Conduct of the interview

Hello Everyone,

Would appreciate any opinion on the topic.

My interview took place for T1 extension application on the 20th June after I applied on the 17th April 2018. The compliance officer did not note down everything I was saying. She repeatedly kept telling me to keep my answers short and specific and not give her any context. When I tried to explain more she would stop me in the middle and move to next question. I did stop to question her and told her that I feel like my business model has not been explained for case worker to make an informed decision to which she replied no matter how much I explain the case worker will base everything on the evidence and not on what I explain and she mentioned that she will ask me follow up questions if there are doubts so I need not explain.

A small example : She asked me to provide the evidence of the work I did for my previous clients. I did explain her that the information and data is confidential and also because I work on their systems I would only be able to show her the evidence of the client I was working for currently and will not be able to provide the evidence of work for the clients I was working with at the time application was made. For that evidence I provided the contracts, invoices and bank statements showing the funds for the invoices. For this explanation she only wrote down 'will not be able to provide evidence'

A lot more instances happened during the course of the interview. I sent a personal statement to my solicitor detailing everything.

My Q is should I raise a formal complaint that I was not given opportunity to explain my business to the case worker for the case worker to be able to make an informed decision. And also the statements she made may result in an incorrect decision.

Any sort of input will be appreciated.

Thank You

Customer confidentiality is always a sticky topic. It is a poor reason to keep information from government departments. Most standard contracts would have an exception for sharing information if requested by "authorities". HO would qualify as a government authority.

The compliance officer that interviewed you was doing exactly the right thing. They are not interested in your business model neither is the caseworker in Sheffield.

You need to demonstrate three things:
That the money was invested into the business and spent on business activity - not directors salary etc.
The business is trading and therefore credible but meets the visa condition as well - no contracting.
You have employed the required number of staff to meet the conditions for the extension.

Anything outside of the above is irrelevant and serves no purpose. You have not provided examples of work and by the sounds of it , it appears you are an IT contractor if you are working on others peoples systems. This is not self determination/ employment activity as stated for the Tier 1 Ent visa therefore it will not meet the requirements for the extension. This is maybe why you are concerned?

As for a complaint - what can you complain about? The fact that you refused to provide evidence of work on request? That the irrelevant information you wish to be considered was not written down?

You either meet the requirements or you don’t, what your business model is - no one cares.

Thank you both of you for the reply. I appreciate your thought but I do feel you are missing the point. This was just one example. She did not let me answer and did not record the verbatim. Also I do think the business model helps you make strategic or commercial decisions so how can it not matter completely? You keeping the clients work irrespective of the GDPR ruling against all confidentiality clause ?

Wasn't she supposed to write down or record things I was saying rather than noting what she felt was relevant was my question? Am not an IT contractor. I am running a business but I work with extensive data laws which apply to my business as well as my clients so I again come to the point like without knowing exacltly what I do and my business model you jumped to the conclusion that I might be an IT contractor my fear is so will the case worker as my side of the explaining wasn't noted down. The rules specifically state than in an compliance visit I could be talking for 10 hours and they need to note down my testimony word by word so s the case worker is clear of any doubt.

How is it fair if my testimony wasn't noted down as I explained and in her words or what she perceived about what I was saying?

Secretary of state requires that fairness will very often require a person in this case me , who maybe adversely affected by the decision will and should have an opportunity to make further representation on my own behalf either before a decision is taken with a view of producing favorable result in case of a compliance visit so my question was as this opportunity wasn't given will escalating it help? rather than me being afraid. Thats not my concern here. I just think if you can make a mistake of not knowing what I do with half explanation so can the case worker.

You might want to point me to the guidance that states your every word has to be recorded.... can’t find that personally.

Did you invest all the money?
Did you take any funds that were not covered by net profits as salary etc?
Are you able to demonstrate that your business is credible including evidence of the activities undertaken?
Have you employed the requisite number of people to amass the the full time equivalents for your extension?

If yes to all of the above it will be fine.