My wife has applied for settled status online using ILR BRP (Settlement Refugee), my EU national ID, my BC naturalization certificate (instead of passport to indicate naturalization date). (Eligibility under regulation EU11(2).)
Applied:
30 June 2019
The automated system indicated she would be considered for settled status.
She sent the ILR BRP by post special delivery (with special delivery retrurn envelope) to validate the identity. No biometric letter or any similar request was issued.
A COA was issued based on online application:
19 July 2019
This certificate of application confirms receipt of your valid application under the
EU Settlement Scheme. You will receive a decision shortly.
After 4 calls, with the last one on
2 August 2019 on our enquiry the EU resolution centre realized we should have applied with a paper application!?
Sky777 wrote: ↑Sun May 12, 2019 7:10 pm
...
I said what ? it take them 5 weeks to tell me this we should use paper form I been calling every week and every person said everything is fine and under process .
...
It seems we are not the only ones...
So it seems we have to re-apply with a paper form on a 6-month application standard, as most of other posters here found out. However, we refused this prospect and requested an answer on the existing "valid application" for which the COA letter was issued for.
The difference of our case is that: they issued a COA based on the online application, making it a "valid application". Hence, we have a statutory right to receive a decision on the basis of the original online application. The application cannot be classified as invalid, or ineligible, due to the fact the HO has issued a COA letter for a valid application and the eligibility is apparent. Therefore the answer to our original online application would have to be
approval or refusal.
5. ‘Other outcomes’ includes any outcome that did not result in a grant of leave because the application was withdrawn by the applicant, was invalid as it did not include the required proof of identity and nationality or other mandatory information, or was void because the applicant was ineligible to apply, for example because they were a British citizen.
Therefore, it could not fall under other outcomes per the definition of the official statistics.
We have filed a formal complaint about this procedure for breach of Equality Act 2010:
The procedural segregation of non-EU family members of dual British & EEA nationals by association.
Discrimination by association: Associative discrimination comes about when someone is
treated unfavourably on the basis of another person's protected characteristic.
For the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 `race´ includes colour,
nationality and ethnic or national origins.
Therefore, non-EU family members of dual EU-British citizens are treated unfavourably through procedural segregation compared to non-EU family members of non-British EU citizens through association because of their family members protected characteristic: race (subset: British nationality).
Detriment/unfavourable treatment: longer processing time, postal costs.
Therefore,
the Toufik Lounes candidates procedural segregation can be deemed facial discrimination by association and this Home Office practice is a breach of Equality Act 2010 and thus unlawful practice.
We are awaiting an answer to this complaint and were promised an answer within 10 working days, will keep you posted.
