NEW AN(Citizenship) FORM MAY'2015

cs95tdg wrote:

March_LR14 wrote: i have worked for Marks & Spencer in 2005 but i don't remember my joining and ending date. I have called Marks & Spencer HR department and they told me that they don't keep any employee data longer than 3 years.

I have only done 3 jobs (all part time) and maximum only for 6 months in my whole 10 yrs.

I don't know what should i put in that employment section now?

Look through any paperwork you may have such as employment contracts, bank statements, P60's or even payslips. In the event you have none of these or any other source you can think of, and are also not able get your 10 year employment history from HMRC, then state the closest dates from memory. You can always indicate the fact that the dates are not exact (and approximate from memory) under the additional information section, if you wish to.

Hi,

Many Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately i have moved addresses since than and i have shredded my old banks statements and payslips as i didn't envisage that i would need those 10 yrs later.

You are right i have to guess date's and explain that i have contacted both hmrc and employer to get the accurate dates but was unsuccessful.

@coolmind thanks for the link and i can see that employers are not required to keep the staff date longer than necessary (maximum upto 6 years).

I have my NCS appointment next month and let's hope HO will not make further changes in the form.

Many Thanks

Another idea came in my mind that why don't the applicant itself voluntarily request the entire previous data about his employment history from HRMC and attach same for ukba for their easiness and our peace of mind.

I have been following this quietly and thought I would add to.
for a second can we all stop assuming HO is some kind of a CSI or FBI or MI5 organisation and have a magic button they can push then voila they can see from when a person was born, I think my mom probably has the magic wand to that.

If they can easily access a person's employment record from HMC why on earth would they be asking us to provide such details and secondly what's the point of us providing them and they checking with hmrc, duuuuh is anyone a retard here? wouldn't that be stupud? I am sorry but this is just a mere information to check with your immigration history whether u had rights to work on the dates you have provided and not the dates they can check if they had the option to.

when it comes to PNC, home office have only been given a minor access or limited access which means not everything can be seen by them as they are humans just as us and could use such information for something else. I very much doubt they can even see arrest records, they only access they probably have is to check whether a person has a conviction or not.

So guys chill out, if they had a magic button the application process would have been a lot easier for them, the requirement would just be us giving them our name and date of birth, pay the fees and wait for then to push the magic button then issue you with a certificate if you pass...

These are my thoughts. have a blessed weekend.

KKD wrote:HO is some kind of a CSI or FBI or MI5 organisation

You are getting close

KKD wrote:If they can easily access a person's employment record from HMC why on earth would they be asking us to provide such details and secondly what's the point of us providing them and they checking with hmrc, duuuuh is anyone a retard here? wouldn't that be stupud?

Coz HO wants to make its own job simpler and doesn't want to do the applicants job of providing their own earnings, also it doesn't want to run to HMRC for trivial queries. HMRC records are checked only to verify earnings with what applicant has provided.

KKD wrote:when it comes to PNC, home office have only been given a minor access or limited access which means not everything can be seen by them as they are humans just as us and could use such information for something else. I very much doubt they can even see arrest records, they only access they probably have is to check whether a person has a conviction or not.

Nothing personal but you are sounding almost arrogant and speaking like a man in charge of HO's affairs. HO is a govt agency like HMRC, HMPO, DVLA etc and all of them share info on applicants details. DVLA has caught applicants trying to get a driving license using proxy passport and reported to HO.

KKD wrote:So guys chill out, if they had a magic button the application process would have been a lot easier for them

HO is all the time trying to make applications simpler for them and difficult for the applicant so they can catch applicants red-handed if they find any discrepancies. Don't think HO is everyone's friend and just waiting to hand out visas/citizenships on a platter to whoever applies, they are trying to reduce immigration, not increase it.

