Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Fri May 10, 2019 10:57 am

I just needed some advice on my current situation. I applied for my husbands spouse visa last year in June 2018 which got refused end of November 2018 based on not meeting the financial requirement. We have a 6 year old daughter together, and me and my daughter are both british nationals by birth.
I have two jobs (i work part time at both, so a total of 20 hours a week). At the time of applying i got together all my payslips and p60’s and took all the documentation to my lawyer. When looking at my P60’s from both employers and HM revenue tax documents , my income was coming up-to 18,000 ( so 600 short of the requirement). We were desperate to apply because our daughter was really beginning to have an adverse affect of us living apart and she would cry for days when my husband would leave. Our lawyer suggested we apply using Article 8, and by citing exceptional circumstances, we can use a third party sponsor (which was my relative whose annual income is above 200k). We also attached letters proving compassionate factors and exceptional circumstances.
So, in November 2018 the visa got refused. They rejected Article 8, compassionate factors and exceptional circumstances (saying no evidence has been given) and said that the financial requirement was not being met. We filed for an appeal. In January 2019, i sent a cover letter once again explaining all the factors and emphasising the proof that was sent( which was previously ignored), and also an employer letter that stated that my contract was a full time contract of which i was only doing prt time hours. So i had the option to go full time with immediate effect. The letter was received by Sheffield (i sent it via DHL and got proof of who signed for it etc).
In March 2019 they refused the initial review, stating that the initial decision made was correct, and also that no new documentation was given. They completely ignored the letter i had sent. We then received a letter for a court date in August 2019.
In the meantime, since last year, i had an annual increment from one of my jobs and my end of year salary from the financial year 2018/2019 exceeds 20k. I thought i would prepare early and even take this new documentation to the court as well just to show that my pay has increased (eventhough im aware they focus on the financial documents submitted with the initial application). As i was doing this, i was told by the HR department of one of my employers that the P60 for one of my jobs DOES NOT show my total gross income BUT only my “TAXABLE INCOME” . This was only raised because i asked them why the gross income amount was different on my P60 and my march payslip. The HR department mentioned that the actual gross pay amount is only mentioned in march payslips, as this is the last payslip for the financial year. The P60’s ONLY look at the income that is taxable. Apparently there is some threshold, so you aren't taxed for a certain amount and the rest you are. I rushed back to last years payslips and realised that my gross income for the payslips i submitted was infact £18,900 and exceeded the financial requirement in the first place. The amount we mentioned in our application was based on the P60’s so this was my taxable income not my total gross income. Therefore refusal on this basis was invalid. I have asked my lawyer to send another representation to both the tribunal and home office to reconsider this. This time i highlighted and explained everything in detail and got employer letters confirming these gross income amounts. I re attached all payslips from last year and this year, and bank statements.

Sorry for the lengthy lengthy post. We are just so exhausted and fed up of this whole process. Has anyone been through the same and had a positive outcome with the home office withdrawing the refusal before the court hearing? Im at a point of being so disheartened and discouraged by this whole awful process. I feel angry at myself for not noticing or knowing about this earlier. I have full faith that God didn’t intend for it to happen last year, and it wasn't meant to be but i really pray that they withdraw the refusal now knowing that the financial requirement was being met all along.

lutga · Post by **lutga** » Fri May 10, 2019 12:22 pm

My wife was in a very similar situation to you - and we used my father's income as third-party support. Our application was initially refused because of the exact same reasons as yours (they basically said we didn't meet the exceptional circumstances).

We appealed (the hearing was in April), and two weeks later found out we had won, with the judge overturning the initial refusal.

I think if you meet every other requirement, and are only failing on the financial element - and have a firm offer of third party support, the chances of you winning the appeal are high (on grounds of 'proportionality' - ie. it is unfair to reject an offer of third party support if you meet all the other criteria).

