Victims of ETS Scam

[vinny]

Section 3C/3D
Section 78

[hassan5805]

Hi Vinay,

What about those people who are on JR with same ets scam issue.

can they be detained or deported?

coz one of my cousin submitted his JR last week and he keep going to sign in at detention centre.

Regards

[Ahsan888]

Thanks vinny for putting up the link (Y) appriciate that.

[Obie]

JR is not covered by Section 3C or Section 3D, but if the courts find that the curtailment decision was unlawful, and quash the decision, then the UKBA may want to then make a new decision, which will invoke section 3C or Section 3D, and whiles an appeal is pending, section 78 will apply.

In the meantime people faced with a threat of Removal, who have JR pending could ask the Upper Tribunal to impose a stay on removal or an Injunction.

[hassan5805]

JR is not covered by Section 3C or Section 3D, but if the courts find that the curtailment decision was unlawful, and quash the decision, then the UKBA may want to then make a new decision, which will invoke section 3C or Section 3D, and whiles an appeal is pending, section 78 will apply.

In the meantime people faced with a threat of Removal, who have JR pending could ask the Upper Tribunal to impose a stay on removal or an Injunction.

Hi Obie,

Thank you very much for your kind reply,
how could we ask tribunal to impose a stay on removal or an injunction?
Do we have write a letter to tribunal?
I will appreciate your early response.

Best Regards

[Obie]

Once the Secretary of State issues a Removal directions, than an application for a stay on Removal could be made with the Upper Tribunal.

IF there is also a challenge to the lawfulness of the detention, the that injunction challenge can be made at the High Court.

[Obie]

Further Sad news for ETS victims.

Section 10(8) invalidate Section 3C.

Surely this cannot be right.

We have not heard the last of it yet.

[vinny]

It's not clear how he had made his application.

I find it hard to believe that he was refused (8) on the date of his application (3), unless he had applied in-person. If he had applied in-person, then they should have given him the refusal notice, with no rights of appeal, on that day.

Correctly, Section 3C would not be engaged at all, if he was refused with leave remaining, unless he made another valid in-time application that was pending.

It's also not clear that the removal decision (5) came first (10). However, this seems to be irrelevant, if Section 10(8) overrides Section 3C.

See also 55.

[Obie]

I find it shocking, that a Judge of the calibre of Peter Lane, can make this kind of Judgement.

It look like the Daily Mail is having its way. The Court of Appeal will need to overturn this as quickly as possible.

He is of the View that the Leave in 3(C) can be evoked by 10(8). That certainly cannot be right. The use of IQ Pakistan to Justify such views is most troubling.

Section 3C cannot be the same as an extant leave granted.

If this Judgement is correct. The Secretary of State will be entitled to issue a Section 10(8) notice in the middle of an appeal. This may have the effect of bringing to an end the appeal process if done retrospectively. May have the effect of overturning Section 78 of the 2002 act.

It is just rubbish. Nonsense. It is causing me headache. I may have to revert to it again tomorrow.

A friend of mine was working on a JR on exactly this basis.

This will be a huge setback on him.

It is as if the courts don't respect the law any more, and this is dangerous in a supposedly democratic state.

Everything is lacking in that judgement, reasoning, common sense, lawfulness, legal soundness.

[brightstar]

How long does ETS hold voice recordings for TOEIC?
ETS says they cannot re-score TOEIC tests after 3 months and they hold scores (not voices or paper answers) only for 2 years.
Does it mean the voice recordings are not stored for more than 3 months ?
Even if they hold the recordings, are they valid, as ETS is the main accused and they are providing evidence which may not be authentic?

The Home Office letter says - "ETS has a record of your speaking test" and "On the basis of information provided by ETS, .........".
So the Home Office does not have any direct evidence. Don't they have to prove that the information provided by ETS is authentic and valid?

[Obie]

The DPA does not set a fixed time for holding a date.

It is dependant on Necessity and relevance.

[K4]

don't know how long will it take for them to finish this investigation anyone has any idea?

it's ETS to blame as well as they handed out licence left right center to every language institute

[Obie]

The investigation is an ongoing one.

If people have done nothing wrong, then i don't believe they should have anything to fear.

The must be able to find strength and solace from the fact that they have done that , for which they have been accused.

[K4]

How come UKVI trust ETS aren't they under investigation they can produce anything hell they aren't even based in the UK.
That's what happens when you outsource hopefully it will all be over soon. I think everyone should deserve a chance regardless.

[Frontier Mole]

Obie
There are literally thousands of students who fall into the totally invalid results category where there is absolutely no doubt as to their deception.
Many have stated they bought into the deception because it was an easy option. Many even could have passed the test without a problem and have gone on to take IELTS with good scores. There was an early belief that putting in a replacement SELT could get you off the hook. Now known to a false hope.

The problem with many of the test centres and the colleges the individuals attended was that they bought a joining package which included a guaranteed CAS and a SELT. These packs were prepared in the thousands of cases and hence the massive problem that faces these students.

