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

New fees for 2010/11

General UK immigration & work permits; don't post job search or family related topics!

Please use this section of the board if there is no specific section for your query.

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

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

New fees for 2010/11

Post by newperson » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:13 pm

Announced today as part of a ministerial statement:

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... n-services

Shortcut to fees table here:

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... t-services

Of particular note:
- Settlement of dependent family members (elderly parents, adult dependent children, etc.) will be much more expensive. ILR (postal) via SET(F) will be £1680. £1930 for PEO. Dependent settlement visas made from overseas will also be £1680.
- Spouse and partner settlement fees (SET(M)) have been increased, but by not as much to £840/£1095. This is the same rate as most other ILR routes (SET(O)).
- Dependents on in-country applications for leave to remain will each have to pay an additional 10% fee to be included in the main application.
- Many other categories will see increases of £10-100
- If you want to get your biometrics done quickly, there is now a premium service. It costs...wait for it...£15,000.

User avatar
Casa
Moderator
Posts: 25651
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:32 pm

Post by Casa » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:35 pm

I'd just finished reading through them. Surely £15,000 must be a typo! :(
Incredible!
Seems to be an error with Nationality applications - single.
At present the fee is £720 and the table shows less.

ElenaW
Diamond Member
Posts: 1525
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Back and forth between California and Norwich :D

Post by ElenaW » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:39 pm

No the £15,000 is not an error. An advisor told me that this is for the rich people (really really rich people!) that can't be bothered doing things the simpleton way.
I tell it like it is.

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Post by newperson » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:41 pm

Casa wrote:I'd just finished reading through them. Surely £15,000 must be a typo! :(
Incredible!
Seems to be an error with Nationality applications - single.
At present the fee is £720 and the table shows less.
The £15,000 is not a typo. That is what it is!

The nationality application fee under Section 6(1) is correct, it just doesn't include the £80 ceremony fee. Section 6(1) naturalisations were £575 in 2008/9, £640 in 2009/10, and will be £655 now. But as before, these all don't include the £80 ceremony fee. The total price in early 2010 will be £735.

f2k
Diamond Member
Posts: 1423
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: London

Post by f2k » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:44 pm

newperson wrote:
Casa wrote:I'd just finished reading through them. Surely £15,000 must be a typo! :(
Incredible!
Seems to be an error with Nationality applications - single.
At present the fee is £720 and the table shows less.
The £15,000 is not a typo. That is what it is!

The nationality application fee under Section 6(1) is correct, it just doesn't include the £80 ceremony fee. Section 6(1) naturalisations were £575 in 2008/9, £640 in 2009/10, and will be £655 now. But as before, these all don't include the £80 ceremony fee. The total price in early 2010 will be £735.
haaaa. :wink: thanks for explaining that. was really confused there. I suppose the ceremony fee could increase as well

User avatar
Casa
Moderator
Posts: 25651
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:32 pm

Post by Casa » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:50 pm

Maths was never my strong point! :wink:

sac
Junior Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:12 am
Location: London, UK

Post by sac » Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:07 pm

I must say, I am pleasantly surprised by these relatively modest hikes.

The £15 increase for single nationality applications, for example, is actually very decent - if you consider that inflation is running at 2.9% (Dec '09), the minimum justifiable fee hike could have been £18.56. And of course, the maximum could have been however much the money-mad beancounters at UKBA wanted it to be! :)

However, seeing the real cost price of any of these categories is what makes the blood boil!! It's quite puzzling too; an ILR application at the PEO actually costs UKBA less to process than a postal app... yet it's the PEO applicant who is charged the higher fee...

The near doubling of fees in the dependent relative category is extremely unfair, though. As for the ridiculous £15,000 biometric 'premium plus' service, i can think of only two potential customers for that - Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich ;-)

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Post by newperson » Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:16 pm

sac wrote:The near doubling of fees in the dependent relative category is extremely unfair, though. As for the ridiculous £15,000 biometric 'premium plus' service, i can think of only two potential customers for that - Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich ;-)
According to feedback on another site, there have already been inquiries for bookings at the £15k rate. So I guess it's a matter of create a product, create demand.

sac
Junior Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:12 am
Location: London, UK

Post by sac » Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:18 pm

recession, what recession eh!

newperson wrote:
sac wrote:The near doubling of fees in the dependent relative category is extremely unfair, though. As for the ridiculous £15,000 biometric 'premium plus' service, i can think of only two potential customers for that - Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich ;-)
According to feedback on another site, there have already been inquiries for bookings at the £15k rate. So I guess it's a matter of create a product, create demand.

mochyn
Diamond Member
Posts: 1038
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:02 pm

Post by mochyn » Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:18 pm

eee by gum

I'd sell my house to have the right to live in the UK

People don't realise how hard it was to live in the UK before
We had to work a 27 hour day, father would flog us every day and we used to live in a cardboard box

You were lucky, we used to dream about living in a cardboard box............

keshgrover
Member of Standing
Posts: 369
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:58 pm
Contact:

Post by keshgrover » Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:52 pm

It is another game by Labour for tomorrow's Headlines. But soon there will be a loophole or some sort of grants from Local Government to support immigrants. Because Labour can not rule without immigrants. Dont wonder if you see a bill board saying vote for us and we will pay for Premium 15K appointment. lol.