Yes, it's very frustrating to wait nearly a year for the appeal hearing - but following the MM Lebanon case, the legal proceedings are certainly in place to work in your favour in cases like this. It worked for us, anyway!

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Sun May 12, 2019 10:54 am

Thank you for your response. Finally to hear something positive from someone in the same situation as us gives me some hope. Im just hoping they withdraw before it even goes to court because the financial requirement WAS being met in the first place.

Jhelumi · Post by **Jhelumi** » Sun May 12, 2019 11:33 am

Traveler123 wrote: ↑
Fri May 10, 2019 10:57 am
I just needed some advice on my current situation. I applied for my husbands spouse visa last year in June 2018 which got refused end of November 2018 based on not meeting the financial requirement. We have a 6 year old daughter together, and me and my daughter are both british nationals by birth.
I have two jobs (i work part time at both, so a total of 20 hours a week). At the time of applying i got together all my payslips and p60’s and took all the documentation to my lawyer. When looking at my P60’s from both employers and HM revenue tax documents , my income was coming up-to 18,000 ( so 600 short of the requirement). We were desperate to apply because our daughter was really beginning to have an adverse affect of us living apart and she would cry for days when my husband would leave. Our lawyer suggested we apply using Article 8, and by citing exceptional circumstances, we can use a third party sponsor (which was my relative whose annual income is above 200k). We also attached letters proving compassionate factors and exceptional circumstances.
So, in November 2018 the visa got refused. They rejected Article 8, compassionate factors and exceptional circumstances (saying no evidence has been given) and said that the financial requirement was not being met. We filed for an appeal. In January 2019, i sent a cover letter once again explaining all the factors and emphasising the proof that was sent( which was previously ignored), and also an employer letter that stated that my contract was a full time contract of which i was only doing prt time hours. So i had the option to go full time with immediate effect. The letter was received by Sheffield (i sent it via DHL and got proof of who signed for it etc).
In March 2019 they refused the initial review, stating that the initial decision made was correct, and also that no new documentation was given. They completely ignored the letter i had sent. We then received a letter for a court date in August 2019.
In the meantime, since last year, i had an annual increment from one of my jobs and my end of year salary from the financial year 2018/2019 exceeds 20k. I thought i would prepare early and even take this new documentation to the court as well just to show that my pay has increased (eventhough im aware they focus on the financial documents submitted with the initial application). As i was doing this, i was told by the HR department of one of my employers that the P60 for one of my jobs DOES NOT show my total gross income BUT only my “TAXABLE INCOME” . This was only raised because i asked them why the gross income amount was different on my P60 and my march payslip. The HR department mentioned that the actual gross pay amount is only mentioned in march payslips, as this is the last payslip for the financial year. The P60’s ONLY look at the income that is taxable. Apparently there is some threshold, so you aren't taxed for a certain amount and the rest you are. I rushed back to last years payslips and realised that my gross income for the payslips i submitted was infact £18,900 and exceeded the financial requirement in the first place. The amount we mentioned in our application was based on the P60’s so this was my taxable income not my total gross income. Therefore refusal on this basis was invalid. I have asked my lawyer to send another representation to both the tribunal and home office to reconsider this. This time i highlighted and explained everything in detail and got employer letters confirming these gross income amounts. I re attached all payslips from last year and this year, and bank statements.

Sorry for the lengthy lengthy post. We are just so exhausted and fed up of this whole process. Has anyone been through the same and had a positive outcome with the home office withdrawing the refusal before the court hearing? Im at a point of being so disheartened and discouraged by this whole awful process. I feel angry at myself for not noticing or knowing about this earlier. I have full faith that God didn’t intend for it to happen last year, and it wasn't meant to be but i really pray that they withdraw the refusal now knowing that the financial requirement was being met all along.

Hello,

It was your solicitor's job to check what you were being paid. He should 've compared both the wage slips and the P60.

Also, since your uncle is earning over £200,000, you could've asked him to gift you £62,500 (maximum savings required for 6 months). This way, you wouldn't have had to rely on meeting your salary requirement.

