Document supplied in previous application not considered by case worker

Can you guys pleaes guide me if we can send the cover letter with admin review? or we can just fill in the boxes in the form and cannot send any kind of document at all?

Thanks

An AR is generally inflexible.

There’s no harm in enclosing a cover letter to explain any caseworker’s mistakes.
May include additional documents to refute any deception allegations.

vinny wrote: ↑

Mon May 28, 2018 2:51 am

An AR is generally inflexible.

There’s no harm in enclosing a cover letter to explain any caseworker’s mistakes.
May include additional documents to refute any deception allegations.

Thanks for your reply Vinny.

As per my understanding there is no way to send supportive document like cover letter or any other document with online application and home office preferred method for Admin Review is online application.

Do you think it is a good idea to request the paper form and attach document with it or I am missing something?

Thanks

I’m not sure if there are provisions to request the paper form!

Are there places where you can add comments?

It is like a form with boxes in It.

Can any one advice me if document submitted with previous application like hm revenue document and bank letter cannot be considered in any new application?


Regards

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 3:10 pm

Can any one advice me if document submitted with previous application like hm revenue document and bank letter cannot be considered in any new application?


Regards

Don't understand this question.

A new application is meant to be a fresh case and considered on its own merit. You cannot depend on the CW referring to any document in the original application. The only exception being originals (passport, etc) which cannot be obviously resent.

marcnath wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 5:34 pm

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 3:10 pm

Can any one advice me if document submitted with previous application like hm revenue document and bank letter cannot be considered in any new application?


Regards

Don't understand this question.

A new application is meant to be a fresh case and considered on its own merit. You cannot depend on the CW referring to any document in the original application. The only exception being originals (passport, etc) which cannot be obviously resent.

Sorry for the confusion marcnath.

I am talking about 2nd extension. So, if I provide some documents in first extension can I expect the CW to use it in current application. And if not used by CW does it considered to be CW error and can it be argued in AR?

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 8:53 pm

marcnath wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 5:34 pm

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 3:10 pm

Can any one advice me if document submitted with previous application like hm revenue document and bank letter cannot be considered in any new application?


Regards

Don't understand this question.

A new application is meant to be a fresh case and considered on its own merit. You cannot depend on the CW referring to any document in the original application. The only exception being originals (passport, etc) which cannot be obviously resent.

Sorry for the confusion marcnath.

I am talking about 2nd extension. So, if I provide some documents in first extension can I expect the CW to use it in current application. And if not used by CW does it considered to be CW error and can it be argued in AR?

Generally not. Each application is independent and will be considered on its own.

Of course, it is a lot easier if you are clear and state your situation.

Because there are some exceptions when evidence in the 1st extension can be relied upon in the second.

marcnath wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 9:24 pm

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 8:53 pm

marcnath wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 5:34 pm

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 3:10 pm

Can any one advice me if document submitted with previous application like hm revenue document and bank letter cannot be considered in any new application?


Regards

Don't understand this question.

A new application is meant to be a fresh case and considered on its own merit. You cannot depend on the CW referring to any document in the original application. The only exception being originals (passport, etc) which cannot be obviously resent.

Sorry for the confusion marcnath.

I am talking about 2nd extension. So, if I provide some documents in first extension can I expect the CW to use it in current application. And if not used by CW does it considered to be CW error and can it be argued in AR?

Generally not. Each application is independent and will be considered on its own.

Of course, it is a lot easier if you are clear and state your situation.

Because there are some exceptions when evidence in the 1st extension can be relied upon in the second.

Thanks Marcnath.

Here is my situation. 2nd extension has been refused based on the fact that I did not provide hm revenue and bank document. All others points have been awarded. I used the same business to claim the points and I was under impression that I have been provided these document with my last application and there is no time restriction on these document like Company house report. So why would I need to provide them again.

I can see in some other thread that someone ILR approved without providing these documents again but just the company report. I also read the thread in which both you(partially) and zimba are convinced that there is no need of these document in 2nd extension or ILR.

I am convinced this is CW error but just want others input on it.

Hope it clears my point now.

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 11:27 pm

Thanks Marcnath.

Here is my situation. 2nd extension has been refused based on the fact that I did not provide hm revenue and bank document. All others points have been awarded. I used the same business to claim the points and I was under impression that I have been provided these document with my last application and there is no time restriction on these document like Company house report. So why would I need to provide them again.

I can see in some other thread that someone ILR approved without providing these documents again but just the company report. I also read the thread in which both you(partially) and zimba are convinced that there is no need of these document in 2nd extension or ILR.

