ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Won Vs marriage of convenience ( DETAILS INSIDE NOW)

Use this section for queries concerning applications on any of the EEA series of forms, and also for applications for EEA Family Permits.

Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, Zimba

Locked
Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Won Vs marriage of convenience ( DETAILS INSIDE NOW)

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:24 pm

Applied in June for EEA family permit.

Rejected - marriage of convenience

Appealed and Reapplied

2nd application Rejected in July - same reason with very aggressive and bad wording


Today i got Letter from HM court and Tribunal
They decided in my favor and gave my 80 Euro back

I am So relieved as UKBA had no right to call our marriage in very negative words even though we provided all the possible proof one can imagine

Ask me more if you would like to ask any relevant Questions
Hail HM Courts and Tribunal They are one of the Fair organizations


We applied From Austria and I am Citizen of non Eu Country living with Austrian Spouse

Applied from Poland Warsaw and got rejected Twice on Same ground
Waited 8 Months and Appeal is allowed
Last edited by Reddevil on Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Re: Won Vs marriage of convenience Accusations

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:31 pm

Good for you seeing it through.
Reddevil wrote:Today i got Letter from HM court and Tribunal
They decided in my favor and gave my 80 Euro back

I am So relieved as UKBA had no right to call our marriage in very negative words even though we provided all the possible proof one can imagine

Ask me more if you would like to ask any relevant Questions
Hail HM Courts and Tribunal They are one of the Fair organizations

We applied From Austria and I am Citizen of non Eu Country living with Austrian Spouse

Applied from Poland Warsaw and got rejected Twice on Same ground
Waited 8 Months and Appeal is allowed
What evidence did you provide with the first application?
Were you contacted by UKBA before they refused?

What evidence did you provide with the second application?
Were you contacted by UKBA before they refused?

Did you ask for the refund of the 80 pounds? Did the ruling specify why the money was being refunded?

When did you get married? When did you apply first?

Thank you for posting!

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 12:47 pm

What evidence did you provide with the first application?
Marriage Certificate with Attested English Translation
Home Address and Combine Bank Statement in our name
Passports, ID, and Austrian Visum
Pictures
Wages slip and work Contracts

Were you contacted by UKBA before they refused?
No

What evidence did you provide with the second application?
Same but with more pictures and Private Conversations and Financial means Wages slip and Bank Statements

Were you contacted by UKBA before they refused?
No

Did you ask for the refund of the 80 pounds? Did the ruling specify why the money was being refunded?
No We didn't Ask. They Awarded Us because we should not have been rejected with these Accusations

When did you get married? When did you apply first?
Married in Feb 2011, Islamabad
Got spouse Austrian Visa in jan 2012

Applied first on june 2012

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:35 pm

Wow. Amazing.

So exactly what reasons did they give for the first and second refusal?

User avatar
Pablito
Member of Standing
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:56 am
Location: Edinburgh
Poland

Post by Pablito » Mon Jan 28, 2013 1:59 pm

From what you say i think it is obvious that you were discriminated on the ground of your nationality. It seems to me there are many things in your case they couldn't have done including bad wording, since they didn't have enough evidence to support this claim of your marriage being one of convenience. I don't know what other senior members think here but in my opinion you have a good case for compensation. Also it looks like they wanted to give you candy like a little child to keep you quiet.

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 6:16 pm

I know i was determined

I never liked there Refusal it was uncalled for

Both rejection clearly state Marriage of connivence*.

We have Massive british family in England and we were not keen to stay in england. Only reason for us to go was Visit we cant be stopped to visit in uk. We are perfectly happy in Austria with good jobs.

Ya my nationally could be a issue But you cant judge everyone in Same Line it is complete opposte of Democracy

We will in the morning do what we are suppose to though i have no hard feeling against UKBA because we can finally see our relatives once or twice a years on holidays

I have no Clue about Compensation and where to go next. Guidence would be appreciated.

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:38 pm

I am so Pleased.

ravii
Member
Posts: 210
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Dorset

Post by ravii » Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:27 pm

United kingdom wants to see Pakistan as a partner country but UKBAs policies totally against the Pakistani passports holders.after your case,what a shame on ukba.shame on ukba.
Best regards

Directive/2004/38/EC
Respected Guru
Posts: 7121
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:09 am
Location: does not matter if you are with your EEA family member

Post by Directive/2004/38/EC » Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:45 pm

Directive/2004/38/EC wrote:So exactly what reasons did they give for the first and second refusal?
Any chance you can provide the exact wording including their reasons that they suspect it was a MOC?