No offences.
KESH

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Post by newperson » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:18 pm

A couple of fun articles:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p ... 995927.ece

(love the quote from the bureaucrat about footballers, Jaguars and Croydon)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/2 ... s-increase

tall_funky
BANNED
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:35 am

Post by tall_funky » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:03 am

The near doubling of fees in the dependent relative category is extremely unfair, though. As for the ridiculous £15,000 biometric 'premium plus' service, i can think of only two potential customers for that - Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich
Lolz Sac and you think Lakshmi Mittal and Roman Abramovich are that DUMB to give £15k to UKBA for a STAMP ;)

kindley
Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:09 pm
Location: there
Contact:

Post by kindley » Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:18 am

Are the differences between estimated (actual) costs and proposed fees for applications to the UKBA justified considering the poor customer service and some unwarranted delays experienced by applicants?

Does anyone know the reasons for this big differences?
Always Seek Further Opinion (ASFO)

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Post by newperson » Thu Jan 21, 2010 10:20 am

The Government freely and frankly admits that the fees for some visas and leaves to remain exceed the administrative cost of providing them. If you read the charging consultation responses, the Government states again and again that the immigration system costs the UK taxpayer over £2 billion a year to administer. As they believe that those who use the system should fund it, they make no apologies for the high fees. They want to fund the system and build it up, and since it doesn't seem to impact application numbers negatively at all, they set the prices at that high level.

To be fair, fees in the US immigration system aren't as expensive as the UK's, but the service levels and waiting times can be a whole lot worse.

ElenaW
Diamond Member
Posts: 1525
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Back and forth between California and Norwich :D

Post by ElenaW » Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:01 pm


To be fair, fees in the US immigration system aren't as expensive as the UK's, but the service levels and waiting times can be a whole lot worse.
Very very true. People wait from 8 months to a year to get a fiance or spousal visa response in the us!
I tell it like it is.

sac
Junior Member
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:12 am
Location: London, UK

Post by sac » Thu Jan 21, 2010 1:09 pm

but surely there has to be some upper limit?? i mean, they surely can't have the constitutional licence to just charge any amount they damn well please like and say 'pay up or f**k off', right?

can you imagine the uproar if the government arbitrarily decided to henceforth charge all UK citizens £5,000 per person per year in council tax, justifying it by saying, 'well too bad matey, it costs only a fraction of that to run a council, but pay up if you want your trash collected etc etc - after all you benefit from the system don't you'?

i think this attitude - both from the government and some forum posters - of 'well they're only migrants so we/the govt can do whatever we like and they can't do anything' just sucks.

most migrants are middle-class at best, i don't see why the fees have to be the equivalent of one (or more, if it's a family) month's wages of a hard working tax paying man, just because the blatantly inefficient Labour government and UKBA love to piss away criminally vast sums of money on white-elephant schemes like ID cards and whatnot.

instead of keeping money in people's pockets so they can buy a house, pay for a good education, have a comfortable lifestyle, save up for a rainy day, keep the economy going etc, they charge amounts that encourage, indeed force, credit card debt and dent savings. anyone still wondering why the recession happened?

and then they add insult to injury by saying, in polite officialese, 'oh shut up now and take it up the ars*, there's a good migrant'. they'd do well to remember, today's migrant is tomorrow's citizen - and voter.

ElenaW
Diamond Member
Posts: 1525
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Back and forth between California and Norwich :D

Post by ElenaW » Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:04 pm

sac wrote:but surely there has to be some upper limit?? i mean, they surely can't have the constitutional licence to just charge any amount they damn well please like and say 'pay up or f**k off', right?

can you imagine the uproar if the government arbitrarily decided to henceforth charge all UK citizens £5,000 per person per year in council tax, justifying it by saying, 'well too bad matey, it costs only a fraction of that to run a council, but pay up if you want your trash collected etc etc - after all you benefit from the system don't you'?

i think this attitude - both from the government and some forum posters - of 'well they're only migrants so we/the govt can do whatever we like and they can't do anything' just sucks.

