- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha
I think it would be a good use of £10 for you to make a Subject Access Request and thus get a copy of the Home Office record on you. Having got that report you will know what they know about you and can then plan accordingly.What is my best option ?
They could, in theory, do a lot of cross checking on a lot of people but they will they? Look at it this way: If someone gave themselves up as an illegal immigrant the chances are the HO wouldn't have the time, inclination or manpower to do anything about it.someone told me that they will use this information to check whether an applicant has stayed within the terms of their stay
There is a technical abbreviation for that pessisim: CYA. Make no mistake, though, should you succeed they'll claim all the credit.None of the advice I have received from the solicitors I have spoken to has been helpful – they just keep telling me all the things that can go wrong and offer no way forwards
This is correct I'm afraid. There was a break in your stay in the UK. Under the IDI's (long residence in the UK, April 2007) it is stated that when a person leaves the UK they must have existing leave for when re-enter the UK. If your leave expired after you left the UK and were given a brand new leave when you re-entered (as a student) there was a gap in the 10 year.The problem I have is this. Before my working holidaymaker visa expired (1999) I left the UK for France (on the Eurostar) and came back one month later and re-entered as a student. I have been informed that this one month period when my visa expired when I was abroad was a break in the requirement for there to be continuous residence in the UK. This is the only time I have spent out of the UK. I fear that my application will be refused.
-: and appreciating that these are instructions to BIA staff, William Blake it looks like you will need to wait until 2009 before submitting your 10-year application.A person who leaves the UK when one period of leave expires, and comes back with a fresh grant of leave, will not be resuming his continuous residence, but will instead be starting a new period of residence in the UK.
I thought you said previously that it would depend on whether he has an intention to come back to the UK or not?John wrote:Immigration1 quotes the BIA instructions. It might be worth looking at the whole of that document. Click here to download it.
Having done so read 2.1.3 in particular, and see :-
-: and appreciating that these are instructions to BIA staff, William Blake it looks like you will need to wait until 2009 before submitting your 10-year application.A person who leaves the UK when one period of leave expires, and comes back with a fresh grant of leave, will not be resuming his continuous residence, but will instead be starting a new period of residence in the UK.
VERY relevant point.immigration1 wrote: Secondly, even if you get the file of papers from the HO, it won't show you much that you don't know already also the immigration service stopped using embarkation checks from March 1998 onwards and in any event the burden is on you to show that you remained in the UK throughout these ten years without any gap.
If he were to provide all documents to prove that he's present during that two years 1997-1999, he'd be able to satisfy continuity residency and overwrite the break in his visas?Jeff Albright wrote:VERY relevant point.immigration1 wrote: Secondly, even if you get the file of papers from the HO, it won't show you much that you don't know already also the immigration service stopped using embarkation checks from March 1998 onwards and in any event the burden is on you to show that you remained in the UK throughout these ten years without any gap.
Your Home Office file will probably not show up any records of you getting visa from abroad (through the Embassy) and I have some confidence that if you are non-visa national and was given leave to enter at the port, this might not have been linked to your HO file, either. The port file is not automatically linked to your HO file, anyone seeking information from your port file would have to physically pick up the phone and call Ports Liaison Unit to obtain those records.
I also have suspision that when you enter the UK and fill in the landing card, there is no electronic record of your entry - at least in 1998 it is unlikely there was any. The only record of your entry is your filled in landing card with the IO records at the back showing your reasons for entering the UK and his stamp. The card is then sent to Landing Cards Unit and held there for N number of years.
So Immigration1 is correct that you will have to document all the years you stayed here and produce evidence to satisfy the officer that your were present in the UK all this time, which would probably be the passports you held in the past 10 years with the UK immigration stamps in them.
The record does show that in the past I have indeed posted that. However that was on the basis of the contents of the previous advice IND gave to its staff, not the current version. Accordingly I conclude that IND/BIA have changed their policy.Sunnyday wrote:I thought you said previously that it would depend on whether he has an intention to come back to the UK or not?