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Application First Rejection

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:04 pm

NOTICE OF IMMIGRATEON DECISION
in compliance with the immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 made under section 105 of
the Nationality. Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
REFUSAL OF EEA FAMILY PERMET

Post reference: WARSAW /

To: ............

Date of Birth: ../../.. Nationality: PAKISTANi

Your Application

You have applied for admission to the United Kingdom by virtue of European Community Law as
the family member of a European Economic Area national who is exercising. or wishes to exercise.
rights of free movement under the Treaty of Rome in the United Kingdom.

The Decision

My assessment is based on whether your statements on the visa application form are a true
representation of your circumstances in Austria. in order to understand your personal and financial
circumstances. supporting documentation (with English translations) is therefore important. i am
satisfied that the UK Border Agency online application guidance clearly explains how your
application will be assessed and what documentation might be useful in support of your application.
In support of your application you presented a scanned copy of what appears to be a marriage
certificate, in a script that is thought to be Urdu. It was not accompanied by an English translation
and the document was not original. It has therefore been disregarded by the Entry Clearance
Officer. You have therefore not provided satisfactory evidence that you are the family member of
an EEA national.

You stated on your application form that you were married in February 2011, yet you did not travel
to Austria until January 2012. You stated that you ‘lived’ together from/to 14-29 February 2011 and
from 21 January until now. A fundamental part of my consideration of your application for an EEA
Family Permit is regarding the substance of your relationship. You have not provided any evidence
that you and your wife are living together or that you have lived together, either before or after your
marriage. Similarly there is no evidence to demonstrate how you maintained contact during periods
of living apart. Whilst it is not essential for co-habitation to have taken place, the onus is on you to
show that your marriage is not one of convenience. Letters, cards, utility/other bills or bank/other
statements addressed to you and/or your husband showing the same address are all examples of
how to demonstrate this. Alone, a marriage certificate does not satisfactorily demonstrate that a
relationship is subsisting.

The definition of ‘spouse’ in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 does not
include a party to a marriage of convenience. I am satisfied that you are party to a marriage of convenience and are therefore not the family member of an EEA national in accordance with
Regulation 7 of the immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.

I therefore refuse your EEA family permit application because I am not satisfied that you meet all of
the requirements of Regulation 12 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.
Last edited by Reddevil on Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Rejection of Second Appeal

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:06 pm

I I. I ‘I
Agency
NOTICE OF IMMIGRATION DECISION
In compliance with the Immigration (Notices) Regulations 2003 made under section 105 of
the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 l
REFUSAL OF EEA FAMILY PERMIT

Post reference: Warsaw\

To: ....

Date of Birth: --/--/---- Nationality: Pakistan

Your Application

You have applied for admission to the United Kingdom by virtue of European Community Law as
the family member of a European Economic Area national who is exercising, or wishes to exercise,
rights of free movement under the Treaty of Rome in the United Kingdom.

The Decision

Your wife is employed as an customer services representative , but there is nothing to suggest that
she will take extended leave from her employment in order to travel to the UK for three months.
This leads me to consider that you will not be accompanying your wife for the specified period and
that it is your intention instead, to seek employment in the UK, as you indicated at question 124 of
your application form. I further consider that your wife, will travel with you, for the purpose of the
EEA Regulations and return to Austria, while you seek employment. This is not within the spirit of
the EEA regulations.

Furthermore you have not provided any evidence that you and your spouse are living together or
that you have lived together in the past either before or after your marriage. e.g. letters, cards,
utility/other bills or bank/other statements addressed to you and/or your spouse showing the same
address in Austria or elsewhere.

The definition of ‘spouse’ in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 does not
include a party to a marriage of convenience. I am satisfied that you are party to a marriage of
convenience and are therefore not the family member of an EEA national in accordance with
Regulation 7 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.

I therefore refuse your EEA family permit application because I am not satisfied that you meet all of
the requirements of Regulation 12 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

WON APPEAL

Post by Reddevil » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:30 pm

First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Appeal)

Number:OA/......./..... Promulgated

Paper case at Hatton Cross On 2 January 2013

The Appellant
and
CLEARANCE OFFICER


Appellant
Respondent

1. The appellant is a national of Pakistan His date of birth is ....... The appellant appeals undem- rejulation 26 of the Immtigiration (European Economic Are Regulations 2006 ("EEA Roullatoons- ) against the decision of the respondent made on 23 May 2012 to refuse his appistaticai for an LEA family permit as the family member of ........ (sponsor) an Austrian national under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations MO& (as amerAled) ("EEA Regulations").