Manka10 wrote:

KKD wrote:HO is some kind of a CSI or FBI or MI5 organisation

You are getting close
oh please i am not getting close, it's a fact they aint. It even takes a police a hell of a time to catch certain criminals. Don't get me wrong but its the perception we have of HO office which was why i brought this on.

KKD wrote:If they can easily access a person's employment record from HMC why on earth would they be asking us to provide such details and secondly what's the point of us providing them and they checking with hmrc, duuuuh is anyone a retard here? wouldn't that be stupud?

Coz HO wants to make its own job simpler and doesn't want to do the applicants job of providing their own earnings, also it doesn't want to run to HMRC for trivial queries. HMRC records are checked only to verify earnings with what applicant has provided.
why would they want to make their job easier if it would much easier for them to pick up a phone or perhaps push few buttons on their keyboard and have all the details they need. Errrrrm how is providing employer details the same as providing your earnings for them to check? shouldn't they be requesting p60's, payslips or p45's covering the last 10 yrs? i don't know your line of work but i certainly know what i am taking about.

KKD wrote:when it comes to PNC, home office have only been given a minor access or limited access which means not everything can be seen by them as they are humans just as us and could use such information for something else. I very much doubt they can even see arrest records, they only access they probably have is to check whether a person has a conviction or not.

Nothing personal but you are sounding almost arrogant and speaking like a man in charge of HO's affairs. HO is a govt agency like HMRC, HMPO, DVLA etc and all of them share info on applicants details. DVLA has caught applicants trying to get a driving license using proxy passport and reported to HO.
Hold on a second, i never suggested i run or in charge of HO affairs nor did i suggest they had no access to other government bodies/agencies. I was sighting an example of the direct access they might have to PNC, asides these any other information they need of an applicant would need to be requested for hence you sign the declaration.

KKD wrote:So guys chill out, if they had a magic button the application process would have been a lot easier for them

HO is all the time trying to make applications simpler for them and difficult for the applicant so they can catch applicants red-handed if they find any discrepancies. Don't think HO is everyone's friend and just waiting to hand out visas/citizenships on a platter to whoever applies, they are trying to reduce immigration, not increase it.

I am not thinking they are my best buddies but everyone on here should not be worked up about the information they need to provide when it comes to the 10 years employment history. provide them with what you can remember, if it was that important for them, they should be requesting this directly or perhaps have a direct access to HMRC.

I hope i have made myself clear, stop thinking less of yourself. they are humans and have certain restrictions on certain informations just like everyone. period. Until that day comes where they will say we are no longer required to complete an application form, then i will take my words back. PERIOD.

cool mind wrote:Another idea came in my mind that why don't the applicant itself voluntarily request the entire previous data about his employment history from HRMC and attach same for ukba for their easiness and our peace of mind.

I already did request my first 5 years info from HMRC using the form see the link i have posted in my previous posts. Also I have found my P60s for year 2006 & 2007 and looking at the amount I have earned and paid in tax was equivivalent to part time work ( e.g. earnings in the range of 750-850 pounds per month before tax). Also one of my employer no longer exists but again start date and end date are not known and I dont remember them as well. As i dont have the contracts or letter of employement etc.

So I guess the solution of the problem is that if you are applying in July then you put your first employment date as of July2005 to cover the 10 year period for employement and then work through. Provide exact dates of the employment where ever you can.

cool mind wrote:http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/41/section/130

Yes and the ACT is
read page 3 of the following link.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/197 ... 077_en.pdf

hi guys,just a quick question,

Is the new ten years employment section mandatory to fill or what if just leave it blank and do not provide any employment history? even after getting ILR we are not free and cannot freely apply for naturalization.can they refuse application if history been not provided. what the hell they doing by putting stupid sections as now we have to have start thinking in a sneaky way again how to dodge this section.

shahfurqan wrote:hi guys,just a quick question,

Is the new ten years employment section mandatory to fill or what if just leave it blank and do not provide any employment history? even after getting ILR we are not free and cannot freely apply for naturalization.can they refuse application if history been not provided. what the hell they doing by putting stupid sections as now we have to have start thinking in a sneaky way again how to dodge this section.

