Immigrationboards.com

This answer I received from HO about my husband who has Tier1(G) dependant and I am Tier1(G) now.(He is only 1 year in the UK) , my initial visa - HSMP JR 3 November 2006.
I mentioned to them that there was no such requirement for a spouse when I applied for HSMP in 2006

Dear xxx,
Thank you for your enquiry.
Please be advised that dependant status of an initial Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP) visa holder will follow that of the principal applicant only if the dependant initially held an HSMP Dependant visa.

If the main visa holder extends their visa into the Points Based System (PBS) Tier 1 (General) visa category and the first visa that their dependant is granted is a PBS Tier 1 (General) Dependant visa, the dependant is required to complete a 2 year qualifying period in order to be eligible to submit an application for Indefinite Leave to Remain.

Any opinion ?R they right?

Thanks for posting this information.
UKBA is always vary re. handling HSMP(JR) dependent applications.
In past I have seen in this forum that JR dependent asked to apply via SET(M) because they did not finish 2 years.I have seen some successful cases too.

It would be good idea to publish that email(if you receive via email then) in this forum so we can get copy at time of application.

Thanks for posting this info

fora wrote: If the main visa holder extends their visa into the Points Based System (PBS) Tier 1 (General) visa category and the first visa that their dependant is granted is a PBS Tier 1 (General) Dependant visa, the dependant is required to complete a 2 year qualifying period in order to be eligible to submit an application for Indefinite Leave to Remain.

Sri_kant's wife was apparently successful at getting ILR directly.

I can't remember where but this was certainly what SushdMehta (Moderator) said when someone asked her, that:

1. Dependent had HSMP dependent as the first visa, no cohab proofs asked.

2. Dependent had PBS Tier 1 dependent as the first visa, 2 years residence required.

Though there is still room to argue for scenario 2 as per the JR that "Dependents should follow the status of the main applicant" irrespective of which visa they had initially. But then, it at least clarifies scenario 1.

I will email operations policy team just to be sure if I get the same reply.

HI Fora,

Can you please provide me email address so I can also enquire about it.

I am in the same situation, My wife has been in uk for 1.5 years and I applying my ilr under pre nov 2006 jd review, in 3 months time.

I am really worried as to what documents can show to Case Worker to convince?

thanks

I have written this many times. if you are covered under HSMP JR then you need not to show spouse's 2 years cohabitation . I know at least 15 cases in which people have got IR even when they have spent less than 18 months together (got married in less than 18 month time frame ). I fall in the same category (HSMP JR ) so know many of friends who got ILR in such case.

good luck

UKBApublicenquiries@UKBA.gsi.gov.uk

Yours Sincerely,
Wayne Fairweather
Immigration Group
UK Border Agency

u must write in your email - subject[/b]-"FAQ"

I have printed out Sri_kant's PEO experience letter for to show them(IN CASE)-why do they treat the same cases differently?.There should be clear rule and not like...if an officer likes you he will grant ILR to your spouse...If not,the spouse will be refused...
when i called to PEO a man told me - "..under transitional arrangements your husband is elligible for ILR"...whom to believe?
Thereis another option: (I did it in waiting for the written result)
There is complaint option on UKBA site(complaint form)
Describe your case and make it as a complaint-subject of complaint :Incompetence UKBA staff causing confusion and trying to violate the High Court decision ...or smth.like this.
They must give the written answer within 20 days.
Only mention all the points which are in your favour (like-there was no such requirement back in 2006)Again UKBA tries make retrosprctive changes again...smth. like this..make it very persuasive.
If the answer is good-take it with u,..if not don't take...then risk and try to make the imm.officer like u and your spouse and u will get it as there is chaos

I received this reply from Settlement Ops on 15 August re dependents of HSMP pre Nov 2006. And it is quite clear now that depedents of initial HSMP visa holders don't need 2 years residence to qualify for ILR.

[quote]

From: Settlement Ops Policy Mailbox [mailto:SettlementOpsPolicy@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: 15 August 2011 15:35
To: XXXXX
Subject: HSMP/Tier 1 ILR & Dependent Query

Dear XXXXXX,

If you applied to the HSMP between 3 April 2006 and 7 November 2006, received an approval letter and came to or stayed in the United Kingdom on the basis of that letter you are still required to complete a period of five years' continuous residence in relevant immigration routes before you can apply to settle in the United Kingdom. This is because you did not enter the HSMP until after the Immigration Rules had changed on 3 April 2006. However, you do not need to meet the 'Knowledge of language and life in the UK' requirement as part of your settlement application. You can find out more by visiting the Migrants who applied to the HSMP between 3 April 2006 and 7 November 2006 page of the UK Border Agency website.

You fall into this group if: you were initially granted entry clearance or permission to stay in the United Kingdom for two years under the HSMP requirements; and you then extended that initial permission by a further three years (unless you had already completed sufficient continuous residence in a different immigration route which can be amalgamated for settlement purposes). When you have completed at least five years' continuous residence in the United Kingdom in a qualifying category, you can apply for settlement using the SET(O) application form. We will consider your application against the settlement requirements described in paragraph 27 of the policy document, which you can download from the right side of the page (that you can access on the link above).

How are dependants affected? – The immigration status of dependants of migrants in the categories covered by this policy will follow that of the principal applicant.
Settlement Operational Policy Advisor, UK Border Agency.

From: XXXXXXXXXX
Sent: 12 August 2011 15:22
To: Settlement Ops Policy Mailbox
Subject: Dependent Query

Dear Sir/Madam,

I was granted HSMP visa in August 2006 and my wife was granted the HSMP dependent visa in July 2008. We had our visas extended since to Tier 1 (General).

I am due to apply for ILR in the first week of September. Please reply if my understanding (stated below) is correct as per the current settlement rules?

 My wife does not complete two years residence in UK when I apply for ILR. I understand that, she is not required to complete 2 years residence in UK to qualify for ILR as my dependent as:
i. She was granted HSMP dependent visa initially.
ii. She is covered with me under HSMP ILR JR, which states, “Dependents will follow the status of the main applicantâ€

Another positive response.

This is interesting. Let me share this scenario. Aftermath of the HSMP court decision, a friend applied for extension and included his wife's application as well. Note that the wife was formerly a student and the husband is a HSMP pre April applicant. After 3 months, the husband's application was extended and that of the 2 children but the wife was refused! Her refusal was premised on the fact that she had no initial HSMP dependent visa. On appeal, it was held that it will be promoting policy to dogma if the wife would have to leave UK and reapply from abroad. The court held that her status must follow that of her husband! The Homeoffice obliged.

In this instance, will the Homeoffice reject her application for ILR if she submits with her husband based on the 2 year rule or the court judgement subsists forever.

This current policy of pre and post TIG dependent issue is not on the Homeoffice website and was not included in the policy documents. It is contentious and to me, goes against the tenet of the HSMP high court ruling and must be challenged.