her. He relied on MU (statement of additional grounds) Bangladesh 2010 UKUT 442 (IAC). There was no error of law and I was asked to uphold the determination.

13. Mr Anisuddin did not wish to reply. I reserved my determination.

14. The FTTJ dismissed the appeals in relation to the 10 years residence point for two reasons. Firstly, she found that there had not been 10 years continuous lawful residence because of a 35 day break in late 2006. It has not been necessary for me to consider whether there was any error of law in the reasoning or conclusion of the FTTJ because the respondent now concedes that there was no interruption in the period of lawful residence. However, the FTTJ dismissed the appeal for another reason set out in paragraph 29 in which she said;

"It was at the appellants' representatives' insistence that I decide the issue of Long Residence as opposed to remitting the matter to the respondent. I find that the issue of granting or not granting indefinite leave to remain is an exercise of discretion. The wording of paragraph 276C uses the words "may be granted". It is the case that a decision maker would have to consider not only whether the first appellant has been lawfully in the UK with lawful continuous leave for 10 years but also whether there are matters to be taken into account which would render it undesirable to grant indefinite leave to remain. I find that the application for an extension of leave to remain one year before he could apply under the Long Residence provision, as an Entrepreneur was simply done to prolong his leave to "clock" up his 10 years. I find that the application was made with that sole intent. There was a dearth of any evidence about the business and the first appellant struggled to explain any aspect of it. Mr Edwards' submission was that the application to remain as an Entrepreneur did not mirror the first appellant's true circumstances. There was no intention to carry on his business and it was set up purely to support the application for leave to remain and that he had lied to the Court and to the Immigration authorities. I find that the first appellant has not been truthful about his business - his intention to engage in business or about the time and monies expended to develop the business. I find that this ought to be taken into account in considering the grant of leave to remain under the Long Residence provisions. I find, in all the circumstances that the first appellant is not entitled to indefinite leave to remain under the Long Residence provisions. Accordingly, I dismiss the appeal on this ground in relation to the first appellant and in line with this decision, I dismiss the appeals of the other two appellants also."

15. The main thrust of the grounds of appeal to the Upper Tribunal was in relation to issues which have now been conceded in the family's favour by the respondent, namely that there had been a period of 10 years continuous lawful residence. The only other ground is that in paragraph 6 where it is argued that the FTTJ erred in law by basing her conclusion that the appellant made the entrepreneur application in order to complete 10 years lawful residence on nothing more than speculation. Mr Anisuddin amplified this at the hearing in his submission that the adverse credibility finding against the appellant was flawed. No more detailed particulars were given for either submission.

16. The FTTJ gave detailed reasons for her finding that the appellant was not a credible witness. She found him to be evasive and unable to explain his business dealings. He had prepared a business plan purely to support his application. He could not explain his own business plan. He had never intended to set up a genuine business. There was no evidence as to what monies he had used in relation to the business. Whilst the respondent has now conceded that there was no break in the 10 year period of residence the appellant had given contradictory evidence about whether any application he had made was ever returned to him and if it was when it was resubmitted. The effect on his credibility of these inconsistencies does not disappear with the respondent's concession. The FTTJ's reasoning and conclusions can be found in paragraphs 25 to 28. I find that they provide strong support for the adverse credibility finding and the conclusion that the appellant never intended to carry on business and that his application for leave to remain as an Entrepreneur and the appeal which followed the refusal was intended to prolong the family's stay in the UK in order to claim indefinite leave on the basis of 10 years residence. At the date of his application on 21 July 2012 the family had not been in this country for 10 years.

17. The FTTJ set out the provisions of paragraph 276A, B and C of the Immigration Rules in paragraph 21 of the determination. She considered the relevant provisions of paragraph 276C, which refers back to paragraph 276B, in paragraph 29 including the words "may be granted" which led her to the correct conclusion that the grant of indefinite leave was discretionary. She went on to consider the relevant factors under paragraph 276B namely whether there were matters to be taken into account which would render it undesirable to grant indefinite leave to remain. I find that the factors which she took into account justified the conclusion that the family were not entitled to a discretionary grant of indefinite leave to remain. The family's representatives pressed the FTTJ to deal with the 10 year residence application rather than referring it back to the respondent and I have also been asked to deal with this rather than referring it back to the respondent. I find that MU Bangladesh support the view that this course of action can be followed.

18. I find that the FTTJ did not err in law and I uphold her determination.






???????????????
Signed Date 4 April 2014
Upper Tribunal Judge Moulden

aiza78601
Member
Posts: 218
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:28 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by aiza78601 » Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:38 pm

if u were refused to get permission to upper tribunal then u exhausted appeal right,but u had hearing in upper tribunal which is also refused now u can ask upper tribunal for permission to appeal to court of appeal
but its seems fruitless,u already completed 10 years so y cant u make 10 years long residency application

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Sun Jan 25, 2015 9:58 pm

@ Zee, thanks.
what do you suggest ? what steps can be taken for long residency not to be broken?
because tier4 needs ielts, i had all ielts certificates they are expired now and the new exam asks for passport as an identity to sit in
the exam. i have still access to £50,000.00 to apply for tier 1 again (what do you think).
or otherwise, if i apply for flr 0 or ilr, does long residency breaks ? if i apply within 28 days ?
please advise ..
regarding the permission to UT again ,solicitor said that applicant can ask for permission twice, if they refused once then ask for permission again..( it is very much complicated now)

need some more help on this aswell.
thanks zee

jp1524
Newbie
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by jp1524 » Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:32 pm

Hi Guys,

my application for permission to appeal to the upper tribunal was refused on 14th jan 2015.
if within 28 days i apply for flr(o), will the time count towards 10 years long residency ?
and what about in the mean time my right to work ?

help please ..