I would advise you to fill as much as you can "to the best of your knowledge " or in simpler words as much as you remember. This discussion is going for ages with everyone's opinion. What frustrates me is you pay them thousand pounds and struggle hard to fill in their forms. Put as much as you know and let them do some work remember we are no longer students, Tier based immigrants, we are now settled person who are working hard and paying into their system. Also in most of the cases spouses/dependent who were not as long as in this country as the main applicants were will get through easily regardless they were working or not working, I am sure they can't be unfair in their judgement.

Also my last attempt to end this frustration read the article below.
https://www.freemovement.org.uk/good-ch ... htened-up/

Also looking at the point that concerns us more
"9.7 Evasion of immigration

c. been detected working in the UK without permission"

Above will not apply as students are allowed to work. From the article it's clear who they are targeting.

hello guys,
on the form at page 31 section 3, there is a helpful notes about the application which suggests that lawful residence should be during 5 years. Doesn't this suggest that they are asking to check for the breach of visa condition/lawful status during previous 5 years only. I am copying pasting that below:

SECTION 3 Evidence of lawful residence during the 5 (or, if the applicant is married or in
civil partnership to a British citizen, 3) years before the date of the application: required for
applications made on the basis of residence in the United Kingdom: required for all applicants
• Your passports Or
• Letters from employers, educational establishments or other Government Departments
indicating presence in UK

cool mind wrote:I agree with the above poster that many companies don't keep data of employees taxation or work hour for more longer period like five years. But what I guess and repeating again that if such over working is recent then it can come to surface easily while if over working belong to time let say 5-6 years then it will be almost impossible. I think tax department don't share information much with ukba and therefore, ukba need pacific employment dates to get taxes be checked in such precise and limited channel by knowing the jobs of 10 years

My understanding is that data sharing between HO and HMRC has increased considerably in the recent months. Just look at ILR thread- there have been a number of refusals in PEOs based on past tax history. This can only be possible if HO has easy access to tax records.

cool mind wrote:hello guys,
on the form at page 31 section 3, there is a helpful notes about the application which suggests that lawful residence should be during 5 years. Doesn't this suggest that they are asking to check for the breach of visa condition/lawful status during previous 5 years only.

Excerpt from the AN booklet
"Your application may also be refused if you have been involved in immigration offences in the last 10 years, such as entering the UK illegally, evading immigration control or abuse of the Knowledge of Language and Life in the UK requirement."

Besides, there have been cases where BC/ILR was refused as applicants overstayed on student visas within the last 10 years

MrDodge wrote:Unfortunately for my wife, her referees had already filled in the previous version of the form. I called the Home Office helpline, and they said that the old form is still acceptable for 21 days after an update. I wish I could find that in writing somewhere in the guidance..

yeah me too! my own daughter's referees just completed the APRIL version of the form, this is ridiculous to start requiring everyone to re-sign! There was no warning of any kind. They are going to do this every month now?

I am sending in the April form, they can bite me.

plus she spent all time in the UK legally and with unrestricted right to employment a,d was under 18 for most of it, so a new section would not have made any difference.

But I would also love to see the announcement/confirmation somewhere that the new form is valid until 19th of June, because I like my £1005. Argh!!!!!

There is a joint memorandum signed between ukba and hmrc to exchange information although they are not fully obliged too. In my point of view, a lot applicants will suffer especially those ones who cheated taxes or have outstanding taxes. In my points the following threat level out of 100.

Tier 1 applicants= 80%
Visitors/asylum seekers= 15%
students= 5%

Even hmrc and ukba will share information but it will be limited and be in an acceptable format between each other. In my point of view, ignoring or not remembering the past employment history to write in this section might lead suspecision and increase their further checks because i do not think anybody has not enough memory to recall his past employment with approximate dates. yes if past job in few days then it might be ignore/not being remembered.

