ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha
I meant to make the points in my immediately preceding post to a wider audience, essentially all those who contribute to or read this thread. That post was not targeted at you
Also see this post earlier in this thread. The link in that thread explains at least partially the potential reasons for a more rigorous assessment of applicants with a refugee past.
By outsourcing part or the entire checks process to private entities which can affect the outcome of applications the HO is indirectly privatizing (part of) the decision-making. When a caseworker is not in control of the quality and truthfulness of the checks, or their outcome reports, yet he has to base his/her decision with significant weighting on these findings, we end up having private entities effectively deciding naturalisation applications. Which in itself can be deemed a dubious practice at best.secret.simon wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 9:51 pmI think this is a very significant sentence in the letter above. It suggests that at least a part of the naturalisation process is out-sourced.
That would also suggest that there is no point in chasing up the caseworkers/Home Office, either directly or through the MP, as the checks themselves are outsourced and the Home Office itself is in the dark as to their status. That does explain why most of the time MPs get as bland a response as the applicants themselves.
Hi Ariksar,ariskar wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:03 amBy outsourcing part or the entire checks process to private entities which can affect the outcome of applications the HO is indirectly privatizing (part of) the decision-making. When a caseworker is not in control of the quality and truthfulness of the checks, or their outcome reports, yet he has to base his/her decision with significant weighting on these findings, we end up having private entities effectively deciding naturalisation applications. Which in itself can be deemed a dubious practice at best.secret.simon wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 9:51 pmI think this is a very significant sentence in the letter above. It suggests that at least a part of the naturalisation process is out-sourced.
That would also suggest that there is no point in chasing up the caseworkers/Home Office, either directly or through the MP, as the checks themselves are outsourced and the Home Office itself is in the dark as to their status. That does explain why most of the time MPs get as bland a response as the applicants themselves.
Does anyone know which are these external agencies and how their practices and service standards are quality controlled and regulated?
ariskar wrote: ↑Tue May 12, 2020 10:49 amA similar, but sort of different answer my spouse received today (almost 10 months since application):
Good Morning,
Thank you for your email.
Unfortunately, it is not always possible to complete every case within our service standard, particularly if an applicant has a complex immigration history or if further enquiries need to be made.
Published guidance has now been clarified to explain the factors that may contribute to a case being classed as complex.
Examples of relevant factors include:
Criminality,
Previous refusal of asylum,
Previous grant of a period of Leave to remain exceptionally outside the Immigration Rules,
Periods of overstaying between previous applications,
Evidence of illegal working or illegal entry,
European Nationals who do not provide evidence of Permanent Residence in UK,
Failure to comply with immigration reporting restrictions, and
Financial irregularities.
This is of course not an exhaustive list, simply an indication of some of the factors which would trigger a higher level of scrutiny, the relevant guidance can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/chap ... structions. Please note that although investigation of these factors may be delaying your application – this does not automatically mean that your application will be refused – but simply that more investigation is required. You will receive your decision when a complete consideration has been made.
One of the requirements for naturalisation, set out in the British Nationality Act 1981, concerns good character. The British Nationality Act 1981 contains no definition of "good character". The Secretary of State's approach to determining whether or not, for this purpose, an applicant is of good character is set out in guidance which has been published at on our website at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... idance.pdf
A broad view is taken when judging whether this requirement is satisfied. We take into consideration, amongst other things, the activities past and present of an individual, and the openness and honesty of a prospective citizen when assessing whether this requirement has been satisfied. Applicants are expected to have shown respect for the rights and freedoms of the UK, observed its laws and fulfilled their duties and obligations as a resident of the UK.
It may be helpful to know that our enquiries are not limited to criminal records or to a persons activities within the UK. Nor is there a limit set out in nationality law on the time taken to carry out those enquiries.
As part of the application process, we routinely conduct enquiries with other government departments and external agencies. The extent and length of time taken to complete these varies according to the particular circumstance of each application.
Once all necessary enquiries are concluded we will then be in a position to consider the applications. Please be advised that it is not possible to provide a timescale for a decision to be issued, as this will depend on the findings of any of the previously mentioned enquiries and a full consideration of each case. Please also note that Coronavirus (COVID 19) is further delaying decisions at this time.
