Tier 1 Ent Ext - Refused, AR Refused and JR

zimba88 wrote:

shazdar wrote:Unfortunately home office refused my visa with excuse that my name doesn't appear on the accounts and also they said that it wasn't mentioned that capital was injected into the business by myself . My accountant clearly mentioned my name on the accounts and on capital ledger account.

s_r_san wrote: Since shareholder is not mentioned in accounts as per current accounting practice or requirements for SME
my accountant did not mention my name in accounts as shareholder, but did as director

You both failed to read the guide and the rules and submit exactly what they need. I have said it many many times here that what is acceptable in the world of business as invested will NOT be necessarily enough for HO. Your name MUST appear opposite of the invested amount in the accounts, usually in your accounts notes.

You need to follow the immigration rules meticulously and provide the exact evidence required. You should be able to apply for a new application with correct documents with the required information

zimba88 wrote:

Are there possibilities for fresh application? more than 28 days from the expiry of the previous visa and HO keeps the documents

Yes, but it is 28 days from when your section 3C ends. That is if you apply for AR and get rejected or if you choose to not apply for AR within 14 days. Your documents should be returned to you after the AR refusal or after 14 days if you do not apply for AR.

zimba88 wrote:I am afraid not, as you have been an over stayer since your visa expired

b2buk wrote:ok, yes my accountant had submitted the letter as well, my AR is refused and HO is not willing to admit that it is a missing information, they said you haven't submitted the specified document. so I am going for JR.

If the applicant has invested by way of share capital the business accounts must show the shareholders, the amount and value of the shares (on the date of purchase) in the applicant’s name as it appears on his application. If the value of the applicant’s share capital is not shown in the accounts, then a copy of the company’s register of members must be provided,

zimba88 wrote:The accountant letter has no value and is not one of the acceptable forms of evidence as it is not mentioned anywhere in the rules. This is what 46-SD(b)(4) says in the current rules:

If the applicant has invested by way of share capital the business accounts must show the shareholders, the amount and value of the shares (on the date of purchase) in the applicant’s name as it appears on his application. If the value of the applicant’s share capital is not shown in the accounts, then a copy of the company’s register of members must be provided,

s_r_san wrote:

zimba88 wrote:The accountant letter has no value and is not one of the acceptable forms of evidence as it is not mentioned anywhere in the rules. This is what 46-SD(b)(4) says in the current rules:

If the applicant has invested by way of share capital the business accounts must show the shareholders, the amount and value of the shares (on the date of purchase) in the applicant’s name as it appears on his application. If the value of the applicant’s share capital is not shown in the accounts, then a copy of the company’s register of members must be provided,

I have found another point

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration ... sed-system

245AA.Documents not submitted with applications
(d)If the applicant has submitted a specified document:
(i)in the wrong format; or
(ii)which is a copy and not an original document; or
(iii)which does not contain all of the specified information, but the missing information is verifiable from:
(1)other documents submitted with the application,
(2)the website of the organisation which issued the document, or
(3)the website of the appropriate regulatory body;
the application may be granted exceptionally, providing the Entry Clearance Officer, Immigration Officer or the Secretary of State is satisfied that the specified documents are genuine and the applicant meets all the other requirements. The Entry Clearance Officer, Immigration Officer or the Secretary of State reserves the right to request the specified original documents in the correct format in all cases where (b) applies, and to refuse applications if these documents are not provided as set out in (b).

For the Companies, they missed to mention the share holder of the company in company accounts
iii)which does not contain all of the specified information, but the missing information is verifiable from:
3)the website of the appropriate regulatory body;
the application may be granted exceptionally, providing the Entry Clearance Officer, Immigration Officer or the Secretary of State is satisfied that the specified documents are genuine and the applicant meets all the other requirements.