Muhammad1976
Newly Registered
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2015 11:22 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Muhammad1976 » Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:41 am

Hi Obie,
How can I contact you, can you give me your email please.

smir
Member of Standing
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:18 pm
India

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by smir » Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:28 pm

Avylon





Any update about your case please ??????


quote="avylon"]Hi Smir, we had this same issue last Sept14 when we had to apply for ILR and also await for the Tribunal results then my advocate suggested us to file a fresh SET (LR) & FLR(M) though the home had accepted the applications also we had done fresh Biometrics, unfortunately lost our jobs as our employer had enquired the ECS (employee check services) from HO. Now we are still awaiting for the results and we had received from tribunal to appeal for UT. So please make sure and be 100% sure before applying for the fresh application while your existing application is still pending with HO... Also please keep in touch and keep posting the update as it will be helpful here in this post...Tx

smir wrote:PLEASE THROW SOME LIGHT SENIORS

If appeal is pending and still we want to file long residence SET LR form then what we should write in this sections ?

Note - Passports are with HO




If we have outstanding appeal and if we submit ILR application on kong residence

Then in application form they ask where is your passport ?
Now where to tick
Q C4

Passport Location ?
QC5

What is current immig status ?
QD 1

When current leave expire ?
QD

Can I write not applicable ?
[/quote]

Omor4real
Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 2:31 am

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Omor4real » Thu Feb 12, 2015 2:09 pm

smir wrote:Informing tribunal and home office about representing ourself and remove representative


Hello
My appeal is in February 10th

I no longer want to deal with my stupid solicitor

Please advise me how to inform tribunal and home office including presenting officer about this change

Please guide as I am dealing directly with home office and tribunal and taking barrister services directly

Obie wrote:Again I say the person you sought advise from does not know what he or she is saying .

Hello Smir, just checking how was your appeal. pls share
That is all I can say .

I cannot defend my opinion against a legally baseless view expressed by your so called barrister .

Vik22
Newly Registered
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:57 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Vik22 » Fri Feb 13, 2015 3:56 pm

Dear Obie

I would really appreciate if you could help me with some advice.

I am currently on appeal, my visa was refused in November 2014 and my court date at the lower tribunal is in June 2015. I will be 10 years residency in March 2015.

Can I send my application to leave to remain in March 2015 or should I go for the appeal in June 2015? Can I submit a new application with the Home Office?

Anyone in the same situation like me?

Please help

Thanks

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15156
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Obie » Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:00 pm

Perhaps you should make an application, in accordance with their policy.

It will definitely be declared as invalid, but it will not be held against you, that in accordance with their policy, you had not made an application will be invalidated and forwarded to the Presenting office dealing with your appeal.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

Vik22
Newly Registered
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:57 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Vik22 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 2:09 pm

Thank you for the advise

Vik22
Newly Registered
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 12:57 pm

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Vik22 » Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:32 pm

Do you know any other application which I can do that are in accordance with their policy?

Many thanks

smir
Member of Standing
Posts: 337
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:18 pm
India

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by smir » Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:35 pm

Brother Obie

Sorry just show your message


Brother appeal was adjourned due to lack of court time

It's adjourned and shifted to July



Thanks for asking but only now I show ur message
Obie wrote:Perhaps you should make an application, in accordance with their policy.

It will definitely be declared as invalid, but it will not be held against you, that in accordance with their policy, you had not made an application will be invalidated and forwarded to the Presenting office dealing with your appeal.

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15156
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Obie » Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:36 pm

Vik22 wrote:Do you know any other application which I can do that are in accordance with their policy?

Many thanks

You can do an ILR application, it will be voided though, but will be linked to your file and sent to the HOPO.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

Obie
Moderator
Posts: 15156
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:06 am
Location: UK/Ireland
Ireland

Re: Pending Appeal and applicant completes 10 year Legal Sta

Post by Obie » Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:36 pm

smir wrote:Brother Obie

Sorry just show your message


Brother appeal was adjourned due to lack of court time

It's adjourned and shifted to July



Thanks for asking but only now I show ur message
Obie wrote:Perhaps you should make an application, in accordance with their policy.

It will definitely be declared as invalid, but it will not be held against you, that in accordance with their policy, you had not made an application will be invalidated and forwarded to the Presenting office dealing with your appeal.
Sorry Smir that message was addressed to Vik22.
Smooth seas do not make skilful sailors

Locked
cron