- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny
Probably best.jerryguy wrote:I guess the next best thing would be to send in the administrative review and explain the situation?
Thanks very much for the reply!!vinny wrote:Probably best.jerryguy wrote:I guess the next best thing would be to send in the administrative review and explain the situation?
hey there.joxiri wrote:Jemmyguy did you get your online statements stamped by your bank
joxiri wrote:http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... ce-pankina
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... enance.pdf
seems like some good news is on the horizon
by my interpretation of this document
is it correct that as we submitted original bank statements showing our balance on a particular day a month before application being the mimimum required then we will be fine
pls can people sed more light on this thank yu
Aussie Tier 1 refusals wrote:However, if the rule is being wrongly applied, an administrative review should be attempted. If that fails and there is a solid argument, with evidence, that the rule has been wrongly applied, it is possible to lodge what is called a judicial review. Administrative reviews are conducted by Entry Clearance Managers, who I have to say do not have a good track record in correcting silly decisions by their minions.
Judicial review is not a cheap process. It requires a UK-based solicitor, who lodges the application at the High Court in the UK. A barrister will usually be required, which also racks up the expense. If you are in this position, there is advice in finding solicitors in the ‘Getting advice‘ page.
Hi Vinnyvinny wrote: Perhaps you can persuade the administrative/judicial review that under Pankina, the specified documents as specified in the guidance is not binding and too restrictive, as it also rejects genuine documents? Therefore, 245AA(b) should also be applicable, where they treat your online statements as what "purports to be, a specified document". Then, they should have taken reasonable steps to verify the documents.
Good luck!
Perhaps also refer to them to the House of Commons, Home Affairs Committee's report:jerryguy wrote:cause they didn't accept a copy of my online statement.
I see, so basically the guidelines are flawed because it also rejects authentic documents i.e my online statement?
8 Administrative review wrote:150. We agree that an administrative review on objective criteria will be more transparent and easier to administer. However, requiring a new application and a fresh fee for failing to furnish the UK Border Agency with rigidly defined types of paperwork is palpably unfair. This is particularly the case for applicants from countries in which the use of documents such as payslips is not common practice. That some applicants are unable to meet the documentation requirements through circumstances beyond their control is apparent from our conversations with UK Border Agency officials in New Delhi. We therefore recommend that applicants should be able to submit additional documentation, if it is requested, without having to make an entirely fresh application and pay another fee.
151. The Government should provide for an independent review of visa refusal cases under the Points Based System by the Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency, but, in a departure from the current situation, the Chief Inspector must be given the authority to investigate individual cases, and the power to provide appropriate remedy to applicants. The Chief Inspector should also be asked to review visa applications that have been successfully granted to ensure that they were correctly issued.