- 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
This is an immigration forum, not a theological one.Obie wrote:Evil cannot be allowee to prevail over good.
The first notice of detention?avjones wrote:Start with the notices for detention. What reasons are given?
Is removal imminent? Have removal directions been set, or a "removal window" notified to him?
In the first letter they said removal is imminentavjones wrote:Start with the notices for detention. What reasons are given?
Is removal imminent? Have removal directions been set, or a "removal window" notified to him?
Did your prospective husband apply for asylum in Germany? Does he has asylum status in Germany? What are his grounds for seeking asylum?Zimsparta wrote:I am a German National living in UK since 2004
I did not apply for a permanent residence
My husband is Gambian
We met online in August 2014.
He was an asylum seeker who came through Libya, Lampedusa, Swiss to Germany.
We chatted, skyped and phoned all the time until I went to see him in Germany in October.
After three weeks i went back home and struggled to be without him.
I Looked into going back to Germany but feel at home here now. Have a mortgage and my son goes to Uni here.
Went back in November for 4 or 5 weeks and did not wanna leave without him.
I Went home and two days later he followed by train.
He managed to enter illegal.
Came to my house before xmas 2014
We have proof of address since feb 2015
in May 15 we got married by double proxy.
Applied for residence card in August.
Got rejected in January.
In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to...address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State...
Of course I want him to be here legally. Who would not want the one they love to be with them without worrying about losing the person any time. I have sent utility bills and also a letter from fertility clinic that we have visited together because we want children but I struggle to call pregnant. I have submitted photos of us in daily common activities. In bed and with my son and his girl at Xmas.secret.simon wrote:Quoted from earlier post.Did your prospective husband apply for asylum in Germany? Does he has asylum status in Germany? What are his grounds for seeking asylum?Zimsparta wrote:I am a German National living in UK since 2004
I did not apply for a permanent residence
My husband is Gambian
We met online in August 2014.
He was an asylum seeker who came through Libya, Lampedusa, Swiss to Germany.
We chatted, skyped and phoned all the time until I went to see him in Germany in October.
After three weeks i went back home and struggled to be without him.
I Looked into going back to Germany but feel at home here now. Have a mortgage and my son goes to Uni here.
Went back in November for 4 or 5 weeks and did not wanna leave without him.
I Went home and two days later he followed by train.
He managed to enter illegal.
Came to my house before xmas 2014
We have proof of address since feb 2015
in May 15 we got married by double proxy.
Applied for residence card in August.
Got rejected in January.
To a disinterested person, it seems that the marriage was being done to legalise his stay in the UK and for no other reason. What evidence have you provided to the Home Office that that is not the case?
I hope that that just means that that reason may seem to be the only reason for the relationship. As a matter of caution, I myself would counsel against the marriage but for immigration considerations.secret.simon wrote:To a disinterested person, it seems that the marriage was being done to legalise his stay in the UK and for no other reason. What evidence have you provided to the Home Office that that is not the case?
(The 4th paragraph does not apply in this case.)A marriage by deception arises when the EU spouse is deceived by the non-EU spouse to genuinely believe that the couple will lead a genuine and lasting marital life.
Such marriage is a marriage of convenience and should be tackled accordingly, with due regard to the innocence of the EU spouse. In such marriages, the EU citizen is not a willing accomplice, but a victim guilty only of good faith.
Such marriages typically, but not necessarily, follow a short relationship on the internet, or after the EU citizen has met the non-EU spouse in a foreign country on holidays.
They may involve violence and threatening behaviour, particularly if the EU spouse has started to have concerns and is unwilling to participate in the immigration process.
This is one of the clarifications that only come into effect if the UK votes to remain in the EU.secret.simon wrote:The European Council decision of 19th February 2016 states, inter alia,In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to...address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State...
This is very true. I have read their handbook last night and and all their score points match us.Richard W wrote: What is a problem, and I don't see how one would refute it, is that what we have been told matches the description of a 'marriage by deception', one of the categories of a 'marriage of convenience' according to the EU commission's handbook on assessment of Sham marriage (the subject of one of the pinned topics on this forum).(The 4th paragraph does not apply in this case.)A marriage by deception arises when the EU spouse is deceived by the non-EU spouse to genuinely believe that the couple will lead a genuine and lasting marital life.