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Sun May 12, 2019 2:52 pm

My uncles annual earnings are 200k, he doesn't have 200k in savings or even 60k that i could borrow for 6 months hence why we went for the third party sponsor option. Yes it was my solicitors job to double check, but to be honest, i missed it too, and did not realise at all. So i guess we’re all responsible for missing it and not stating it clearly. But now that has happened, im hoping that the home office will see that i was meeting the requirement all along.

ariamus · Post by **ariamus** » Sun May 12, 2019 3:30 pm

Traveler123 wrote: ↑
Fri May 10, 2019 10:57 am
The P60’s ONLY look at the income that is taxable.

That is not correct.

P60 details all gross income from an employment during the tax year.

It also lists the total amount of tax paid during that same period, taking into account the tax free allowance of around £12k.

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Sun May 12, 2019 5:04 pm

ariamus wrote: ↑
Sun May 12, 2019 3:30 pm

Traveler123 wrote: ↑
Fri May 10, 2019 10:57 am
The P60’s ONLY look at the income that is taxable.
That is not correct.

P60 details all gross income from an employment during the tax year.

It also lists the total amount of tax paid during that same period, taking into account the tax free allowance of around £12k.

So one of my employers does this by listing my gross income and my taxable income but my second employer is the nhs and i have confirmed with the HR department that they DO NOT state the gross amount on their p60’s in one box . The only amount stated on their p60’s is the NI taxable income in one section. The remaining amount is mentioned as “lower income threshold” something along those lines, but on that p60 it doesn't mention the GROSS amount total in one box. It shows the breakdown, which would add upto to the gross income mentioned on my march payslip.
This is why i also got confused. But i sent confirmation of gross income amounts by both my employers.

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Sun May 12, 2019 5:15 pm

To be honest i don’t know how it all works, all i know is we made a mistake and the gross amounts that have now been confirmed by both employers exceeded the financial requirement initially. Hoping for a positive reply from the home office

seagul · Post by **seagul** » Sun May 12, 2019 7:24 pm

That's why it has repeatedly been advised not to attach P60 which not always shows the clear picture of earning for immigration purposes.

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Mon May 13, 2019 9:43 am

seagul wrote: ↑
Sun May 12, 2019 7:24 pm
That's why it has repeatedly been advised not to attach P60 which not always shows the clear picture of earning for immigration purposes.

Wish i knew this before. The lawyer said its needed so i attached it.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Wed May 15, 2019 1:12 am

Did you attach the payslips for both jobs dating back 12 months when you applied?

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Wed May 15, 2019 3:00 pm

Frontier Mole wrote: ↑
Wed May 15, 2019 1:12 am
Did you attach the payslips for both jobs dating back 12 months when you applied?

No. We applied in june 2018, so i gave 6 months of payslips from both employers and p60’s. Ive just sent off all of those payslips, bank statements and p60’s again, including this years payslips, p60’s and bank statements (this year my gross annual income in 23k) with a cover letter explaining the situation to both the home office representation centre and the tribunal. I am also expecting our second child, so i hope they withdraw the refusal and speed up the process.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Wed May 15, 2019 11:51 pm

Unless you show 12 months payslips that add up to at least £18,600 on more gross income you cannot meet the requirements based on you do not have a single job that meets the requirements.

The Home Office will not withdraw the refusal before your court date. The decision at the time was correct and you failed to supply the 12 months of payslips that you were required to do. Thus regardless of correct or incorrect alleged figures on P60 it will not make any difference.

It would be quicker and perhaps cheaper to do a fresh application?

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Thu May 16, 2019 7:59 am

Frontier Mole wrote: ↑
Wed May 15, 2019 11:51 pm
Unless you show 12 months payslips that add up to at least £18,600 on more gross income you cannot meet the requirements based on you do not have a single job that meets the requirements.

