Immigration advice

[key138]

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am a 52 years old Singaporean. I am looking to join my son in the UK, who will be applying for ILR soon. He is currently on Tier 1 General Migrant scheme. From our understanding of the UK immigration laws, since I am not financially dependent on him, I am not able to apply to join him under any family visa scheme even when he was naturalised to become British citizen. Hence, I would like to seek immigration advice on the best route to take to gain settlement in the UK.

Here's a brief summary of my UK immigration history:

I have been to the UK on numerous occasions as a visitor, and the dates of my visits are listed below:

29 May 2000
11 June 2000
10 December 2000
01 May 2001
26 September 2002
31 January 2003
07 June 2003
03 September 2003

I cant remember exactly how long I have stayed on each of these occasions, but on each occasion I left within the six months that visitors are permitted to remain in the UK for. On one such visit, in 2003, I decided to return to full-time studies and build upon my work
experience, and I enrolled with Kaplan Finance, at that time known as Financial Training Company (FTC), a recognised educational provider,
on the ACCA course, with the intention of gaining a professional qualification as a chartered accountant. This course comprises of 14 modules, and the ACCA allow students up to 10 years to complete the course.

My student visa was extended on two occasions, and I remained lawfully
in the UK until 30 April 2007. Unfortunately, I overstayed my visa at that
point, but I made a voluntary departure from the UK on 07 February 2008.
Following my return to Singapore, I made three applications to return to the UK to be present at the graduation of my son but in the second of these applications the ECO stated that I had used deception by stating that I had never been required to leave the UK, when I had been issued with an IS 151A when I was leaving the UK, so that the application was refused under paragraph 320(7 A). I lodged another application, in which in response to the same question I stated that I had been
required to leave the UK; this time my application was refused under paragraph 320(7B) on the grounds that I had used deception in the previous application, and therefore was subject to mandatory refusal of all future applications for the next 10 years.

My son engaged a solicitor to appeal against this decision. Though we didnt win the appeal, the immigration judge commented the following:

"On 7 February 2008 as she arrived at Heathrow airport she was issued with a form IS151A because she was an overstayer. She was assured by the immigration officer that this was a routine procdure. All she had to do was apply for an entry clearance which would "overide" the form's effect.

After her return her husband had recovered. She planned to come to the United Kingdom to attend her son's graduation ceremony in May 2008. She applied for a visitor's visa on 12 March 2008 which was refused because she failed to produce an invitation letter. Instead of appealing she decided to reapply. That application was rejected because it was alleged that she deliberately withheld an important fact. This was that she did not state that she had been required to leave the UK. To the best of her memory, she recalled that in anwser to the question whether she had been required to leave UK she ticked "no". In her view, she was not required to leave the UK since she left in her own accord.

I turned to the Home Office Presenting Officer and asked whether it was her intention to challenge the veracity of the appellant's testimony. She told me that she did not, I then asked her to explain on what basis the respondent could justify the suggestion that the appellant failed to disclose that she had been required to leave since the form IS151 was served on her as she was leaving. The Presenting Officer was lost for words.

The appellant's repesentative acknowledge that because the appellant had previously overstayed she fell to be excluded from the United Kingdom for a period of twelve months. However, there was absolutely no basis on which she could be excluded for the ten years claimed by the respondent.

I expressed on my disquiet at the hearing at what appeared to be an abusive use of the newly enacted paragarph 320 (7B)., The provision was enacted to penalise people who use deception as a means of entering the United Kingdom. It was not intended to penalise those that leave the United Kingdom volunatrily.

In this case, not only did the appellant leave voluntarily it was she who provided the form IS151A. Clearly, if her intention was to conceal her overstay in the United Kingdom, then she would not have volunteered it. In any event, it seemed to me a gross abuse of the expression "required to leave the UK" when the appellant was in the process of leaving in her own accord.

I would hope that a senior officer in the office of the respondent will consider whether the draconian powers enacted in paragraph 320(7B) has been properly exercised in this case."