We will write to you once a decision has been reached, or if we require any further information.
Kind regards,
UKVI
I got the same reply today. I applied on July 15, 2019. more than 10.5 months. From following the site, I realise this response is not common. Do you think there could be specific reason. I dont have any issues in my record. Is there any undate on your case? thanks in advance.
Danbet wrote: ↑Fri Jun 05, 2020 7:03 pmHiariskar wrote: ↑Tue May 12, 2020 10:49 amA similar, but sort of different answer my spouse received today (almost 10 months since application):
Good Morning,
Thank you for your email.
Unfortunately, it is not always possible to complete every case within our service standard, particularly if an applicant has a complex immigration history or if further enquiries need to be made.
Published guidance has now been clarified to explain the factors that may contribute to a case being classed as complex.
Examples of relevant factors include:
Criminality,
Previous refusal of asylum,
Previous grant of a period of Leave to remain exceptionally outside the Immigration Rules,
Periods of overstaying between previous applications,
Evidence of illegal working or illegal entry,
European Nationals who do not provide evidence of Permanent Residence in UK,
Failure to comply with immigration reporting restrictions, and
Financial irregularities.
This is of course not an exhaustive list, simply an indication of some of the factors which would trigger a higher level of scrutiny, the relevant guidance can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/chap ... structions. Please note that although investigation of these factors may be delaying your application – this does not automatically mean that your application will be refused – but simply that more investigation is required. You will receive your decision when a complete consideration has been made.
One of the requirements for naturalisation, set out in the British Nationality Act 1981, concerns good character. The British Nationality Act 1981 contains no definition of "good character". The Secretary of State's approach to determining whether or not, for this purpose, an applicant is of good character is set out in guidance which has been published at on our website at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... idance.pdf
A broad view is taken when judging whether this requirement is satisfied. We take into consideration, amongst other things, the activities past and present of an individual, and the openness and honesty of a prospective citizen when assessing whether this requirement has been satisfied. Applicants are expected to have shown respect for the rights and freedoms of the UK, observed its laws and fulfilled their duties and obligations as a resident of the UK.
It may be helpful to know that our enquiries are not limited to criminal records or to a persons activities within the UK. Nor is there a limit set out in nationality law on the time taken to carry out those enquiries.
As part of the application process, we routinely conduct enquiries with other government departments and external agencies. The extent and length of time taken to complete these varies according to the particular circumstance of each application.
Once all necessary enquiries are concluded we will then be in a position to consider the applications. Please be advised that it is not possible to provide a timescale for a decision to be issued, as this will depend on the findings of any of the previously mentioned enquiries and a full consideration of each case. Please also note that Coronavirus (COVID 19) is further delaying decisions at this time.
We will write to you once a decision has been reached, or if we require any further information.
Kind regards,
UKVI
I got the same reply today. I applied on July 15, 2019. more than 10.5 months. From following the site, I realise this response is not common. Do you think there could be specific reason. I dont have any issues in my record. Is there any undate on your case? thanks in advance.
What date did you email them exactly? I think it’s a procedural issue not necessarily meaning that anyone of us are singled out for any reason but we are certainly experiencing a delay because some refugee applicants whole applied in August received email approvals.
I can only hope that they will conclude those checks sooner. I don’t not see anything that should cause any delay in my case in particular that is why I am a bit disappointed. I will ask for another update once my application has hit 11 months. I hope that it will have sorted by then.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. There are always reasons for why some things happen. In this thread itself, I have given at least two reasons on how a refugee's naturalisation application varies from other applications for naturalisation and why it can attract further scrutiny.