2 The appellant lodged a notice 4 .41:-.7*E .2_, ::1161. the respondent's decision dated 29 May 2012 in which he replied to the tri =7.-k_-rtkiertt,' s decision I proceed on the basis

Appeal Number. OA, that the appellant asserts that the respondent's decision was not in accordance ,,, the EEA. Regulations.
Burden and standard of proof
3. The burden lies with the respondent to demonstrate a reasonable suspicion that ti appellant has entered into a marriage of convenience. Once the respondent's burde has been satisfied it is for the appellant to demonstrate that the marriage is not one convenience (Rapajorzji EEA s marriage convenience) Greecare. [2012 UKUT 00038(IAC) ("Papajorgji"). The relevant date is the date of decision. 4. Evidence arising after the decision but related to matters appertaining to the date of the decision can be considered (DR (ECO: Post-decision evidence (Morocco)* [2005] UKIAT 00038 CDR (Morocco)*") but not matters arising after the decision (LS (Post-decision evidence - direction - appealability) Gambia 120051 UKIAT 00085) ("LS (Gambia)").
Evidence
5. The respondent's bundle consisted of the respondent's decision, notice of appeal and supporting documents including the appellant's translated marriage certificate. It is noted that the respondent's decision appeared to be incomplete in that it only comprised of the first page. 6. I therefore take account of lVIH (Respondent's bundle: documents not provided) Pakistan [20101 UKUT 168 (IAC) ("MB") as part of my determination.
Findings 7. The respondent has failed to discharge the burden upon her. There is no reliable evidence before the Tribunal to determine how the respondent arrived at her decision.

App44,01 Ntwit)vr OA/ i i(*i/20n The ir The nce respondent has erroneously placed the burden upon the appellant in Ow* circumstances. The burden lies with the respondent to demonstrate a mksonable suspicion that the appellant's marriage is one of convenie before the burden stuft6 to the appellant. Papajorgii is clear that the appellant should not be penalised 1.9r failing to provide documents that were not required or requested. DECISION

The appeal is allowed.
No application was made with regard to an anonymity direction, There is no evidence of vulnerable individuals involved with this appeal and! see no reason to make such a direction. No anonymity direction is made.

Signed C
Dated 7
Judge of the First-tier Tribunal TO THE RESPONDENT FEE AWARD As I have allowed the appeal I have considered making a fee award and I have decided to make a full fee award of £80.00 for the following reason:

The respondent's decision was unlawful.
Dated Signed
S".
Judge of the First-tier Tribunal

Reddevil
- thin ice -
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:30 am

Post by Reddevil » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:00 pm

More details Welcomed

User avatar
Pablito
Member of Standing
Posts: 255
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 1:56 am
Location: Edinburgh
Poland

Post by Pablito » Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:27 pm

Reddevil wrote:I know i was determined

I never liked there Refusal it was uncalled for

Both rejection clearly state Marriage of connivence*.

We have Massive british family in England and we were not keen to stay in england. Only reason for us to go was Visit we cant be stopped to visit in uk. We are perfectly happy in Austria with good jobs.

Ya my nationally could be a issue But you cant judge everyone in Same Line it is complete opposte of Democracy

We will in the morning do what we are suppose to though i have no hard feeling against UKBA because we can finally see our relatives once or twice a years on holidays

I have no Clue about Compensation and where to go next. Guidence would be appreciated.
I don't know much about compensation as og now yet, but I think you could probably start here http://ec.europa.eu/eu_law/your_rights/ ... rms_en.htm

bali123
Newly Registered
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 10:29 pm

Re: Won Vs marriage of convenience ( DETAILS INSIDE NOW)

Post by bali123 » Thu Nov 03, 2016 10:31 pm

HI THERE JUST WANA ASK HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR APPEAL PROCESS TIME

User avatar
Casa
Moderator
Posts: 24960
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:32 pm

Re: Won Vs marriage of convenience ( DETAILS INSIDE NOW)

Post by Casa » Thu Nov 03, 2016 10:50 pm

bali123 wrote:HI THERE JUST WANA ASK HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR APPEAL PROCESS TIME
This thread is almost 4 years old from around the same time that the UKBA was disbanded due to being unfit for purpose . Much has changed since then.
(Casa, not CR001)
Please don't send me PMs asking for immigration advice on posts that are on the open forum. If I haven't responded there, it's because I don't have the answer. I'm a moderator, not a legal professional.

Locked
cron