Remaining in the UK while a new EC is issued

I encountered a peculiar case recently, which may potentially be helpful for others in similar situation, who cannot switch in-country and traveling home is too far / expensive.

A couple from country X (say, New Zealand to illustrate the case), who were here (I believe) on working holidaymaker visa were approved for Tier 1, which under the new rules doesn't allow switching in-country, so they had to apply for a fresh Entry Clearance in NZ. Both were happily employed as contractors, and considered that leaving the UK for the duration of their application + the cost of round-trip travel would dent the bank account unacceptably.

They gave their passports to a relative who happened to be going to NZ on a short trip, and lodged their Tier 1 EC applications on their behalf at the British High Commission (I think, the forms were filled and signed by the actual applicants, so no problem there). The Tier 1 EC was duly issued to both, the same relative collected the passports and brought them over to the UK. Our friends go to Paris for some sightseeing, and on the way back are admitted under the new Tier 1 Entry Clearance.

Everything seems fine, and they are ever so happy to have saved a small bundle. I am of a diffferent mind, and believe they may have created a hidden problem for themselves, which will surface at the time of extension of stay. It may emerge that they remained in country while their application for a fresh EC was being considred, which may result in the refusal of subsequent extension. They believe they have broken no immigration rules, as their stay in the UK was covered by the previous leave to enter (working holidaymaker) which was far from expiry.

Has anyone come across a such case?

"They believe they have broken no immigration rules" - what nonsense, of course they have. Para 28 of the Immigration Rules states that:
"An applicant for an entry clearance must be outside the United Kingdom and Islands at the time of the application."
and this is repeated in Chap 8 of the Entry Clearance instructions. If the ECO had been aware that these people were in the UK at the time, their applications would have been refused. The reason is obvious - what's the point of "no switching" provisions and the Entry Clearance system itself if the applicants are already here? What if an application was refused? - and I don't believe they didn't realise this.
It's a scam not unknown by applicants from other continents, where the ECO's are a bit more savvy about checking entry and exit stamps than the ECO in this case.
Effectively they have made an application for leave to enter by deception, and for the sake of saving a couple of air fares have placed their whole future in this country at risk. They may get away with it, but they're not going to know for the foreseeable future, are they?

Cosmopol wrote:Everything seems fine, and they are ever so happy to have saved a small bundle. I am of a diffferent mind, and believe they may have created a hidden problem for themselves, which will surface at the time of extension of stay: as they have no New Zealand entry / exit stamps, and the EC itself is "initiated" by a stamp from some English Channel port, which is an unlikely route from NZ - it may emerge that they remained in country while their application for a fresh EC was being considred, which may result in the refusal of subsequent extension. They believe they have broken no immigration rules, as their stay in the UK was covered by the previous leave to enter (working holidaymaker) which was far from expiry.

They may well have stored up problems for the future, but the absence of New Zealand entry/exit stamps won't signify much. For one thing, as far as I know, NZ doesn't stamp its own citizens into or out of the country (it certainly doesn't stamp Australian passports). Lots of countries don't put stamps or endorsements in their own passports...

I'm not sure, in any case, how much credence the UK authorities place in non-UK passport stamps in terms of trying to decide on people's travels outside the UK.

Mr Rusty wrote:"They believe they have broken no immigration rules" - what nonsense, of course they have. ....

That's my point precisely. It may not seem too big compared with other violations, but still, it is not worth it.

Mr Rusty wrote:They may get away with it, but they're not going to know for the foreseeable future, are they?

Yes, I guess, it's buried now until their extension app in a few years, or ILR - not sure which would be first in their case. And I guess, it's not rectifiable now, because the problem is in the past already.

Christophe wrote:Lots of countries don't put stamps or endorsements in their own passports...

It was just a technical point that came to mind; the question itself (and the issue) is of course not with the stamps, but with the fact of staying behind....

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this!

Cosmopol wrote:

Christophe wrote:Lots of countries don't put stamps or endorsements in their own passports...

It was just a technical point that came to mind; the question itself (and the issue) is of course not with the stamps, but with the fact of staying behind....

Absolutely, and their actions have been foolish at best, in my opinion.

I spoke to the people in question last night, and was corrected in some details, although not with the main issue.