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

ILR dependent query (10 months gap) - ILR Success Solihull

Please use this section of the board for queries about Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). However please use the EEA-route section for queries about the EEA-route equivalent of Permanent Residence (PR).


This section is relevant irrespective of whether current status is Tiered or Non-Tiered.

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

geriatrix
Moderator
Posts: 24754
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: does it matter?

Post by geriatrix » Sat Aug 17, 2013 10:17 am

When is your wife's current leave due to expire?
Life isn't fair, but you can be!

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:04 pm

Her visa is expiring on 26/10/13 same as mine, thanks

geriatrix
Moderator
Posts: 24754
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: does it matter?

Post by geriatrix » Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:35 pm

If the appeal is not allowed, then apply for leave to remain as PBS dependant within 28 days of the date of the appeal decision.

319C(j).


Make absolutely sure that there are no errors in this leave to remain (PBS dependant extension) application so that there is not even an iota of chance for the application to be refused / deemed invalid (e.g. - photo not meeting requirements, payment not going through, missing signature, etc.). If this (extension) application is refused, there will be no right to appeal and she will need to leave UK to apply from outside the UK and her ILR clock will be reset.
Life isn't fair, but you can be!

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sun Aug 18, 2013 12:16 pm

Thank you sushdmehta, thank you soo much, I will make sure.
I would just like to thank you from the bottom of my heart.
I will soon start to prepare my case (cover letter for myself and my wife explaining the whole scenario - I might need some help I will keep posting), I am just thinking of:

1) mention the detail about her as I have mentioned earlier with the basis of 5 years probationary period and will not mention any thing related to rule (continuos leave omitted in rule)
Or
2) mention (1) and include 319E(d)(ii) as it doesn't say anything about continuos leave
Or
3) just (1) from the above and wait to see if they refuse it and keep it for appeal

Thanks so far and I know you are not obliged to answer but you have helped me already quite a lot

Kind regards

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:31 am

Hi vinny and sushdmehta,

I got a reply from UKBA, reply is good but unfortunately it will soon be rectified as mentioned by UKBA in response below, as per their response my wife can amalgamate previous PBS dependant mentioned by vinny and clarified and supported by sushdmehta but as it's stand my wife is only eligible next year in December 2014 (5 Years) as her initial EC was issue in January 2009, please kindly suggest what to do next as the rule will be changed soon, here is the response:

Dear Sir,

Apologies for the delay in responding to your e mail enquiry. I have been checking with colleagues in Immigration Policy regarding paragraph 319E(d)(ii). I have confirmed with them that it was not the intention of the rules to permit dependants to be able to amalgamate two periods of leave, separated by a break in leave, in order to qualify for ILR after 2 years. There is therefore an error of omission in the current rules which will be amended at the earliest opportunity.

As it stands therefore, anyone applying under paragraph 319E(d)(ii) would be able to amalgamate previous leave as a PBS dependant, without it having to have been continuous.

I trust this answers your question.

Regards
Settlement, Family and Nationality Operational Policy & Rules |Operational Systems Transformation | Home Office

geriatrix
Moderator
Posts: 24754
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:30 pm
Location: does it matter?

Post by geriatrix » Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:12 pm

Options:

1. Apply for settlement before current leave expires. If refused, appeal and if appeal fails apply for extension as PBS dependant.
2. Apply for extension as PBS dependant before current leave expires. Apply for settlement in Dec-14. If refused, continue to extend PBS dependant leave until she becomes eligible for settlement in Oct.-17.
3. Keep extending as PBS dependant until she becomes eligible for settlement in Oct.-17.

Your choice.
Life isn't fair, but you can be!

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:53 pm

Thank you very much sushdmehta, I am going for (1), just looking for PEO dates - thank you for your effort, time and advise, thanks to Vinny as well.
Wish me luck, I will keep posted.

