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

Home Office's 'Blatant discrimination' against Pakistanis

Family member & Ancestry immigration; don't post other immigration categories, please!
Marriage | Unmarried Partners | Fiancé/e | Ancestry

Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, Administrator

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:41 pm

high_aimer wrote:@Meats - it was you who blamed Pakistanis to be bogus students
meats wrote:most of the bogus students being from Pakistan
and you can't say those 2 cases didn't attach required evidence without even looking at their applications
And it was you accusing people of my 'nationality' of running these bogus colleges. Now, are you going to tell me what 'nationality' i am or are you making wild accusations and discriminating against me?

As for the 2 cases, i only know what they said they provided in their application on this forum. From what they said they provided then the refusal was right in both cases.

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:42 pm

bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
Rain wrote:@meats
Why don't you have a read through the threads by the Indians and see what additional information they give? No, instead you're quite happy to whip out the race card like usual when something doesn't go your way.
I thought you knew the holygrail of additional information ! honestly i am not playing race card . I am just asking what is that "acceptable" proof that visitors will return back home .
Let's see, for starters, a job, family, property. No evidence of any of that was provided, in one case she had retired (fair enough) but no evidence of family or property in Pakistan was provided showing that she had reason to return home. As such it is quite clear to see why, according to the laws in place, that the visa was rejected.
The fact that her husband was there backhome itself is a good enough reason for her to return to her home arguably!
And did you say why the husband wasn't travelling with the wife? It looks a bit odd when the partner isn't travelling to view their kids too, especially considering that Pakistan isn't exactly a short haul away.

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:44 pm

Meats - I really don't get what you are trying to prove here...

Did you not read in my message that the Immigration Judge and then the Entry Clearance Manager both agreed later that both the refusals were unjustified?

bym007
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 9:38 am
Location: London

Post by bym007 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:44 pm

meats wrote:
bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
Rain wrote:@meats

I thought you knew the holygrail of additional information ! honestly i am not playing race card . I am just asking what is that "acceptable" proof that visitors will return back home .
Let's see, for starters, a job, family, property. No evidence of any of that was provided, in one case she had retired (fair enough) but no evidence of family or property in Pakistan was provided showing that she had reason to return home. As such it is quite clear to see why, according to the laws in place, that the visa was rejected.
The fact that her husband was there backhome itself is a good enough reason for her to return to her home arguably!
And did you say why the husband wasn't travelling with the wife? It looks a bit odd when the partner isn't travelling to view their kids too, especially considering that Pakistan isn't exactly a short haul away.
I would say that since I can only financially sponsor one parent at a time to visit me "since Pakistan is not a short haul away", I left my father for another time!

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:46 pm

bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
Let's see, for starters, a job, family, property. No evidence of any of that was provided, in one case she had retired (fair enough) but no evidence of family or property in Pakistan was provided showing that she had reason to return home. As such it is quite clear to see why, according to the laws in place, that the visa was rejected.
The fact that her husband was there backhome itself is a good enough reason for her to return to her home arguably!
And did you say why the husband wasn't travelling with the wife? It looks a bit odd when the partner isn't travelling to view their kids too, especially considering that Pakistan isn't exactly a short haul away.
I would say that since I can only financially sponsor one parent at a time to visit me "since Pakistan is not a short haul away", I left my father for another time!
And did you mention that at all? Bringing one parent over at a time looks 'odd'.

bym007
Member
Posts: 109
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 9:38 am
Location: London

Post by bym007 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:47 pm

meats wrote:
bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
bym007 wrote:
The fact that her husband was there backhome itself is a good enough reason for her to return to her home arguably!
And did you say why the husband wasn't travelling with the wife? It looks a bit odd when the partner isn't travelling to view their kids too, especially considering that Pakistan isn't exactly a short haul away.
I would say that since I can only financially sponsor one parent at a time to visit me "since Pakistan is not a short haul away", I left my father for another time!
And did you mention that at all? Bringing one parent over at a time looks 'odd'.
And why is that so ?

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:48 pm

high_aimer wrote:Meats - I really don't get what you are trying to prove here...

Did you not read in my message that the Immigration Judge and then the Entry Clearance Manager both agreed later that both the refusals were unjustified?
You accused people of my nationality of running bogus colleges. Now, are you going to tell me what nationality i am? By accusing people of my nationality of running bogus colleges you are now discriminating against people of whatever nationality i supposedly am. So, what nationality am i? Is it ok to discriminate against whatever nationality i am but it's not ok to discriminate against yours? Is that what you're trying to say?

