ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe
Instead, the board may be overwhelmed by requests for your assistance! Starting with aniz.noajthan wrote:Fortunately you did not utilise legal representation.
Otherwise the Board would be overwhelmed by requests for details of the hot-shot lawyer.
aniz wrote:dear moderators,
i am in a similar position i am fighting judicial review. i request the moderators to allow me to contact raj to get his decision details as i feel it will be helpfull in strengthening my case. i humbly request u to consider it as my 10 is due this august and my visa got rejected in may 2016. kindly do help me as i have invested more than 230k in this country. is there a way to get contact of this gentleman
aniz
The purpose of the board is to share information in public so all who are interested may benefit.aniz wrote:dear moderators,
its similar case to mine , my visa was rejected to the same reasons mentioned in raj case, i gave further representation along with my ar. i have already started the thread long back but one of the mods said the ar decisions will not be fruitful . i was suprised when mr. raj was granted leave , i am geniunely happy for him , comming back the decision came negative saying that they wont entertain any further documents. thats why i requested the mods to part with his contact to speak to him which might throw some light in my case. i humbly request you to look into my request as i am trying to see whether my case can be strengthened as currently i am exhausting all my options so in the future i dont regret not trying it.
aniz
I think what made the difference in Raj's case is that he did send FPS receipts, which show that he was correctly reporting PAYE.aniz wrote:dear moderators,
its similar case to mine , my visa was rejected to the same reasons mentioned in raj case, i gave further representation along with my ar. i have already started the thread long back but one of the mods said the ar decisions will not be fruitful . i was suprised when mr. raj was granted leave , i am geniunely happy for him , comming back the decision came negative saying that they wont entertain any further documents. thats why i requested the mods to part with his contact to speak to him which might throw some light in my case. i humbly request you to look into my request as i am trying to see whether my case can be strengthened as currently i am exhausting all my options so in the future i dont regret not trying it.
aniz
It is required to prove you are reporting PAYE via RTI, so submitting FPS reports is the best way to prove this. Sadly it is a stupid requirement as ever employer MUST report via RTI but the rules demand evidence of this at the momentyang_81 wrote:Congratulations Raj. I just submitted my AR and waiting for the response. My case is slight different as I did not submit FPS and not receipts. Let's see what will happen on next step.
Hi Anizaniz wrote:dear moderators,
i am in a similar position i am fighting judicial review. i request the moderators to allow me to contact raj to get his decision details as i feel it will be helpfull in strengthening my case. i humbly request u to consider it as my 10 is due this august and my visa got rejected in may 2016. kindly do help me as i have invested more than 230k in this country. is there a way to get contact of this gentleman
aniz
Hi, thank you. All the best to you with your AR. I think if you submitted one of either FPS reports or FPS receipts and provided that all other documents that you sent meet their requirement, I think you will be fine as long as they can verify the missing information from other sources such as P11, etc. Good luckyang_81 wrote:Congratulations Raj. I just submitted my AR and waiting for the response. My case is slight different as I did not submit FPS and not receipts. Let's see what will happen on next step.
Thank you CelinaCelina wrote:Congrats Raj.m
That's really a great achievement.
Regards
Celina .
Congrats Raj.m !!!raj.m wrote:My arguments in my AR
failed to apply the Secretary of State’s relevant published policy and guidance
These details are important because they will help us to review your application. I note that a failure to provide a Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated within three months of the application is listed as one of the two reasons for refusal of my application. I submitted two Companies House Current Appointments Reports for xxx Ltd in my application - 1) the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 05 November 2012, AND 2) the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016. However, the case working team has made an error and has overlooked the Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated 14 March 2016. I request you to refer to page one of the cover letter submitted in support of my application in which I listed ALL the documents sent and amongst others also included 'Current Appointments Report including the filing history page (14/03/2016)'. I believe that non-consideration of Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 has also resulted in incorrectand improper application of Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules to my application. I kindly request you to review your decision by considering the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 for xxx Ltd, which is in possession of the Secretary of State currently.applied the Immigration Rules incorrectly
These details are important because they will help us to review your application. I note that non acceptance of the RTI Submission logs supplied is listed as the reason for refusal, in addition to a failure to provide a Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated within three months of the application . Monthly RTI Submission logs that I supplied show correlationID, submission date and time, and confirmation that the full payment submission was successful, which clearly demonstrates that I was reporting PAYE appropriately to HMRC, and I feel that I should have been given an opportunity to provide the missing information in relation to the RTI submissions, in line with Paragraph 245AA(b) of the Immigration Rules. Moreover, the missing information is verifiable from P11 deduction cards of both employees and other evidences such as P32, payment summary part 1 and part 2, and wage slips that I provided in support of my application, and I believe that the case working team should have considered my circumstances in light of the Paragraph 245AA(d)(iii) of the Immigration Rules.