REMEMBER YOUR SURNAME AND DATE OF BIRTH IS ENOUGH TO CARRY OUT ALL CHECKS BECAUSE ALL RECORDS INCLUDING TAXES ARE KEPT ON THESE.

What i dont understand is if ukba can get all the tax with person name ni and dob which everyone has provided in their past applications then why everyone is panicking by addition of employment histroy ????? Only thing which i can think of for this is that if someone was employed while they didnt hv visa during that time or was working illeglay

Let me explain it a bit further with the official source of information which i think a lot of you will have to agree. UK government is loosing billions of pounds worth taxes with bogus activities assisting as well in gaining visas. Now ukba and hmrc in their join efforts will be trying to recover such tax. I believe that new section can help them because the applicants now have to disclose their employment information. I believe it is the result of the following strategy which designed to recover taxes and escape tax evasion further. See below the chapter called: "2010 to 2015 government policy: tax evasion and avoidance"

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -avoidance

"OR" YOU GUYS CAN WAIT FOR ANOTHER FEW YEARS BEFORE YOU APPLY FOR CITIZENSHIP COUNTING 10 YEARS STARTING FROM THE DAY YOU RECEIVED YOUR PSW STATUS....HOW DOES THAT SOUND FOR MY FRIENDS GETTING WORRIED?

I think we all should stop chatting about it and delete this thread as the caseworkers may not reading this thread and start following our assumptions which we presenting here.

Agreed i think this thread should be delete. Can someone please request this to be deleted

seriously folks?
isn't our freedom of speech the last dignity we have left?

the moment you start altering your words and behaviour based on assumption of government survelliance, you end up in the USSR of my childhood -- which wasn't I must say even that bad, but clearly we are all here because we want to be in a different place.

I for one am pretty upset that in 40 years my life has come full circle and that this Island is turning into a cruel place without justice or fairness, with a government more feared by ordinary citizens, than the uSSR government ever was.

than being said

I also have a theory about this and I think it is a well informed one.

1) I do NOT think this is about your taxes.
2) Home office DOES have access to HMRC records.
3) i do not think this is to check hours worked for students

but
4) I think this IS again about good character requirement -- hence the number 10 years -- and is an attempt to create a catch-22 for those who had been here illegally at any point, to force them to either admit to working illegally or, if HMRC holds any records for them for corresponding periods, catch them out on a lie leading to a ban.

If you all turn to the fate of those who filed before 11th December and told their apps were straightforward, then thanks to John Vine they were all placed on hold and sent letters asking to "explain how they were supporting themselves"? That was an attempt to fish for admission of illegal working, especially since letters called for "payslips".

These people all mostly got legal advice to respond with insistence that they relied on relatives and friends for support during the relevant periods (as indeed many of them were).

So now they come up with the new form.

5) I think if anything here applies to you -- eg you had been in the country with lapsed leave at any time, intentionally or not, and may have been working during that time, this is NOT the best time to apply for citizenship. at least wait until the dust of this witch hunt had settled, and let's see what happened to those pre-11th December group of people who had got letters.

My 5 cents folks.

sagareva wrote:seriously folks?
isn't our freedom of speech the last dignity we have left?

the moment you start altering your words and behaviour based on assumption of government survelliance, you end up in the USSR of my childhood -- which wasn't I must say even that bad, but clearly we are all here because we want to be in a different place.

I for one am pretty upset that in 40 years my life has come full circle and that this Island is turning into a cruel place without justice or fairness, with a government more feared by ordinary citizens, than the uSSR government ever was.

than being said

I also have a theory about this and I think it is a well informed one.

1) I do NOT think this is about your taxes.
2) Home office DOES have access to HMRC records.
3) i do not think this is to check hours worked for students

but
4) I think this IS again about good character requirement -- hence the number 10 years -- and is an attempt to create a catch-22 for those who had been here illegally at any point, to force them to either admit to working illegally or, if HMRC holds any records for them for corresponding periods, catch them out on a lie leading to a ban.