most migrants are middle-class at best, i don't see why the fees have to be the equivalent of one (or more, if it's a family) month's wages of a hard working tax paying man, just because the blatantly inefficient Labour government and UKBA love to piss away criminally vast sums of money on white-elephant schemes like ID cards and whatnot.

instead of keeping money in people's pockets so they can buy a house, pay for a good education, have a comfortable lifestyle, save up for a rainy day, keep the economy going etc, they charge amounts that encourage, indeed force, credit card debt and dent savings. anyone still wondering why the recession happened?

and then they add insult to injury by saying, in polite officialese, 'oh shut up now and take it up the ars*, there's a good migrant'. they'd do well to remember, today's migrant is tomorrow's citizen - and voter.
I completely agree with you. They push around migrants because migrants can't vote or do anything about the increases really. People will pay crazy fees because they desperately want to live in the uk so IMO it'll just keep going up as people will keep paying.
I tell it like it is.

newperson
Member
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 6:36 am

Post by newperson » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:12 pm

I think it might help to see this process through a cynical lens. It's not really about building a civic contract, official statements to the contrary. It's pure economics, driven by the bottom line. The ideal migrant comes to the UK as a young adult, already fully and highly educated and ready to work. He or she works here for their whole career contributing to the Exchequer the entire time and then leaves the UK at retirement age. No kids, no problem. In fact, that's even better.

Because that ideal scenario is so rare, the Government tinkers at the edges to extract as much as it can. High fees and moving goalposts are part of that scheme. But again, that's all business. I just wish they'd be more upfront about it.

Wanderer
Diamond Member
Posts: 10511
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:46 pm
Ireland

Post by Wanderer » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:14 pm

newperson wrote:I think it might help to see this process through a cynical lens. It's not really about building a civic contract, official statements to the contrary. It's pure economics, driven by the bottom line. The ideal migrant comes to the UK as a young adult, already fully and highly educated and ready to work. He or she works here for their whole career contributing to the Exchequer the entire time and then leaves the UK at retirement age. No kids, no problem. In fact, that's even better.

Because that ideal scenario is so rare, the Government tinkers at the edges to extract as much as it can. High fees and moving goalposts are part of that scheme. But again, that's all business. I just wish they'd be more upfront about it.
I've always said I live in UK plc....
An chéad stad eile Stáisiún Uí Chonghaile....

The Station Agent
Senior Member
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:51 am
Location: UK

Post by The Station Agent » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:31 pm

That £15,000 fee is a total disgrace. It's nigh on impossible to get an appointment at a PEO. People like football stars and pop stars can't let UKBA sit on their passports for 3 months like a lot of postal applications take, so they're over a barrel aren't they?

True cost £1982, actual price £15,000. Nice little earner.

On a more serious note, I note they don't quote a visa fee for a Tier 5 CoS holder. These were £99 or thereabouts and there's no proposed new fee. I assume this is an omission?

ElenaW
Diamond Member
Posts: 1525
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 10:14 am
Location: Back and forth between California and Norwich :D

Post by ElenaW » Thu Jan 21, 2010 3:31 pm

newperson wrote:I think it might help to see this process through a cynical lens. It's not really about building a civic contract, official statements to the contrary. It's pure economics, driven by the bottom line. The ideal migrant comes to the UK as a young adult, already fully and highly educated and ready to work. He or she works here for their whole career contributing to the Exchequer the entire time and then leaves the UK at retirement age. No kids, no problem. In fact, that's even better.

Because that ideal scenario is so rare, the Government tinkers at the edges to extract as much as it can. High fees and moving goalposts are part of that scheme. But again, that's all business. I just wish they'd be more upfront about it.
True it is all about economics. But it's all about economics in the us as well and they charge about 1/2 the price (this is if we pretend that there is no currency difference). Yet they still make tons of money on migrants. It just sucks is what I'm sayin :P. Thing is though, I would rather pay more and have my stuff processed quickly. I'm the most impatient person you'll ever meet.
I tell it like it is.

newlife2009
Junior Member
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 12:48 pm

Post by newlife2009 » Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:08 pm

What is CESC (ILR PEO) ?

lboro
Member
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 11:40 am

Post by lboro » Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:38 pm

boulevardofbrokendreams wrote:No the £15,000 is not an error. An advisor told me that this is for the rich people (really really rich people!) that can't be bothered doing things the simpleton way.
The service is called Mobile Biometric Enrolment & Case-working (Premium+)...So I guess you can ask them to come at your house and do biometric and fill in the forms any time you want, i.e. even 2am in the morning and get your passport stamped immediately! Is good to be rich isn't it?

disdil4u
Member
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: U.K.
Contact:

Post by disdil4u » Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:59 am

When this new fees will be application to all?
is it from february 2010 or from April 2010?

Locked
cron