Wow.A typical of you secret .simon that you always blame the victims .Everyone knows the lawyers,judges ,analysts,journalists etc that home office isn't working the right direction.If you face hostile environment just for one day you would know what is truth &what is politics.There are no reasons of delaying applications &creating unnecessary hurdles in ways of migrants getting status via legal channels apart from deliberate twists in rules to make the system abusive &unfair.Please have some courage to understand the meanings of DIRTY TORY POLITICS.This explains all.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:26 pmNothing happens in a vacuum. There are always reasons for why some things happen. In this thread itself, I have given at least two reasons on how a refugee's naturalisation application varies from other applications for naturalisation and why it can attract further scrutiny.
a) Generally refugees will almost certainly been on multiple immigration routes in the UK. I suspect that people who have been in the UK on a single immigration route that can be easily verified (such as Tier 2 G or spousal) get their approvals earlier, simply because the checks are straightforward and with cross-references to a small number of databases.
Even people who got their ILR after long residence in the UK on multiple different visas likely face delays during their naturalisation applications (note that I am not stating that as a fact, merely as my suspicion. Feel free to analyse all the timeline threads on these forums, classifying delays by types of route to ILR, etc.)
b) Citizenship is much harder to undo/nullify than ILR. And some refugees have been creative with their recollections, their past being more imagination and fiction than fact and history. The Home Office has learnt from cases like the one highlighted in this post to subject a citizenship application to much higher scrutiny than ILR, precisely because it is harder to undo. It is unfortunate that some bad apples lead to the whole applecart being discarded (or being subjected to much more scrutiny).
Whether these are valid reasons is a matter of interpretation. But the reasons exist.
... even murderers usually have reasons for their crimes.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:26 pm...
b) Citizenship is much harder to undo/nullify than ILR. And some refugees have been creative with their recollections, their past being more imagination and fiction than fact and history. The Home Office has learnt from cases like the one highlighted in this post to subject a citizenship application to much higher scrutiny than ILR, precisely because it is harder to undo. It is unfortunate that some bad apples lead to the whole applecart being discarded (or being subjected to much more scrutiny).
Whether these are valid reasons is a matter of interpretation. But the reasons exist.
ariskar wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 11:00 am... even murderers usually have reasons for their crimes.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 06, 2020 8:26 pm...
b) Citizenship is much harder to undo/nullify than ILR. And some refugees have been creative with their recollections, their past being more imagination and fiction than fact and history. The Home Office has learnt from cases like the one highlighted in this post to subject a citizenship application to much higher scrutiny than ILR, precisely because it is harder to undo. It is unfortunate that some bad apples lead to the whole applecart being discarded (or being subjected to much more scrutiny).
Whether these are valid reasons is a matter of interpretation. But the reasons exist.
Dear secret.simon, all refugees go through at least two loops of scrutiny before their citizenship/naturalisation application. Their initial status grant (which always includes 1 or usually more interview, sometimes even followed by judicial review/appeal process) and their ILR settlement application which since 2017 includes more stringent "safe return" reviews. Both of these processes take longer than most other immigration visa application processes.
If all these refugees applying to naturalise have been through so much scrutiny, what is the point of procedurally segregating them having unfavourable treatment again compared to other route candidates?
If we would like to presume that UK rule of law is prevalent and it is a tolerant and fair society, the presumption of innocence in lieu of proof of the contrary should apply to all of us, citizens and residents with similar clean records. The lack of this aspect of rule of law is what more often than not force the concerned people to seek asylum in other countries.
It is morally (and most likely legally) indefensible that a democracy can use something like your bad apple theory to collectively punish through presumption of guilt an entire group of people, particularly given the fact that they are amongst the most vulnerable groups in our society. These are not the British and democratic values our society should aspire to. As a British Citizen, I feel ashamed and feel the need to apologize for all those affected and the governments we have elected in the past decade. Maybe a policy driven realisation that our country and society may not be worth becoming part of, at least for those who have a choice.
Very clear message to Refugees from someone who worked for the welfare of Refugees.Zerubbabel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 3:26 pm
As you are a refugee, I dare to hope that the UK saved your life in first place. So if you have any human right claim, I recommend you pursue these efforts against the country you came from.
That is actually not what the user said or implied. You have merely misinterpreted what was posted.Present1 wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:51 pmVery clear message to Refugees from someone who worked for the welfare of Refugees.Zerubbabel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 3:26 pm
As you are a refugee, I dare to hope that the UK saved your life in first place. So if you have any human right claim, I recommend you pursue these efforts against the country you came from.
