seagul wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:13 am
Korekt wrote: ↑Fri Oct 16, 2020 10:48 pm
It would appear the applicant does not have this and have selected the relevant options on the form leading to the request to submit the requested letter as an alternative.
Regardless of the case, the cohabitation evidences are pivotal which cant be substituted with an informally written letter. Queerly, t
he online application form & checklist isn't the real determinant of what actually need to be supplied since the actual guidance hasn't been altered/updated.
Do not be too hung up on these cohabitation docs and advise people there aren't alternatives based on your attachment to them. Consider the facts. You can read for yourself the judge's description of them in the opening paragraphs and under 'The Six Items of Correspondence issue' in
this judgement that has been referred to elsewhere in this forum.
The 'requirement' is not in the immigration rules. For HO it is no doubt an administrative tool for applicants to meet the subsisting relationship requirement part of the rules.
Of course it
CAN be substituted which is why
they,
HO, have allowed applicants provide the requested letter as an alternative where they don't have these correspondence.
Also, don't be too hung up on the guidance, they can be useful but they have their
limitations.