As per Companies Act 2006, the members list of companies should be updated with Companies House every year - that is called as Annual Return
It is governing body and it is also in http://www.gov.uk
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/
If we search a company here, we can get the company annual return and accounts filled free of charge
This is the official site of companies house (Beta service, in non beta service, they will charge £ 1.00 per document)

We can argue that the missed shareholder's name (in accounts) (can be interpreted as missing information) is available in appropriate regulatory body (245AA (d) 3)

then
the application may be granted exceptionally, providing the Entry Clearance Officer, Immigration Officer or the Secretary of State is satisfied that the specified documents are genuine and the applicant meets all the other requirements.

Mr zimba88, I welcome your comments on this and thanks for your other comments

zimba88 wrote:It should be clear that evidential flexibility applies to the missing information from a document you submitted and not the missing document itself.
As you can see in the conditions when they ask you to submit X and you did not, the will NOT ask you to send that document unless they can verify such a information from other acceptable evidence (not some alternative unacceptable evidence you simply submitted).
This does NOT mean that you can omit required documents and hope that they will verify the information they are looking for on your behalf.

s_r_san wrote:
Sorry the author of this site may not prefer that we are communicating personally
Let's talk here and give the idea to others in similar situation

s_r_san wrote:

zimba88 wrote:It should be clear that evidential flexibility applies to the missing information from a document you submitted and not the missing document itself.
As you can see in the conditions when they ask you to submit X and you did not, the will NOT ask you to send that document unless they can verify such a information from other acceptable evidence (not some alternative unacceptable evidence you simply submitted).
This does NOT mean that you can omit required documents and hope that they will verify the information they are looking for on your behalf.

Thanks for your comment

Let's accept your argument - 'Missing information not missing document' as interpretation to "evidential flexibility policy were “much broader” than the rules"
Sorry we need to get more views, that is why I am asking same question in deep

"If the applicant has invested by way of share capital the business accounts must show the shareholders, the amount and value of the shares (on the date of purchase) in the applicant’s name as it appears on his application."

This is major rule. If we mention me as shareholder in accounts then no need to worry about members list.

Accountants are mentioning what is share capital of business in accounts. Only they have not mentioned who is the shareholder holding those shares.
-------------------------------------------------------------
e.g.
Share capital

Authorised
50 000 Ordinary shares of £ 1 each 50,000
Allotted, called up and fully paid
50 000 Ordinary shares of £ 1 each 50,000
Equity Shares
50 000 Ordinary shares of £ 1 each 50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HO may expect another line like

Shareholders
Mr s_r_san - 50,000 shares of £ 1 each 50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My argument is that this is a missing information in given document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When shareholder's name is not shown in accounts only, we need to give the members list. This is alternative option by rule.

If we consider "major rule", this will be a missing information.
If we consider the "alternative option" as major rule only, this will be a missing document.

We need to find "supporting provisions in UK act" to fight above point

sm12 wrote:Not sure if you can proceed with JR and also with reconsideration at once.
I will see if I can find info on gov.uk.

dilse4srk wrote:HI S_r_san

Can you please tell me when did you file the PAP and when did you get the response from home office. I file PAP on 21 sep 2016 and got a fax from HO on 03 oct 2016 that they will reconsider my case. My case is different to you as i applied for FLR fp under private and family life married to british citizen.

I am also thinking the same thing that my 3 months will end in january 2017 , but my initial application was refused on 13 sep 2016

s_r_san wrote:

dilse4srk wrote:HI S_r_san

Can you please tell me when did you file the PAP and when did you get the response from home office. I file PAP on 21 sep 2016 and got a fax from HO on 03 oct 2016 that they will reconsider my case. My case is different to you as i applied for FLR fp under private and family life married to british citizen.

I am also thinking the same thing that my 3 months will end in january 2017 , but my initial application was refused on 13 sep 2016

Once I got refusal in AR, I sent a pre action letter on 19/09/2016
In 14 days time, they asked another 14 days time
then on 13/10/2016, they said that they would reconsider the application and HO would response within 3 months

particular 3 months will finish on 13/01/2017
but between 2nd week of dec and 2nd week of jan, HO people will be in holidays (?)

So will they answer before 14/12/2016 ??

Or as usual, a letter from HO with 'refusal' or 'since your case is more complicated, we need more time' ??

Regards