Regards

vinny
Moderator
Posts: 29845
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:58 pm

Post by vinny » Sat Sep 07, 2013 11:53 pm

reply from UKBA wrote:There is therefore an error of omission in the current rules which will be amended at the earliest opportunity.

Statement of changes in Immigration Rules HC 628 - October 2013 wrote:133. In paragraph 319E(d)(ii), delete “the specified period is 5 years” and substitute “the specified period is a continuous period of 5 years”.

134. In paragraph 319E(d)(ii)(c), after “where applicable,” insert "with leave".
This is not intended to be legal or professional advice in any jurisdiction. Please click on any given links for further information. Refer to the source of any quotes.
We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:24 am

vinny wrote:
reply from UKBA wrote:There is therefore an error of omission in the current rules which will be amended at the earliest opportunity.

Statement of changes in Immigration Rules HC 628 - October 2013 wrote:133. In paragraph 319E(d)(ii), delete “the specified period is 5 years” and substitute “the specified period is a continuous period of 5 years”.

134. In paragraph 319E(d)(ii)(c), after “where applicable,” insert "with leave".
Thank you very much for pointing it out. I was expecting this by end of october 2013. Can you if you don't mind clarify what is the change in 134 319E(d)(ii)©? My understanding since from start if there was no "and" between 319E(d)(ii) (b) and © then ( C ) can easliy allow currently on dependant visa EC after 9th July 2012 to amalgamate previous non-dependant leave but and is an issue - is that right understanding? Now, what change this "with leave" will play in ( c) - does it mean now it will not count non-dependant leaves?
Kind regards
Last edited by Sep08T1Applicant on Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:31 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Amber
Moderator
Posts: 17256
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:20 am
Location: England, UK
Mood:

Post by Amber » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:29 am

From:
(c) have spent the remainder of the 5 year period, where applicable, as the spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner of that person at a time when that person had leave under another category of these Rules.
To
(c) have spent the remainder of the 5 year period, where applicable with leave, as the spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner of that person at a time when that person had leave under another category of these Rules.
You think correctly.
**this forum is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice**
Click here to send me a PM regarding an offensive post. Do NOT PM me for immigration advice.

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:33 am

Thanks Amber, does this mean there was a chance earlier to amalgamate the previous leaves assuming dependant and non-dependant leaves and this change from "where applicable" to "with leave" will not now combine the non-dependant leaves?

User avatar
Amber
Moderator
Posts: 17256
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:20 am
Location: England, UK
Mood:

Post by Amber » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:34 am

Yes, the leave will have to be as the spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-gender partner.
**this forum is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice**
Click here to send me a PM regarding an offensive post. Do NOT PM me for immigration advice.

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:35 am

D4109125 wrote:Yes, the leave will have to be as the spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-gender partner.
Thanks for being kind, I saw your reply after posting my reply.
Last edited by Sep08T1Applicant on Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

vinny
Moderator
Posts: 29845
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 7:58 pm

Post by vinny » Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:19 pm

I still don't seen any definition of "continuous" in this context (for dependants).

Is it based on 245AAA(a) or 276A or something completely different?
This is not intended to be legal or professional advice in any jurisdiction. Please click on any given links for further information. Refer to the source of any quotes.
We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our children.

User avatar
Amber
Moderator
Posts: 17256
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:20 am
Location: England, UK
Mood:

Post by Amber » Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:26 am

I know Vinny, it's difficult as to whether the 180 day rule would be used or merely that absences should be limited and for good reason?
**this forum is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice**
Click here to send me a PM regarding an offensive post. Do NOT PM me for immigration advice.

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:31 am

vinny wrote:I still don't seen any definition of "continuous" in this context (for dependants).