Such marriage is a marriage of convenience and should be tackled accordingly, with due regard to the innocence of the EU spouse. In such marriages, the EU citizen is not a willing accomplice, but a victim guilty only of good faith.
Such marriages typically, but not necessarily, follow a short relationship on the internet, or after the EU citizen has met the non-EU spouse in a foreign country on holidays.
They may involve violence and threatening behaviour, particularly if the EU spouse has started to have concerns and is unwilling to participate in the immigration process.
This is one of the clarifications that only come into effect if the UK votes to remain in the EU.secret.simon wrote:The European Council decision of 19th February 2016 states, inter alia,In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to...address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State...
True.Casa wrote:It seems that one issue here, as explained in the other (now locked thread) that the HO have considerable doubts that the official paperwork for the proxy marriage was in order and the Registrar wasn't a 'competent' person, therefore the marriage is deemed to be invalid.
http://www.immigrationboards.com/eea-ro ... l#p1358835
Obie wrote:If the German Authority has confirmed that the marriage by proxy that was officiated in Gambia is lawful, then you are a married person and cannot remarry. I think your case should be fought within that context.
This doesn't appear to be an immigration question per se.Zimsparta wrote:Question
How do we apply to get married while being
in detention?
Notice period has been passed, commies with Vindictive investigation passed!
Notice is valid for one year.
What steps to take now? Who to apply to go get an appointment near detention centre?
How to arrange?
Was he given and appeal right and has it been exercised?Zimsparta wrote:Obie wrote:If the German Authority has confirmed that the marriage by proxy that was officiated in Gambia is lawful, then you are a married person and cannot remarry. I think your case should be fought within that context.
They did not confirm that this particular marriage was lawful.
The HO rejected the application with the argument that it is NOT the HOST COUNTRY that has to accept a marriage by proxy as legal but the HOME COUNTRY OF THE EEA MEMBER.
So for the HO office to give a RP a proxy marriage would have to be accepted in Germany
I have go an email from the German embassy that says
If the marriage is legal in the country where is was conducted, it will be legal in Germany
Of course it would have to go through the process of registering.
So far the HO argument was that UK may accept proxy marriages but Germany not.
I appreciate your effort at gender-neutral language.lurli wrote:The likes of Secret-simon (Google warrior) and some of his or her mates...
Page 2 of that document suggests that the document has already been voted on, approved (by unanimity, I believe) and would come into force automatically on the UK government notifying the EU authorities that it is remaining in the EU. Certain parts of the document are incumbent on the European Commission bringing forward proposals for amending the relevant directives, which may take a while, but as I understand it, the document takes legal effect immediately on the UK government's notification.lurli wrote:The commission document means nothing until at least UK votes to remain a member of the EU, and as far as I am aware a vote on that is yet to take place.
Richard W wrote:This is one of the clarifications that only come into effect if the UK votes to remain in the EU.secret.simon wrote: The European Council decision of 19th February 2016 states, inter alia,
In accordance with Union law, Member States are able to take action to...address cases of contracting or maintaining marriages of convenience with third country nationals for the purpose of making use of free movement as a route for regularising unlawful stay in a Member State...
As I understand it, the clarification is only restating existing law, not creating new law and hence does not need to be enacted, but is already law, irrespective of the outcome of the referendum. Hence, my quotation from the document.lurli wrote:the context of commission document which is yet to become law?
That is probably the reason why we care for this country, because we are citizens now.lurli wrote:to think most of you are immigrants before you begged to be granted citizenship in this country.
I agree. It is so inconvenient and irritating to have somebody disagreeing with you or the consensus in a discussion. So much better if everybody went in only one direction, like a well-behaved herd to the slaughter.lurli wrote:This forum is becoming so annoying with members like these
When I was younger, "Little Women" and "Little Men" by Louisa May Alcott were some of my favourite books to read. They must be available in any good public library. I would highly recommend them to you.lurli wrote:Little people.