If you all turn to the fate of those who filed before 11th December and told their apps were straightforward, then thanks to John Vine they were all placed on hold and sent letters asking to "explain how they were supporting themselves"? That was an attempt to fish for admission of illegal working, especially since letters called for "payslips".

These people all mostly got legal advice to respond with insistence that they relied on relatives and friends for support during the relevant periods (as indeed many of them were).

So now they come up with the new form.

5) I think if anything here applies to you -- eg you had been in the country with lapsed leave at any time, intentionally or not, and may have been working during that time, this is NOT the best time to apply for citizenship. at least wait until the dust of this witch hunt had settled, and let's see what happened to those pre-11th December group of people who had got letters.

My 5 cents folks.

Many thanks for this, exactly what I was referring to in my previous post, if they had direct access to all records they wouldn't be asking all these information and I was being referred to as being ARROGANT.

Again. .
1. This isn't about tax
2. This isn't about earnings
3. This isn't about student working longer hours than were allowed.

It's just to catch the ones who had no right to work and they were in their name.

sagareva wrote:
If you all turn to the fate of those who filed before 11th December and told their apps were straightforward, then thanks to John Vine they were all placed on hold and sent letters asking to "explain how they were supporting themselves"? That was an attempt to fish for admission of illegal working, especially since letters called for "payslips".

These people all mostly got legal advice to respond with insistence that they relied on relatives and friends for support during the relevant periods (as indeed many of them were).

Then can you show us on this forum those ones who filed before 11th December and now they are being asked to provide evidence that how they supported themselves??
My assumption is more authenticated and according to which they actually want to recover the unpaid taxes and taxes shown on bogus activities to get earning points for tier1 extensions. In my previous post i already presented their 2010-2015 tax evasion avoidance strategy. This section i believe is the best measure for them to stop letting the taxes be cheated in future even leads to recovery. And i believe during 2015-2016 year the tax revenue will reach to highest level.

Universal soldier wrote:

sagareva wrote:
If you all turn to the fate of those who filed before 11th December and told their apps were straightforward, then thanks to John Vine they were all placed on hold and sent letters asking to "explain how they were supporting themselves"? That was an attempt to fish for admission of illegal working, especially since letters called for "payslips".

These people all mostly got legal advice to respond with insistence that they relied on relatives and friends for support during the relevant periods (as indeed many of them were).

Then can you show us on this forum those ones who filed before 11th December and now they are being asked to provide evidence that how they supported themselves??
My assumption is more authenticated and according to which they actually want to recover the unpaid taxes and taxes shown on bogus activities to get earning points for tier1 extensions. In my previous post i already presented their 2010-2015 tax evasion avoidance strategy. This section i believe is the best measure for them to stop letting the taxes be cheated in future even leads to recovery. And i believe during 2015-2016 year the tax revenue will reach to highest level.

I had at least 2 clients come to me from this forum who were EXACTLY asked to provide how they were supporting themselves on applications made before 11th december after 3 years of lawful residence (both BC spouses with previous student overstays)

i also had email correspondence and calls from several more forum readers who emailed me their similar letters they received, the latest guy calling quoted a letter in slightly nastier tone than the ones i have seen before -- that was all after posting here about it,
as this has been subject to several huge threads here in this forum over the last 6 months. use a search button.

I also remember reading about it here in this forum in this thread that people exactly got these letters and some were even unfortunate enough to actually send payslips, believe it or not

i have been following this one since December and i know i am right

@sagareva

So how about for the those people especially students who didn't work and get funds from back home. Will they have to send evidence of those funds? And doesn't it correct that an applicant should try to remember the dates of all previous employment history to write in form because for a lot of people sending payslips will be more inconvenient??