From the above, though it was not explicitly stated, it can be inferred that I am not subject to a 10 year ban and I am able to apply to enter the UK after February 2009. Thus, I applied for a student visa to complete my ACCA qualifications in March 2009. However, it was rejected on the basis, quoting directly from the refusal letter:

“The fact that you have chosen to miss the first weeks for your course leads me to question your commitment to your studies and whether or not studies are the main reasons for your application to travel to the UK.
You state that you will sponsor yourself and have produced the letter from Progressive Automotive as evidence of the earnings that you have accrued in the 12 months since you returned to Singapore. This includes a $50,000 bonus, which represents over 6 times your annual salary. Given that you have worked for the company for just one year and have provided no independent evidence to confirm this payment or indeed your employment such as tax document, I cannot be satisfied as to the provenance of these funds. The vast majority of the funds held in your account have been deposited in large cash deposits since January. In the light of the financial evidence provided by you regarding the source of the funds held in your account and your employment, I cannot on the balance of probabilities be satisfied that you are able to meet the costs of your course and accommodation and the maintenance of yourself and any dependants without taking employment of engaging in business or having recourse to public funds. (57 viii)â€

[Ben]

Hello ST.

It is true, even when your son is a British citizen it will not help you to migrate to the UK.

Does you son really intend to give up Singapore citizenship? If his intention is to live in the UK only and not in another EU country, why not settle for ILR only?

New Zealand citizens have no preferential treatment over Singapore citizens in the UK.

[key138]

Yeah - I advised him to give up his Singaporean citizenship. We love the lifestyle in the UK and there are more job opportunities abroad. Besides, most of our family have moved away, there is no point in us remaining in Singapore. We have family in the UK and my son likes the UK so it would be good if we could move there, otherwise, we might just have to move to the states to join our other relatives, but apparently it takes 10 years to sponsor a green card for siblings.

[Ben]

Ok, if he's sure..

Once your son is a British citizen, consider using EU law. Sacrifices will have to be made, largely on his part.

He will have to move to another EEA nation (like Ireland, for example). You will have to move with him. He will have to work (or be self-employed) there, for at least six months.

After that, he can return to the UK and you can return with him.

It is a free of charge process, but it may not be practical.

[Wanderer]

Ok, if he's sure..

Once your son is a British citizen, consider using EU law. Sacrifices will have to be made, largely on his part.

He will have to move to another EEA nation (like Ireland, for example). You will have to move with him. He will have to work (or be self-employed) there, for at least six months.

After that, he can return to the UK and you can return with him.

It is a free of charge process, but it may not be practical.

Doesn't she have to be dependent?

[Ben]

Doesn't she have to be dependent?

Not necessarily.

She merely has to be a person described in either Article 2(2) or Article 3(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC.

2) "Family member" means:
(a) the spouse;
(b) the partner with whom the Union citizen has contracted a registered partnership, on the
basis of the legislation of a Member State, if the legislation of the host Member State
treats registered partnerships as equivalent to marriage and in accordance with the
conditions laid down in the relevant legislation of the host Member State;
(c) the direct descendants who are under the age of 21 or are dependants and those of the
spouse or partner as defined in point (b);
(d) the dependent direct relatives in the ascending line and those of the spouse or partner as
defined in point (b);

2. Without prejudice to any right to free movement and residence the persons concerned may have
in their own right, the host Member State shall, in accordance with its national legislation, facilitate
entry and residence for the following persons:
(a) any other family members, irrespective of their nationality, not falling under the definition in
point 2 of Article 2 who, in the country from which they have come, are dependants or
members of the household of the Union citizen having the primary right of residence, or
where serious health grounds strictly require the personal care of the family member by the
Union citizen;
(b) the partner with whom the Union citizen has a durable relationship, duly attested.
The host Member State shall undertake an extensive examination of the personal circumstances and
shall justify any denial of entry or residence to these people.