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:49 pm

bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
bym007 wrote:
meats wrote:
And did you say why the husband wasn't travelling with the wife? It looks a bit odd when the partner isn't travelling to view their kids too, especially considering that Pakistan isn't exactly a short haul away.
I would say that since I can only financially sponsor one parent at a time to visit me "since Pakistan is not a short haul away", I left my father for another time!
And did you mention that at all? Bringing one parent over at a time looks 'odd'.
And why is that so ?
Bring one over at a time, slip through the system and remain in this country instead of showing sufficient funds for both of them.

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:51 pm

@Meats - No it does't look odd especially when they had 2 other children in Pakistan, in full time education and some one needed to be there for them.

You know nothing about these cases and yet you are on a mission to prove all Pakistanis wrong. Please stop jumping in your chair as you are not making much sense!

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:52 pm

high_aimer wrote:@Meats - No it does't look odd especially when they had 2 other children in Pakistan, in full time education and some one needed to be there for them.

You know nothing about these cases and yet you are on a mission to prove all Pakistanis wrong. Please stop jumping in your chair as you are not making much sense!
I am commenting on what was said on this forum about those cases.

You're on a mission to prove that Pakistanis are being discriminated against when that's not the case.

By the way, what nationality am i? Or are you happy to just discriminate against whatever nationality you think i am? Come on, answer me or have you realised that you're discriminating against my apparent nationality?

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:56 pm

I'll leave it to the readers of this thread to judge us as who is discriminating against who as even from the first post you started accusing Pakistanis of being 'bogus students' and 'not attaching required evidence' without asking any details first.

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:58 pm

high_aimer wrote:I'll leave it to the readers of this thread to judge us as who is discriminating against who as even from the first post you started accusing Pakistanis of being 'bogus students' and 'not attaching required evidence' without asking any details first.
I'll help you out high_aimer and jog your memory.

"Just looking at the list of people who have been caught in running these bogus colleges can prove that almost all of them were actually from "another" country, most probably where our friend Meats is from."

That is what you said. Now, what nationality are these people and am i? You're discriminating against whatever nationality you think are running these colleges.

Bit of pot kettle black going on here me thinks.

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:05 pm

You've got nothing else to say have you? How could I discriminate against your nationality when I don't even know what nationality you are.

And this was my last reply to your post, as I am going to ignore any of your comments now as you really don't know what you are saying.

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:38 pm

high_aimer wrote:You've got nothing else to say have you? How could I discriminate against your nationality when I don't even know what nationality you are.

And this was my last reply to your post, as I am going to ignore any of your comments now as you really don't know what you are saying.
I'll help you again high_aimer as it is clear that you don't think that you are discriminating against anyone.

"Just looking at the list of people who have been caught in running these bogus colleges can prove that almost all of them were actually from "another" country, most probably where our friend Meats is from. "

That is what you said. You are saying that a particular nationality runs most of the bogus colleges. You aren't saying what that nationality is but you are discriminating against whatever you think that nationality is. It is pretty clear for all to see that you are discriminating against the nationality that you think runs most of the bogus colleges, and it is clear for all to see that you definitely think that one particular nationality runs most of the bogus colleges.

But according to you you aren't discriminating against anyone and you are actually the victim here because you're a Pakistani. Keep on playing the race card chump.

batleykhan
Moderator
Posts: 3573
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 3:58 pm
Location: West Yorkshire
Contact:

Post by batleykhan » Sat Dec 12, 2009 9:53 am

Look boys if you dont have any constructive comments, please dont post bickering commentss. :x

stmellon
Member
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Behind enemy lines, London

Post by stmellon » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:36 pm

I find it highly unlikely that this is a beloved issue. The ECOs and ECMs are intelligent, globally minded individuals who have already demonstrated their caliber to first enter the Civil Service, and later apply specifically for a job in Pakistan.

Why would anyone choose to work in Pakistan if they hated the place and its people, and were determined to keep as many out of the place as possible?

andyb123
Member
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:59 am

Post by andyb123 » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:11 pm

On the day that my girlfriend and I visited the Hanoi embassy in November 2008 to try to get a visit visa, we were refused, and so were 6 other people we saw walk out looking dejected before us.