The Home Office will not withdraw the refusal before your court date. The decision at the time was correct and you failed to supply the 12 months of payslips that you were required to do. Thus regardless of correct or incorrect alleged figures on P60 it will not make any difference.

It would be quicker and perhaps cheaper to do a fresh application?

Really? Even if i had employment letters stating that i have been working at both jobs for over two years? Hmm, i didn’t know about this, i thought regardless of how many jobs you have, the monthly gross total of them should be above £1500. Is this stated on the home office financial requirement guidelines? I did attach over 12 months of payslips from last year when i applied and this year, with the letter i just sent.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Thu May 16, 2019 11:10 pm

When you say 12 months do you mean 12 months for each job or 6 months from each job?

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Thu May 16, 2019 11:31 pm

Frontier Mole wrote: ↑
Thu May 16, 2019 11:10 pm
When you say 12 months do you mean 12 months for each job or 6 months from each job?

So in my appeal letter i sent Jan 2018- June 2018 (6 months payslips from each job, so a total of 12)

And then i also additionally added payslips from November 2018-April 2019 (6 months payslips from each job, so a total of 12 payslips again)

I also attached bank statements from december 2017- april 2019 and highlighted all the payments coming in each month from both employers.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Fri May 17, 2019 8:03 am

You are wasting your time appealing. It will be dismissed as you failed to submit the correct documents at the original application. Even after that you have still not managed to submit the correct documents.

The quickest and cheapest way to get your Spouse here is to apply again. Please get it into your head though - you need to submit 12 months of payslips for each job IF one single job does not meet the £18,600 threshold on its own.

In your original application you should have submitted 12 months of payslips for both of the jobs. So there should have been 24 payslips

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Fri May 17, 2019 12:17 pm

Frontier Mole wrote: ↑
Fri May 17, 2019 8:03 am
You are wasting your time appealing. It will be dismissed as you failed to submit the correct documents at the original application. Even after that you have still not managed to submit the correct documents.

The quickest and cheapest way to get your Spouse here is to apply again. Please get it into your head though - you need to submit 12 months of payslips for each job IF one single job does not meet the £18,600 threshold on its own.

In your original application you should have submitted 12 months of payslips for both of the jobs. So there should have been 24 payslips

Firstly, this is working out much cheaper for us rather than a new application which is why we took this route. Both the lawyer and barrister are taking a minimum fee because of our circumstances. So we applied under CAT A, and after consulting not only my own lawyer but two other immigration barristers(the two barristers are someone i know and are independent, not involved in my case) was told that it does not state anywhere that you cannot use 6 months of payslips from two jobs. Even after this i contacted the home office helpline for general inquiries and double checked with them who also stated the same.
Further to this, i also checked on this forum and came across this post : immigration-for-family-members/do-i-nee ... 60884.html

Including all that and that two people i know (both with two jobs) did the same and only supplied 6 months and their visa’s were successful.

That is when i submitted the appeal the way that i did. As the general consensus was that the payslips being insufficient was not the issue, the amount stated was incorrect on the covering letter and the payslips actually showed a higher amount (which we discovered much later) . The original application was therefore refused because the amount stated in the covering letter did not meet the financial requirement. So i understand very clearly what you are saying but i have not come across any information of a visa being refused under CAT A with two permanent jobs with a stable (not varied) income where only 6 months of payslips were provided.

This is why i asked if you know where it states in the home office guidelines ( or home office documentation) that i need 12 months payslips with two jobs so i can bring this to my lawyers attention. Because no one i know or have spoken to is aware of this.

But based on what you have said, I can always send all the payslips from january 2018 till date additionally (total of 26 payslips) via courier as supporting documentation , as the appeal was only submitted last week just to be on the safe side.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Sat May 18, 2019 10:06 am

Good luck let us know how it goes at appeal. If you barrister friends are confident that is wonderful. Just want to make you aware that even if you win at appeal the best you will get is a reconsideration and that can end in refusal still because you have not got your head round the required documents.