Given the apparent change of policy, I feel that someone aggrieved by that change might decide to take their ILR refusal to Judicial Review.5. WHAT CONSTITUTES CONTINUOUS RESIDENCE
Continuity need not be broken by a small number of short absences abroad of up to 6 months at any one time during the 10/14 year period. Short absences cannot be said to disrupt or sever ties with the United Kingdom. These absences should normally be ignored, unless such trips are frequent. In such cases the reasons for such frequent trips should be requested, as the applicant may have a business or be maintaining family ties abroad. In some cases a lengthier absence may still not sever the ties to the United Kingdom. In each case the strength of the ties to the United Kingdom, the reason for, and effect of the absence should be taken into account.
Continuity of residence should be considered as being broken if the applicant:
- was removed or deported from the United Kingdom;
- at the time of his departure there is evidence to indicate that he had no intention of returning or there was an absence of strong ties to the United Kingdom; or
- a lengthy absence which can be considered to have severed ties with the United Kingdom.
n?![/quote]The appeal wouldn't be successful if you tried to argue that the HO are wrong in applying the immigration rules.
I wouldn't appeal that they were wrong in applying the rules but rather that the discretionary power should be applied in my case as a one month break is not sufficient to sever my ties with the UK or deny me of my fundamental place in society.William Blake wrote:n?!The appeal wouldn't be successful if you tried to argue that the HO are wrong in applying the immigration rules.
Well, you need to prove you were here during your WHM so what else can you use to prove you were here legally, other than your passport with the stamp?? Plus, you need to list all the absences. Sorry to be frank, but if you're thinking about lying to the HO to prove your 'ties' to the UK to get ILR, because you are worried about the outcome, lying never helps and you are simply cheating your way through the system.William Blake wrote:
What if I just don't give them my original passport and provide alternative evidence that I have been here for ten years. The issue there I suppose is what about the other requirements of not having spent more than six months etc. out of the country - maybe I just claim I had no abscence from the UK.
Very relevant information. There are just too many changes recently it's so overwhelming.John wrote:The record does show that in the past I have indeed posted that. However that was on the basis of the contents of the previous advice IND gave to its staff, not the current version. Accordingly I conclude that IND/BIA have changed their policy.Sunnyday wrote:I thought you said previously that it would depend on whether he has an intention to come back to the UK or not?
The relevant part of the previous advice to IND staff reads :-
Given the apparent change of policy, I feel that someone aggrieved by that change might decide to take their ILR refusal to Judicial Review.5. WHAT CONSTITUTES CONTINUOUS RESIDENCE
Continuity need not be broken by a small number of short absences abroad of up to 6 months at any one time during the 10/14 year period. Short absences cannot be said to disrupt or sever ties with the United Kingdom. These absences should normally be ignored, unless such trips are frequent. In such cases the reasons for such frequent trips should be requested, as the applicant may have a business or be maintaining family ties abroad. In some cases a lengthier absence may still not sever the ties to the United Kingdom. In each case the strength of the ties to the United Kingdom, the reason for, and effect of the absence should be taken into account.
Continuity of residence should be considered as being broken if the applicant:
- was removed or deported from the United Kingdom;
- at the time of his departure there is evidence to indicate that he had no intention of returning or there was an absence of strong ties to the United Kingdom; or
- a lengthy absence which can be considered to have severed ties with the United Kingdom.
William Blake, when you left the UK you still had a valid visa. The application for the new visa, was that made while the old visa was still valid? Or had the old visa run out when you applied for the new one?
Yes I agree. I read that the BIA staff weren't given written rules before and merely using their discretion and judgement in assessing applications. Now these written guidelines have been published. It depends on how much they choose to follow the guidelines I suppose?SYH wrote:To that point regarding the changing rules
It would be helpful if someone keeps the former versions of the continouus residence rules so that we can reference. As I know I conducted myself based on the informatin given at the time and now that it has changed, I think it is unfair that I might be adversely impacted as a result.
Well, to my limited knowledge, Tue, Wed, Thurs might be better than Mon (a blue starting working day) and Friday (may think of how to leave office and catch a date later on all the time). Morevoer, morning time might be better than late afternoon. Anyway, if you can spend some time on reviewing the PEO experience with similar ILR cases on this board, you might be have clearer idea in mind then.William Blake wrote:.choose a good time at PEO,
What is a good time ?