For example:

• Son naturalises as a British citizen.
• Mother comes to the UK for up to six months as a visitor, residing with son.
• Before the six months are up, son and mother enter another EEA country - son as a UK national, mother as a member of his household in the country from which which they have come.
• Son engages in economic activity and they both reside together for at least six months.
• Son and mother return to the UK using Singh.

[Wanderer]

Doesn't Singh apply to spouses only?

[Ben]

Doesn't Singh apply to spouses only?

The ECJ ruling on Singh consistently mentions spouse, rather than family member.

However, at least in the UK, spouse is taken to mean family member in the broader sense, as is consistent with the Directive.

Family Members of a British national (Surinder Singh)

The ECJ case of SURINDER SINGH ruled that where a national of a Member State goes with his/her non-EEA national spouse to another Member State to exercise an economic Treaty right, on return to his/her own Member State the non-EEA national spouse is entitled to join the EEA national under EC law.

Under regulation 9 of the 2006 Regulations, the family members of a British national returning to the UK will be treated as if they were the family members of an EEA national under the following conditions:

• After leaving the United Kingdom, the British national resided in an EEA state and –
  o Was employed there (other than on a transient or casual basis); or
  o Established him/herself there as a self-employed person; and
• If the family member is his/her spouse, the marriage took place, and the parties lived together in an EEA state, before the British national returned to the United Kingdom.

The family member of a British national will only have a right to reside in the UK under the 2006 Regulations if the British national would have a right to reside in the UK under those Regulations if he/she were an EEA national, e.g. because he/she is working or self-sufficient.

See section 3.2 of this chapter for information on issuing a residence card in SURINDER SINGH cases.

See Chapter 3 for more information on evidence required by Entry Clearance Officers in order to issue an EEA family permit in these circumstances.

[Obie]

The ruling consistently mentioned Spouse, because the case involved the spouse of a British Citizens, same with Metock and Mrax, just like Jia and Eind only mentioned dependent family members.

However under EU law, there is no discrimination among family member, which means rules applied to one type, applies to all, regardless of whether they are Article 2 or 3(Save for the few limitations and requirements attached for these categories of family members).

One could quote case law for Eind in cases involving Spouse, and it would be perfectly fine to do so.

[Wanderer]

The ruling consistently mentioned Spouse, because the case involved the spouse of a British Citizens, same with Metock and Mrax, just like Jia and Eind only mentioned dependent family members.

However under EU law, there is no discrimination among family member, which means rules applied to one type, applies to all, regardless of whether they are Article 2 or 3(Save for the few limitations and requirements attached for these categories of family members).

One could quote case law for Eind in cases involving Spouse, and it would be perfectly fine to do so.

eughhh!

At this rate I'll be a stranger in my own country!

[key138]

Thanks for your advice.

Summarising what has been discussed so far to make sure I got the right picture:

1) A family member can be a non-dependent parent under EU law.

2) Therefore, it is possible to gain settlement via the following proposed route:

* Son naturalises as a British citizen.
* Mother comes to the UK for up to six months as a visitor, residing with son.
* Before the six months are up, son and mother enter another EEA country - son as a UK national, mother as a member of his household in the country from which which they have come.
* Son engages in economic activity and they both reside together for at least six months.
* Son and mother return to the UK using Singh.

Does the above sound right?

Meanwhile, I am thinking of visiting my son (he hasnt naturalised as a British Citizen yet) for Christmas, he wants to show me the new house he is going to get as well. Do you think I will be admitted to the country? If you reckon there is no problem with it, do I need to get entry clearance first before travelling to the UK or you reckon I could just enter the country without applying for entry clearance first since under normal circumstances, Singaporean nationals do not require visa to visit the UK if his/her stay is less than 6 months?

It is probably too much to hope for but how likely it is for me to change my status once I am in the country? I am thinking of applying for a student visa to complete my ACCA studies - according to what I have seen so far, applying while you are in the UK is a lot easier than applying via a consulate.

[Casa]

Hi,
One more thing I wanted to confirm. I am 52 years of age was in UK for 7 years

Why have you posted in this thread from 2009? And what does your question relate to? You need to start your OWN thread where members can respond.