One question - does your main job pay more than £18,600 p.a without overtime?

Did your barrister friends point out the hearing is likely to be in 6-9 months time.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Sat May 18, 2019 10:15 am

You seem to think the Home Office will be reconsidering your case prior to the appeal based on the further submission of documents. That does not happen. It will all be placed in the file hold until about 4 weeks before the hearing date and then it is considered under a triage process. If the ORIGINAL decision is manifestly flawed then it is recommended for reconsideration by the triage team. The reconsideration will take weeks if not months to do.Other than that it goes to hearing.

If you want your spouse here before the end of 2019 make a new application.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Sat May 18, 2019 10:52 am

If your main salary does not meet the £18,600 gross requirements then Cat A can not apply

Cat B

5.3.10. So, under Category B, the assessment of the financial requirement is based on both:
(1) The gross annual salary or income from salaried or non-salaried employment at the date of application. This source can be combined with Category C: non-employment income , Category D: cash savings and Category E: pension; and
(2) The actual amount of gross income received from any salaried or non-salaried employment in the 12 months prior to the application. This can be combined with the actual gross income received from Category C: non-employment income and Category E: pension over the same 12-month period. Category D: cash savings cannot be used under (2).

Hence my belief that if you do not meet cat A with your primary salary only you have to supply 12 months of payslips for both roles.

If you meet the cat A with your main salary then I see where you are coming from

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Sat May 18, 2019 11:02 am

Having read your OP again - you did not meet the requirements of Cat A at the time of application. Two jobs and neither met the £18,600 requirements. Hence you were required to apply under Cat B. Hence proof of income for 12 moths from both jobs.

Hearing in August will not alter the outcome. You should really reapply based on current Cat A single role as you meet it - assuming new wage has been received for more than 6 months. If the issue is the cost of a new application and you are dependent on the hearing being successful by all means wait.

Please be aware only the evidence at the time of application will be considered.

Traveler123 · Post by **Traveler123** » Sat May 18, 2019 11:04 am

Frontier Mole wrote: ↑
Sat May 18, 2019 10:15 am
You seem to think the Home Office will be reconsidering your case prior to the appeal based on the further submission of documents. That does not happen. It will all be placed in the file hold until about 4 weeks before the hearing date and then it is considered under a triage process. If the ORIGINAL decision is manifestly flawed then it is recommended for reconsideration by the triage team. The reconsideration will take weeks if not months to do.Other than that it goes to hearing.

If you want your spouse here before the end of 2019 make a new application.

So i already have a hearing date of xxx july. And i was made aware that even if they withdraw, it could take months, in which case, as soon as they withdraw the case (if they do), i should get the MP involved, with my pregnancy documentation, and get them to push the home office to expedite the process so that he can be here before the due date. My husband currently has a 5 year visit visa anyway. So he comes and goes on that. But thank you so much for all your advise, i’ll pass on everything you said to the lawyer and discuss it with him and will update as to when theres some progress

Post by **Casa** » Sat May 18, 2019 11:11 am

Further to Frontier Mole's advice, don't rely on advice given by the Home Office 'helpline'. This isn't staffed by the HO....it's outsourced to an Agency with 'advisors' who have limited knowledge on even the most basic
immigration issues and frequently give wrong/misleading advice. Cal them 10 times and you're likely to be given 10 different answers.

Has your husband visited since your spouse visa application was submitted? Future visits may be tricky, due to his intention to settle which is likely to flag up on the IO's system at UK Border Control.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Sat May 18, 2019 12:18 pm

MP involvement makes little difference to routine case management unless there is immediate or imminent removal action on going. Pregnant or not it will not readily move it up the reconsideration queue MP or not. It is not an exceptional or compelling reason for it to be fast tracked.

Piece of advice - do not publish exact hearing dates as that can identify you.

cR001 please xxxxx the exact date please

Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement

Re: Spouse visa rejected based on financial requirement