I also request you to consider that the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 that I submitted with my application was overlooked by the case working team, and had this not been the case, I feel I would have been provided with an opportunity to submit the missing information in relation to the RTI submissions in line with the Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules. I feel that the common law duty of acting fairly in the decision making process as well as Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules have not been applied correctly, and that I have been treated unfairly by the refusal of my application for further leave to remain.
I respectfully submit that the decision to refuse my application for further leave to remain is erroneous as the Secretary of State has failed to adhere to the provisions of the Immigration Rules as well as her own published policy guidance with respect to the principle of Evidential Flexibility. I kindly request you to review your decision and grant me further leave to remain or provide me with an opportunity to submit missing information in line with the Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules.
Good effortraj.m wrote:My arguments in my AR
failed to apply the Secretary of State’s relevant published policy and guidance
These details are important because they will help us to review your application. I note that a failure to provide a Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated within three months of the application is listed as one of the two reasons for refusal of my application. I submitted two Companies House Current Appointments Reports for xxx Ltd in my application - 1) the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 05 November 2012, AND 2) the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016. However, the case working team has made an error and has overlooked the Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated 14 March 2016. I request you to refer to page one of the cover letter submitted in support of my application in which I listed ALL the documents sent and amongst others also included 'Current Appointments Report including the filing history page (14/03/2016)'. I believe that non-consideration of Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 has also resulted in incorrectand improper application of Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules to my application. I kindly request you to review your decision by considering the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 for xxx Ltd, which is in possession of the Secretary of State currently.applied the Immigration Rules incorrectly
These details are important because they will help us to review your application. I note that non acceptance of the RTI Submission logs supplied is listed as the reason for refusal, in addition to a failure to provide a Companies House Current Appointments Report for xxx Ltd dated within three months of the application . Monthly RTI Submission logs that I supplied show correlationID, submission date and time, and confirmation that the full payment submission was successful, which clearly demonstrates that I was reporting PAYE appropriately to HMRC, and I feel that I should have been given an opportunity to provide the missing information in relation to the RTI submissions, in line with Paragraph 245AA(b) of the Immigration Rules. Moreover, the missing information is verifiable from P11 deduction cards of both employees and other evidences such as P32, payment summary part 1 and part 2, and wage slips that I provided in support of my application, and I believe that the case working team should have considered my circumstances in light of the Paragraph 245AA(d)(iii) of the Immigration Rules.
I also request you to consider that the Companies House Current Appointments Report dated 14 March 2016 that I submitted with my application was overlooked by the case working team, and had this not been the case, I feel I would have been provided with an opportunity to submit the missing information in relation to the RTI submissions in line with the Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules. I feel that the common law duty of acting fairly in the decision making process as well as Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules have not been applied correctly, and that I have been treated unfairly by the refusal of my application for further leave to remain.
I respectfully submit that the decision to refuse my application for further leave to remain is erroneous as the Secretary of State has failed to adhere to the provisions of the Immigration Rules as well as her own published policy guidance with respect to the principle of Evidential Flexibility. I kindly request you to review your decision and grant me further leave to remain or provide me with an opportunity to submit missing information in line with the Paragraph 245AA of the Immigration Rules.
noajthan wrote:Fortunately you did not utilise legal representation.raj.m wrote:When I received my visa rejection letter, everyone said it's my fault and that I should have hired a solicitor and shouldn't have applied on my own. I went to see 7 to 8 different solicitors after that so that I can proceed with my AR and/or a fresh application. I hired a solicitor in Bedford and decided to go for AR first. However, when he wrote my arguments for AR, I wasn't satisfied, so I told him he can keep the fees I've paid him, I don't want a refund and told him that I will be going for AR on my own. Even he thought I was crazy. But yes, I wrote my own arguments for my AR and the HO overturned the decision.
Otherwise the Board would be overwhelmed by requests for details of the hot-shot lawyer.
Takeaway: careful and intelligent preparation, plus understanding of guidelines, plus unimpeachable evidence (based on unimpeachable business practice) is paramount.
