being physcially present in the UK + both british referees

Hi All,

I am a bit confused by the meaning of this statement about the requirement for BC and it will be kind of you if you can advice please:

"Applicants should have been physically present in the UK at the beginning of the 5 years residence period i.e. the day the HO receives your application 5 years back"

If someone got his ILR, this automatically means he has been living in UK for 5 years. For example, if I got my ILR on 31/07/2013 based on 5 years Tier 1 and been in UK first as student from 2004 to 2008, then on Tier 1 from 2008-2013. If Iyou apply to ILR on 04/08/2014, does this mean that you should be present in UK on 05/08/2009? but the clock for ILR started from 2008? also, what if you were on holiday on 05/08/2009 to 30/08/2009 (i.e.begining of residence period)?


On the other hand, would it be ok to have the 2 british referees ? or one should be non british?

Thank you in advance for your help.

Naturalisation applications are based on 5 years in your case, so 1 year ILR and 4 years visa or 3 years if married to a BC.

Physically present means that you must have been in the UK exactly 5 years before to the day/date that HO receives your AN application. So if you were on holiday in Europe for example, on 5 Aug 2009 and HO receives your application on 6 August 2014, your application will be refused as you were not physically present in the UK.

Physically present is not a reference to residence qualification period.

Your professional referee can be someone of any nationality but your other referee must be over 25 years of age and a British Citizen. Neither can have any criminal convictions.

Thank you CR001 for your answer.

I thought that naturalisation is based on 6 years in total (if not maaried to a BC). This includes 5 years on Tier 1 (to get the ILR). Then 1 year on ILR (to get naturalisation). So total 6 years before naturalisation? Could you please confirm this.

As for physcially present, it is a bit strange requirement. So if I was on holiday on 5 Aug 2009 and HO receives application on 6th August 2014, then it gets refused. If I am back from holiday on 7August 2009, then I can apply? I wonder what is the purpose of this requirement.

Thank you again.

Naturalisation applications are based on 5 years residence, 3 years if married to a BC, and it is based on the 5 years backwards from date HO receives the application. So in your case as mentioned, 4 years visa and 1 year ILR - 2009 to 2014 for example.

If you were back in the UK on 7th August 2009, you can apply on or after this date.

Don't know why the requirement is there but could be to avoid people who only visit the UK for short periods to qualify eventually. Not sure, but is a good requirement as it shows future intentions and not just using the UK visa system for short/temporary stopovers etc.

One could also asked the same about the absence limits and the same would reasoning can apply.

But someone would need 5 years on economic VISA to get ILR. And to for BC, 4 out of these 5 years will be considered?


Otherwise, I could have applied after 4 years of Tier 1 VISA for ILR and stayed one more year. Then applied for BC. But I could not get ILR before 5 years.

On other words, the minimum number of years to get BC (not married to a BC) is 6 years (combination of VISA and ILR). Is this right?

Sorry for this confusion and I missed the point.

The rules and processes (and department) is completely different for naturalisation to that of visas and ILR.

Yes, on the economic route it does equate to 6 years in total and there is no way of shortening that all, but for naturalisation, only the 5 years preceding the application date are considered and taken into account for residency requirement.

Thank you very much for the clarification.