reapplying for PSW after 12month period?

[jerryguy]

Hi guys.
Could someone please help me as am at my wits end

I submitted my PSW application on the 8th of July and my 12month deadline is on the 11th (as stated on my graduation cert). However because I did it back in my home country I did not have the last's months bank statement. Hence not wanting to miss the deadline I submitted the application with an online statement with a letter saying that because my bank is in the UK, the original copy statement is on its way and I would be more than happy to produce it should they request it to verify it with the online statement. However I got got my rejection letter today 19th July

I don't know if I can still submit a fresh application as technically my 12mth period has expired after submitting my first application? I guess the next best thing would be to send in the administrative review and explain the situation?

[vinny]

I guess the next best thing would be to send in the administrative review and explain the situation?

Probably best.

[jerryguy]

I guess the next best thing would be to send in the administrative review and explain the situation?

Probably best.

Thanks very much for the reply!!
I feel quite pessimistic as I feel the odds are quite against me
has anyone ever been through this?

[jerryguy]

hi guys

after thinking about it how about if I was to submit a fresh application with a cover letter?
also in the application form there is a section on whether i've previously applied and sections where I can state why i was refused. Surely they can see that because I was refused this has caused me to go over the 12th month period?

or am I wasting my money?

[vinny]

A 'fresh' application wouldn't meet with all the requirements (245X).

The odds were against you because you didn't meet the requirements of their guidance, but is it binding?

The following may also help with the Administrative Review:
245AA(b). Did they take reasonable steps to verify the submitted on-line statements?
He who asserts must prove (MH (Respondent's bundle: documents not provided) Pakistan [2010] UKUT 168 (IAC))
RFL4.4 What is a false document?

[jerryguy]

Thanks so very much Vinny, esp for taking the time to reply to both threads

[joxiri]

I happen to be in the exact same position as you
I really hope they accept the online statements we used
Is it possible for them to call the bank to verify
If they have some common sense they should realise its initial application appela that delayed us
And besides I explained that I wasn't in uk so I cnt even withdraw from account
I really hope its good news do inform me of your outcome

[joxiri]

Jemmyguy did you get your online statements stamped by your bank

[jerryguy]

Jemmyguy did you get your online statements stamped by your bank

hey there.

nope was in my home country by that time and we don't have a Barclays bank here. I don't think they actually will call to confirm with your bank. It is common sense but they are rigid with the rules.
Good luck with your application and I will let you guys know the out come.
Please do keep us updated too

[joxiri]

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... ce-pankina

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... enance.pdf
seems like some good news is on the horizon
by my interpretation of this document
is it correct that as we submitted original bank statements showing our balance on a particular day a month before application being the mimimum required then we will be fine

pls can people sed more light on this thank yu

[jerryguy]

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... ce-pankina

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... enance.pdf
seems like some good news is on the horizon
by my interpretation of this document
is it correct that as we submitted original bank statements showing our balance on a particular day a month before application being the mimimum required then we will be fine

pls can people sed more light on this thank yu

Hey there!!
THANK YOU!!!! This information actually gives me more leverage towards my Admin review! But am also now slightly confused. Is an admin. review still the appropriate way to go?

anyway... still drafting my AR but will be sent off soon!

[jerryguy]

I hope online statements too are allowed but that's based on the discretion of the officer reviewing the case. In my case the online statement was the last months statement

[vinny]

However, if the rule is being wrongly applied, an administrative review should be attempted. If that fails and there is a solid argument, with evidence, that the rule has been wrongly applied, it is possible to lodge what is called a judicial review. Administrative reviews are conducted by Entry Clearance Managers, who I have to say do not have a good track record in correcting silly decisions by their minions.

Judicial review is not a cheap process. It requires a UK-based solicitor, who lodges the application at the High Court in the UK. A barrister will usually be required, which also racks up the expense. If you are in this position, there is advice in finding solicitors in the ‘Getting advice‘ page.

Perhaps you can persuade the administrative/judicial review that under Pankina, the specified documents as specified in the guidance is not binding and too restrictive, as it also rejects genuine documents? Therefore, 245AA(b) should also be applicable, where they treat your online statements as what "purports to be, a specified document". Then, they should have taken reasonable steps to verify the documents.

To my mind, the "container" (specified documents) should be less important than the "contents" (what's actually in the bank account).

Good luck!

[vignette]

But wouldn't they have a problem verifying online bank statements?

I have enough trouble getting my bank to tell me anything about my own bank account, I would think they would just refuse to give any information to anyone else no matter who or why.

[joxiri]

But jemmyguy you have original statements dating back 1 month to the time of application right which shows the balance
From what I read btw 23 of june and 23 of july if you have balance dating back 1 month then we should be fine hopefully
Is this correct can some1 pls confirm

[jerryguy]

no, unfortunately the last month statement is an online statement. so that may be a problem. Anyway, in light of the latest news am slightly abit more optimistic

[jerryguy]

Perhaps you can persuade the administrative/judicial review that under Pankina, the specified documents as specified in the guidance is not binding and too restrictive, as it also rejects genuine documents? Therefore, 245AA(b) should also be applicable, where they treat your online statements as what "purports to be, a specified document". Then, they should have taken reasonable steps to verify the documents.


Good luck!

Hi Vinny
Could I please ask, what exactly do you mean rejects genuine documents?

Thanks so very much

[vinny]

Why were you refused?

[jerryguy]

cause they didn't accept a copy of my online statement.
I see, so basically the guidelines are flawed because it also rejects authentic documents i.e my online statement?

[joxiri]

I have finally gotten my psw visa 8 mnths 10 mnths after initial application in the uk
I don't know if they accepted my online statement or used pankina judgement because ieither way I had a balance of £2800 in an original statement 2 weeks before the application
So under pankina judgement I would have been fine as I applied btw 22 june and 23 july
As my online statements did not even have my name, only acct no and sort code which correspond with the original statement for the 1st 2 mnths I sent there's a good chance it was d pankina judgement
Well I am very pleased and I hope this information can help other people on here

[vinny]

cause they didn't accept a copy of my online statement.
I see, so basically the guidelines are flawed because it also rejects authentic documents i.e my online statement?

Perhaps also refer to them to the House of Commons, Home Affairs Committee's report:

150. We agree that an administrative review on objective criteria will be more transparent and easier to administer. However, requiring a new application and a fresh fee for failing to furnish the UK Border Agency with rigidly defined types of paperwork is palpably unfair. This is particularly the case for applicants from countries in which the use of documents such as payslips is not common practice. That some applicants are unable to meet the documentation requirements through circumstances beyond their control is apparent from our conversations with UK Border Agency officials in New Delhi. We therefore recommend that applicants should be able to submit additional documentation, if it is requested, without having to make an entirely fresh application and pay another fee.

151. The Government should provide for an independent review of visa refusal cases under the Points Based System by the Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency, but, in a departure from the current situation, the Chief Inspector must be given the authority to investigate individual cases, and the power to provide appropriate remedy to applicants. The Chief Inspector should also be asked to review visa applications that have been successfully granted to ensure that they were correctly issued.