They claimed that my gf had family in the UK that we'd failed to declare on the form, they then claimed that her father had given them this information but refused to hand over that information to my gf (so that we could re-submit with "correct" information)... we later went back with a signed affadavit from her father and they admitted they'd cocked up.

The visa applicatoin process is very complex and tied up in legalise (one would almost say deliberately if you didn't know how inept the british civil service can be), plus all the ECO's are PEOPLE who sometimes make mistakes too, particularly when faced with a heavy workload.

It's not discrimination, it's just the way the system works.

Having had to deal with the civil service in Vietnam, believe me, things could be a lot worse!

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Wed Dec 16, 2009 4:15 pm

andyb123 wrote:On the day that my girlfriend and I visited the Hanoi embassy in November 2008 to try to get a visit visa, we were refused, and so were 6 other people we saw walk out looking dejected before us.

They claimed that my gf had family in the UK that we'd failed to declare on the form, they then claimed that her father had given them this information but refused to hand over that information to my gf (so that we could re-submit with "correct" information)... we later went back with a signed affadavit from her father and they admitted they'd cocked up.

The visa applicatoin process is very complex and tied up in legalise (one would almost say deliberately if you didn't know how inept the british civil service can be), plus all the ECO's are PEOPLE who sometimes make mistakes too, particularly when faced with a heavy workload.

It's not discrimination, it's just the way the system works.

Having had to deal with the civil service in Vietnam, believe me, things could be a lot worse!
Civil service in Vietnam are a piece of cake, just chuck them a few fags or slip them a few dollars. Done that a few times whilst out there and everything was done straight away :) Saves it being 'lost' or rejected for stupid reasons.

Pakhtoon
- thin ice -
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 2:57 am
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Post by Pakhtoon » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:15 am

I don't see it as discrimination either. There might be individual cases where the ECO made a wrong judegement but blaming Home Office for picking on Pakistanis is simply not true.

As for the large percentage of Pakistani applications being rejected, I rather see it as Home Office doing their work properly by rejecting applications where the applicants' intended purpose of travel to UK is not what they mention.

I am not passing any judgement on the cases reported here but I believe it was wrong to have a go on meats because of what he said about Pakistani students. I don't have any knowledge about the number of bogus students from Pakistan and other countries but what I do know is that most of the students from Pakistan ARE actually bogus.

Besides, given the large number of ethnic Pakistanis in UK, dodging the system through family/vist visas is yet another fact.

So if your cases are genuine, you should blame those Pakistanis who dodge the system and make you suspicous rather than Home Office.
“Terrorism is the war of the poor; war is the terrorism of the rich.â€

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:40 pm

I am not going to start another discussion on what you said inwarsaw as I've learnt to ignore people like yourself who...
inwarsaw wrote:don't have any knowledge about the number of bogus students from Pakistan and other countries
and yet they choose to show their inner hatred by saying...
inwarsaw wrote:most of the students from Pakistan ARE actually bogus.
All I can say is that please don't try to hijack this forum to spread your baseless hatred towards a particular group of people.

Peace.

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:49 pm

high_aimer wrote:I am not going to start another discussion on what you said inwarsaw as I've learnt to ignore people like yourself who...
inwarsaw wrote:don't have any knowledge about the number of bogus students from Pakistan and other countries
and yet they choose to show their inner hatred by saying...
inwarsaw wrote:most of the students from Pakistan ARE actually bogus.
All I can say is that please don't try to hijack this forum to spread your baseless hatred towards a particular group of people.

Peace.
You still haven't told me what nationality i am high_aimer. I guess you realised that you were discriminating and tried backtracking.

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:52 pm

@meats

Your comments aren't even worth of my 30 seconds, so they are ignored!

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:01 pm

high_aimer wrote:@meats

Your comments aren't even worth of my 30 seconds, so they are ignored!
You are ignoring them because i am right about you discriminating against these bogus college owners and whatever nationality i am as apparently we share nationalities. However you feel that because you are Pakistani you can't actually discriminate against people.

high_aimer
Junior Member
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:19 pm

Post by high_aimer » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:06 pm

^^ meats has just been ignored, again! :roll:

meats
BANNED
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am

Post by meats » Sun Jan 03, 2010 1:18 pm

high_aimer wrote:^^ meats has just been ignored, again! :roll:
If i was being ignored by you then you wouldn't be replying at all would you? Christ you're bloody stupid :lol:

Locked
cron