There MIGHT be a tiny percentage of students thay claim to have taken the test themselves that are classed as invalid BUT you might well find they became proxy test takers themselves. This was not an uncommon event.

The predominant claimers of innocence are wishful thinkers and hopeful types believing that if they shout loud enough and long enough they will be believed. They are the same group of students that rarely attended college, came primarily to work and have nothing to show for X numbers of years study. They as students were the very reason that the colleges who sponsored them subsequently lost their licences for poor recruitment practices.

Not once have I seen a sucessful JR for an invalid test tagged student and see very little chance of that changing.

The rounding up of the invalid test students continues with reasonable sucess and they are being removed on the whole with little issue. This is and will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

There is a whole industry of legal reps clawing in thousands in JR fees for hopeless cases, the great majority don't pass initial review.

The reality for those identified as submitting an invalid test result there is no escape from. the inevitably of being refused futher leave. The question they have to ask themselves is do they want to fund the shiny new cars and holiday villas of the JR sharks offering the vague hope of a miracle win.

For those that are guilty by association and were classed as giving suspect test results due to where they sat their tests or the secondary evidence then they should be treated differently. I believe many have been asked to submit another SELT to prove the validity of their ETS score.

The issue is the enormity of the numbers and hence the concentrated effort on the invalid test result givers.

[Obie]

Frontier Mole i am minded of the difficulty in engaging in this debate with you, as it is likely to end in futility.

You are simply making bare assertions, taking about tiny percentage , majority , without any concerete evidence to back up these unfounded assertions.

In the UK a person is innocent until proven guilty. A party accused of wrong doing ought to be given an opportunity to defend themselves.

You views may be right, but again it is just views. No concrete evidence to back it up.

I remember when the CCL issue came up several years back, i use to challenge people on this forum, that they most have know what CCL was doing in producing these false certificate.

It ended up being these case, that i was wrong. Several of these student had attended in good faith and obtained genuine certificates. Scores of them mounted litigations and succeeded.


Whether or not you or me is correct, the fact remains that these people are entitled to due process and the ability to defend themselves in a court of law.

Until the commencement of this due process, these people are innocent as far as i am concerned.

We are supposed to be in a western world, not one of these rogue states , where you have these kangaroo courts.

[Frontier Mole]

Obie,

This is not CCL, the scale of the deception employed there is insignificant compared to ETS and the policy in place in regards PGD qualifications was weak to the point of being wothless. The outcome was not good for UKBA based on the loophole in allowing just about anyone to offer a PGD. The net result of that being the introduction of the policy of only allowing accredited qualifications to be acceptable for Tier 4 purposes.

ETS is a different case - the level of work that has gone into the voice analysis,was on an unprecedented scale and went through secondary verification. Some of the evidence is unbelievable - full on East London accents recorded for rural nominally educated individuals that have barely enough English to answer their name and address when they are encountered. These individuals in the main are those that entered into the tier 4 system pre SELT. Again another change in policy to stop the wholesale abuse of colleges accessing the English ability of students.
The vast majority of those who you wish to give additional rights of appeal to knowingly bought their false SELT for whatever reason and accept the consequence of doing so.
Why are they a special case, what makes that group any different from any other individuals that employed deception by other means?
The courts have accepted the evidence from UKVI and ETS in relation to those that are not in doubt, those classed as invalid. There is no gray area there.

There will be some interesting battles ahead for those that still want to JR but as I have said before - there has not been a single win for an invalid tagged student to date. That in itself suggests that the appeals are futile and without any substance.

I understand your view in the granting of appeal rights, they still do have appeal rights, just not in country.

Lets see how this turns out in the coming months. The lack of any real clamour on the forum apart from the inital arrests shows that those that participated in the deception are not defending their position with any vigour. That alone would indicate the true scale of the injustice you perceive to be is just not the case.

[K4]

What about people who applied ILR and have previous history of toeic?? I heard they are sending out letters that your case will take more than 6 months to process. Some people did went to their tests it's the centers which screwed up. It should be ETS doing the checks before producing results. They didn't mind when the cash was flowing. Let's see how long it will go for.

[Frontier Mole]

ETS did not renew their contract to conduct SELT's in the UK.
Reputationly they have nothing more to lose in the UK. They do provide SELT's for other countries hence they are mindful to cooperate with UKVI as they obviously don't want to lose further contracts.
I have heard the same nonsense in regards the test centres - it was their fault - at what point is it their fault? Did they push the candidate out of the seat and grab the headset so some other person could take the test....
Those thousands of students that stepped aside to let others take their test are at fault as every bit as the test centres facilitating the fraud in the first place.
The students took their chance, they have been found out so they now have to face the consequence.
There is no error, misjudgement, oversight or mistake - those who are declared as invalid test givers had to be a willing party to the deception. They had to have their picture taken as part of the process and thereafter would have had to make the conscious decision to step aside.

