appeal in the ''COURT OF APPEAL''

Timeline as follow
Applied on 6th September 2014
Visa refused on 10th November 2014
Appeal to the first tribunal and Hearing on the 18th June 2015
Appeal dismissed on 6th July 2015
Appeal in the UT hearing date was 18th January 2016
Appeal dismissed on 18th feb 2016

We applied for tier 1 entrepreneur 50 k visa via PSW route and got refused on the basis of marketing material as per HO our business card and leaflet do not state the date and services on them and the website domain was registered on someone’s else name (that was the person we had a contract with) we submitted the receipt for business card and leaflet along with the application and everything was dated before 11th of July and the website was in business from 2013

We applied for permission to appeal in the first tribunal, which was granted, and we had our hearing.
On the day of hearing we had a conversation with the home office representative and she said that she has no issues with the card and leaflet and they will narrow the appeal and would only talk about the website issue. *(This was an out of court settlement)* but neither the HO rep nor our solicitor mention this concession in the court.
After a long court scene we received our decision which was dismissed and the reason on which they refused were:

That the card and the leaflet Colors scheme do not match, therefore the judge said that the business was not genuine. Although HO representative had no issue with both things and we were not asked anything about these two in the court.
In short decision was completely irrelevant n in a new direction of business not being genuine

We than applied for permission to appeal in the upper tribunal that was granted.
In the hearing the UT judge agreed to almost every thing that the FTJ said and also said that he cant accept the concession that was given by the HO rep to narrow the appeal as there are no evidence to prove it. Beside he did not talk about the business cards and the leaflets at all And dismissed our appeal

Over all the only issue that FTJ & UTJ had was marketing material that led them to decide that the business is not genuine. Both the judges did not consider business cards and leaflets at all on the hearing and ignored the fact that both the business cards and leaflets are enough to prove marketing criteria of HO

We have now sent an application to UT for permission to appeal in the COURT OF APPEAL.

I would like to have your sincere opinions and please share your expert advice.

39 views but no replies..guys please throw some light on this ..give ur opinion or share your experiences .

You are barking up the wrong tree with the so called concession you had with the HO rep.
There was no concession at all. The HO PO does not have the ability grant concessions in an out of court manner as suggested.
The only time that a concession is possible is when specified in writing or directly verbally given to the Judge in the hearing.
So don't harp on with that point as it gets you no where.

I do not believe that the difference between success at appeal and not is some low end marketing material. There has to be more to it than that? Usually marketing material is a low end concern and if suspect is tagged onto other concerns. Not having a web presence is more than likely to be more of an issue. Putting the marketing material and the web issue together will get you to a refusal.

In the court decision I imagine the two issues were linked? So it is unlikely that it was just the marketing material that was the sole reason for the case to be dismissed.

We were not relying on the consession part obviously cuz it was not discussed in front of the judge as I have mentioned that in my above case. As far as Web domain is concerned we submitted copy of contract wid the Web designer. But the issue they had with the marketing material was ridiculous...thy have just dragged our case out of nothing ..We provided all the receipts and agreements to prove the authenticity but they were just not bringing that Into notice ..and that is the reason that we have decided to go for the court of appeal . .even if thy do not consider website ..The business cards and leaflets itself are enough evident of marketing because when we applied the rule was to at least show 1 medium of marketing that u Hv done to promote your business ..We showed several of thm .

I think you will need more than luck to get your case through any level of court.
JR is difficult and costly plus the fact they actually grant very few cases a hearing.

Normally in marketing cases they want to see the production of materials, the use of the materials and the evidence to support the existence of the business at the magic date in July.

Business cards and leaflets are the weakest evidence you can produce, they are easy to come by, cheap and have little value as marketing materials. It was the most commonly produced material at the time the door closed on the scheme for £50k. The numerous low quality and absolutely worthless materials that were pushed out in support of genuine business claims at the time made it very easy to rubbish them and it was normally accepted by the courts they where next to worthless.

You will have to go a long long way to get a different view of of any court as by your own account the materials were of poor quality. So the credibility factor is weighted against you. The question that pushes the balance of probability is simple - in Producing low end marketing materials did you believe in the business and is reasonable to conclude that in failing to do so were you ever seriously expecting to really undertake a genuine business. The lack of care and attention in the very little effort to market the business all points to anything other than a genuine business.

I am assuming no sales had been made at the time of application and no evidence of sales were produced at the first hearing? Has the business traded? Have you invested the funds? Did you try to make a go of it during the appeal stages?

Although outside the scope of the appeal if the answer is no to those questions it further damages your credibility.

I wish you well but I will be surprised if you get a JR hearing.

The company was registered in 2012 and since than the business was trading.as far as business cards and leaflets are concerned they were produced way before 11th July. At the time when application was submitted there was no criteria of what quality should be used for advertising material and I think a genuine business men will always find its way of cutting his cost on as many things as he can . Prove of business trading and contracts with clients were also submitted along with the application .
We have spoke to our solicitor and he said that our case would go for court of appeal and not for JR .
The business is genuine and that is why we are still fighting for it.

Sorry to cast doubt on your claims....
If your business was trading from 2012 why was this not brought up at your appeals. Bank accounts, sales invoices, equipment purchases, annual accounts etc. must have been available? So if none of this was put forward you have to ask the question, when you say trading.... The company was formed? And that was about it?

Who said that nothing was brought up in the court.all required docs were submitted along with the application .but HO didn't object on the genuiness of the business thy just had an issue with the marketing material and that's what we brought forward in our ground of appeal..it was actually the first tribunal from where this issue was brought forward just cuz the colour theme of business cards n leaflet dsnt match...I know it sounds ridiculous but thats the actual thing that happened ..everyone including our solicitors who evehas read our decision said that dere was nothing in the case n it shd Hv been allowed in the 1st attempt cuz we provided with all the evidence that HO objected on ...apart from marketing thy had no other issue........ it just looks like that the things are being dragged in a different direction ...