(You all lied about persecution or fear of persecution, UK didn't save you from persecution. Go back to the people who are persecuting you and claim your rights from them. You shouldn't claim rights or question any thing here)
Misinterpreted. The user said to pursue claims AGAINST the country field from. Not Go back to the country.
Zerubbabel wrote: ↑Sun Jun 07, 2020 3:26 pmCall me heartless but this kind of posts and the associated claims make me smile.
Many of us here, including myself, are non-EEA and we know how it works elsewhere in the world. Where I came from, there are refugees living there for 3 or 4 generations and none of them, including their descendants born there, got the citizenship. They don't get residences but just A4 documents they can show the police in case they are controlled in the street but if they leave the country, they won't be allowed back.
I worked as a volunteer for Amnesty International and similar organisations for a while. One of my last assignments was to work on a case of 4000 people who came to disappear during a civil war in Africa. With some of the parents who could make it to Geneva, we organised a protest and read their names on loudspeakers near the broken chair in front of the UN building.
So if the UK takes 15 months to process your citizenship application, I don't see a strong human right case that can trigger the interest of international organisations.
As you may already know, the asylum system is abused and became a classic immigration route for many people who don't qualify under other venues. I don't like that because I have seen a lot of people under genuine threat due to their ethnicity or religion being unable to get asylum as the system is clogged with immigration candidates with bogus stories. I for one believe that authorities must make and end to that abuse otherwise it will destroy the asylum system. That system is not there to allow some to live in fancy countries, or get visa-free travel to interesting countries, or a joker card for immigration. It's there to save lives of people who can genuinely end up in mass graves of no fault of their own. This is not yet another immigration route.
When there was a war / genocide in Rwanda (1994), people from all Africa claimed asylum by telling authorities they came from Rwanda. Many of these, when they didn't get a response by 1998, ran to the asylum offices changing their stories and claiming they actually came from Eritrea as another war was starting there.
This takes us back to your citizenship application. When someone comes from an organised country such as Germany, Koweit or Japan, it's easier to ascertain the identity of the applicant to the level required for citizenship. When people come from places that are not so organised, there is a risk for the Home Office / Secretary of State. The risk is to sign a naturalisation certificate for someone then realising years later that the person participated in genocide or similar activities then claimed asylum under forged or stolen identity. That would be a major embarrassment for the UK.
As you are a refugee, I dare to hope that the UK saved your life in first place. So if you have any human right claim, I recommend you pursue these efforts against the country you came from.
Lets leave the interpretation to the readers or perhaps the writer can clarify it themselves.
It was written in perfectly straightforward normal English!!
Good luck to those waiting... Eligibility criteria: ILR refugee settlement + ILR: EU Settled status + BC spouse (I know it is rare combo)
Language Criteria: UK university post-graduate degree
Nationality : Non-EU
Method of application: Online + UKVCAS
Date of application: 23/07/2019
Date of acknowledgement: 24/07/2019
Date biometrics enrolled: 26/07/2019 (UKVCAS Croydon + document scanning)
Date on Approval letter: 02/06/2020
Date of receipt of approval: 10/06/2020
Date of receipt of ceremony letter: Covid,,, waiting
Date of Ceremony: -Covid,,, waiting
Date of Passport Application: -
Date of debit of fees: -
Date Passport received: -
Many congratulations for your spouse.ariskar wrote: ↑Fri Jun 12, 2020 11:30 pmMy spouse timeline. Approval, July 2019 application. 10.5 months processing time.
Some positive news at last.
Eligibility criteria: ILR refugee settlement + ILR: EU Settled status + BC spouse (I know it is rare combo)
Language Criteria: UK university post-graduate degree
Nationality : Non-EU
Method of application: Online + UKVCAS
Date of application: 23/07/2019
Date of acknowledgement: 24/07/2019
Date biometrics enrolled: 26/07/2019 (UKVCAS Croydon + document scanning)
Date on Approval letter: 02/06/2020
Date of receipt of approval: 10/06/2020
Date of receipt of ceremony letter: Covid,,, waiting
Date of Ceremony: -Covid,,, waiting
Date of Passport Application: -
Date of debit of fees: -
Date Passport received: -