[PaperPusher]

Obie, once the Home Office started making a note of CCL cases they recorded over two and a half thousand PGD diplomas from CCL. There would have been of course others who were granted before the alarm was raised. There are sometimes determinations mentioning people being granted leave. It was found, beyond reasonable doubt by the way, that CCL never ran those PGD courses.

I well remember everyone saying that they were unwitting victims, but of course none of them were.

Months and months of protestations of innocence. People really do have that level of bare faced cheek.

A handful attended CCL on a course that wasn't a PG diploma, but accepted the bogus certificate when CCL lost the ability to run the accredited course.

Just saying.

"NA and Others" is the main case, if you are interested. I remember one Pakistani lawyer challenging his refusal and succeeding, because the judge seemed to believe that a lawyer would of course always tell the truth. Apart from the odd aberration like that scores didn't challenge and win.

I am sure it will all come out in the wash so to speak.

Also, it is worth bearing in mind that there were roughly 35,000 PSW applications a year (if my memory is correct). Three thousand or so bogus CCL certificates in a year, plus the other smaller scale scams and individuals forging their own paperwork, over 10% of applicants prepared to get PSW by committing a criminal offence..... This ETS thing should not be surprising.

What I personally find interesting is how people justify this fraud to live in the UK to themselves and/or their families. It must be something that is endemic and culturally acceptable among the international student population for fraud to occur at this level. I don't think all the blame can be laid at the Home Office's door because there appear to be plenty of willing customers.

[Obie]

City of London Academy, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWHC 3755 (Admin) (11 November 2014)

Even the colleges are victims of this sad saga.

They are expected to police student ability to speak English aswell. Even those who can speak english very well, like most of the ETS victims, are expected to be monitored.

The colleges are required to possess psychic abilities aswell.

[PaperPusher]

Hopefully I understand this correctly. The college is asserting that some of the students have a good standard of English so the fraudulent test results would not have been noticed. However, they also appear to be asserting that some students' English was poor enough for their CAS to be withdrawn. I am not sure that lets the college totally off the hook where the defence is that they offered courses to students who were not able to follow the course frankly. No psychic ability needed there, just assessing if the prospective student is able to do the course, which they should be doing anyway surely? Interviews, do none of them do interviews??? Even government funded colleges do this for British/EEA students. No reputable college wants a student who cannot get the most from the course, or who will drop out.

People on here have admitted using a proxy, and then submitting the fraudulently obtained results.

As I said, I am sure it will all come out in the wash.

[Obie]

Some hope for some ETS victims with British or Settled Spouse or unmarried partner

(a) reasonable cause to doubt that an English language test in speaking and listening at a
minimum of level A1 of the Common Framework of Reference for Languages relied on at any
time to meet a requirement for limited leave to enter or remain in Part 8 or Appendix FM was
genuinely obtained; or
(b) information that the test certificate or result awarded to the applicant has been withdrawn by
the test provider for any reason,the decision-maker may discount the document and the applicant must provide a new test
certificate or result from an approved provider which shows that they meet the requirement, if
they are not exempt from it.

It appears that the government has realised that this effort of pursuing ETS beneficiaries with British or Settled spouse may be futile, as their convention rights may well outweigh their alleged ETS crime.

[K4]

Some hope for some ETS victims with British or Settled Spouse or unmarried partner

(a) reasonable cause to doubt that an English language test in speaking and listening at a
minimum of level A1 of the Common Framework of Reference for Languages relied on at any
time to meet a requirement for limited leave to enter or remain in Part 8 or Appendix FM was
genuinely obtained; or
(b) information that the test certificate or result awarded to the applicant has been withdrawn by
the test provider for any reason,the decision-maker may discount the document and the applicant must provide a new test
certificate or result from an approved provider which shows that they meet the requirement, if
they are not exempt from it.

It appears that the government has realised that this effort of pursuing ETS beneficiaries with British or Settled spouse may be futile, as their convention rights may well outweigh their alleged ETS crime.

Hope they discount people who have applied ILR and had previous history with ETS

[PaperPusher]

Some hope for some ETS victims with British or Settled Spouse or unmarried partner

(a) reasonable cause to doubt that an English language test in speaking and listening at a
minimum of level A1 of the Common Framework of Reference for Languages relied on at any
time to meet a requirement for limited leave to enter or remain in Part 8 or Appendix FM was
genuinely obtained; or
(b) information that the test certificate or result awarded to the applicant has been withdrawn by
the test provider for any reason,the decision-maker may discount the document and the applicant must provide a new test
certificate or result from an approved provider which shows that they meet the requirement, if
they are not exempt from it.

It appears that the government has realised that this effort of pursuing ETS beneficiaries with British or Settled spouse may be futile, as their convention rights may well outweigh their alleged ETS crime.

Which is the appendix to part 8 of the Immigration rules where it states that the person must not fall for refusal under general grounds. Not really a get out of jail free clause as far as I can see. A doubt is a doubt. Knowing or believing a document to be false something else.