Is it based on 245AAA(a) or 276A or something completely different?
Vinny - do you mean there is no mention of dependant as per the reading or it is I am taking it wrong.
The whole 319E keeps on saying spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-sex partner of the main applicant - they should mention specifically dependant visa (is that what your concern is?)
Sushdmehta did mention about dependant to clarify my concern:
"The term "dependant" is generally used to refer to spouse or civil partner, unmarried or same-gender partner of "PBS" migrant, which is covered by 319E(d)(ii)(b)"

Is the above statement only applicable if "PBS dependant" or "dependant" written?
Or
The whole point I am talking about is wrong as mentioning spouse or civil partner, un-married or same-sex partner of the main applicant are anyway dependant visa's category and regardless of not mentioning the word "dependant" does mean the same.

I am not sure, sometimes 319E as a whole is ambiguous and sometimes you read in context it make some sense but not much.

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:32 am

D4109125 wrote:I know Vinny, it's difficult as to whether the 180 day rule would be used or merely that absences should be limited and for good reason?
Did you mean to say similar absences requirement will be in place for dependants as well?

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Sun Sep 22, 2013 1:21 am

Hi vinny, sushdmehta, amber and seniors,

Please accept my apologies in advance. Kindly can anyone clarify the statement below:

"As it stands therefore, anyone applying under paragraph 319E(d)(ii) would be able to amalgamate previous leave as a PBS dependant, without it having to have been continuous."

(a) Does this mean - any leave (not necessarily PBS dependant) can be combined (considering my wife case - PBS dependant and non PBS dependant leaves)?

(b) Like in my wife's case if I can get appointment before 01/10/2013 then my wife is eligible to apply for ILR by combining
(i) her current PBS Dependant EC (1 Year 1 month),
(ii) previous PBS dependant EC (2 Years 8 months)
(iii) not PBS dependant leaves (2 Years 9 months)

All above can be combined if and only if dependant ILR application is made before 01/10/2013 (also able to provide evidences to show the relationship susbsisting and genuine)

Please kindly reply as this is the response from the UKBA and I will take this email copy with me if in case I get an appointment before 1st October 2013.

Kind regards

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

ILR Approved (Main Applicant & Dependent wife) - Solihul

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Mon Sep 30, 2013 3:54 pm

Hi vinny, sushdmehta, amber, seniors, gururs and everyone,

First of all I would like to thanks Almighty Allah for the success of ours. I would also really like to thanks Vinny, Sushdmehta, Amber from the bottom of my heart.

Me and wife both got ILR Today. No interaction of case worker at all. We went yesterday night to stay at Ramada hotel with a little one.

Appointment was at 9:40 but they took us in 9:00am. Airport security style check except no belts and shoes removed. Token number given and was told to wait in the waiting area. Our number called, we went to submit all our document to a staff member. We took every single document since 2006 to prove the cohibition. As my wife's second entry clearance was after 9th July 2012. Member of staff a lady only took 3 documents from the current year, 3 documents from the previous year, she was not at all keen in more cohibition document but was very keen to take the children birth certificates (both kids born in UK). She again asked me have we given her birth certificates for the kids. Then she told us to go to the waiting area and wait for the biomterics to be done. Myself, i didn't submit any absences letter also didn't tick that box as well in the form and no personal letter for absences provided. My total absences were 110 out of which I worked for my employer from back home for around 69 days, pay was in UK account.

Once our biometric process completed, they asked us to leave the building around 10:30am and told us to come back after 2 hours around 12:30. We went outside with the little one, was very worried about we might get a call from case worker relates to my wife. We spend the time in Touchwood shopping centre with a hope to hear something good but still internally quite worried as we were thinking my wife's case is a refusal.

Now 12:30, we went inside, they just asked us our token number, as soon as I told them my token number they said Congratulations we have granted you ILR. You will get your biometrics in 7-10 working days.

Once again thanks to Vinny & Sushdmehta.

Please do let me know anybody needs any help, I will try my best to provide any help from my side.

Kind regards

Sep08T1Applicant
Member
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:05 am
Location: London
Mood:

Super fast service

Post by Sep08T1Applicant » Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:18 am

Super fast service, I did hear from lot of people on this forum about receiving BRP within 3 days but experienced Today. We received our BRPs Today.

Locked
cron