I am convinced this is CW error but just want others input on it.

Hope it clears my point now.

Ok. This justifies my reading of the revised rules that those two documents are needed. You are the first in this forum to have been refused due to those missing documents.

So, it is not a CW error.

However, this is a new update and can be tested in an AR. I think you have a reasonable chance of success.

Some of your arguments would be:

1) This has been only changed since 10 Jan 2018. So, if you applied before that, the CW decision is clearly a mistake and will be overturned.
2) You entered the route much earlier to the change. Your last extension was before the change. So this change should not apply to you. Has a chance of being accepted.
3) Since it is the same company that was used in your previous application, HO is aware of and has accepted the fact that this is a UK business. So the registration document alone should have been accepted.
4) Even if the document alone was not sufficient, CW should have used evidential flexibility under 245AA and requested for the additional documents as it was only one part of the required documents.
5) If there are any other documents you submitted that would have shown a bank account or tax related transaction (invoices, for example would have your bank details) you can also argue that CW should have considered it under 245AA(d)(iii)

God luck with it. I do think you have a better than 50% chance of success

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Tue May 29, 2018 11:27 pm

I used the same business to claim the points and I was under impression that I have been provided these document with my last application and there is no time restriction on these document like Company house report. So why would I need to provide them again.

Unfortunately this is not a valid argument for what the CW did.

It is a valid argument as to why the immigration rules were drawn up that way. But once the rules specify it, the CW has to follow it. Creating exceptions would be much more detrimental.

Thanks.

But I saw someone ILR approved without these docs. And even in SET O form it is not even asked from 5 year settlement applicant just the company house report in question A2.


Do you think that rule applied on 2nd Extension and ILR are different and these docs not required for ILR but just for 2nd ext.

Thanks

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Wed May 30, 2018 8:42 am

Thanks.

But I saw someone ILR approved without these docs. And even in SET O form it is not even asked from 5 year settlement applicant just the company house report in question A2.


Do you think that rule applied on 2nd Extension and ILR are different and these docs not required for ILR but just for 2nd ext.

Thanks

You may have missed my earlier reply - uk-tier-1-entrepreneur-visas/document-s ... l#p1640590

This requirement is new and so only applicable to new applications

Thanks again.

So you are saying this is the new requirement only for extension applicant and not for ILR applicant hence not reflecting in set o form as mentioned above.

Thanks

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Wed May 30, 2018 9:12 am

Thanks again.

So you are saying this is the new requirement only for extension applicant and not for ILR applicant hence not reflecting in set o form as mentioned above.

Thanks

By the way, are you applying to ILR or 2nd extension ? This is confusing.

But no, that is not what I am saying. Clause 48 applies to both leave to remain and indefinite leave to remain.

All I am saying is that if you applied before 10 Jan 2018 or even within 21 days of that, you could argue you submitted the application on the earlier guidelines which did not need this for either extension or ILR.

I don't think any change related to "Business Activity" was introduced during past changes ( Ref: Appendix A Para 46-48) the only exemption can be used in ILR / 2nd Extension is the evidence for investment as following,

"The applicant does not need to provide evidence of this investment if they were awarded points under Table 5 in their last grant of entry clearance or leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant"

moongesture wrote: ↑

Wed May 30, 2018 11:37 am

I don't think any change related to "Business Activity" was introduced during past changes ( Ref: Appendix A Para 46-48) the only exemption can be used in ILR / 2nd Extension is the evidence for investment as following,

That is incorrect. You can go back and check the old rules, specifically 46-SD which is now replaced with 48. There is definitely a difference.

moongesture wrote: ↑

Wed May 30, 2018 11:37 am

"The applicant does not need to provide evidence of this investment if they were awarded points under Table 5 in their last grant of entry clearance or leave to remain as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) Migrant"

Not sure what the relevance of this is to the discussion. OP was not refused for investment, so that is not the point being discussed.

You may be correct and I am not challenging your knowledge.

I have a copy of 46-SD as well, where what is missing in this case was covered in Para 48-of previous version of Appendix A. What I was trying to explain here was that OP applied for a 2nd extension which means he needs to observe Table 5.
He believed that Business Activity documents (previously Specified documents to show established a UK business) were provided in previous successful application thus covered automatically in any further/future application if he is in the same business. So I was trying to clarify that he has to provide "business activity" documents with all future applications and this was not changed in any "statement of change". Although he was not refused for investment-related points but just to clarify that the only exception he can enjoy is "Investment related documents" and this is where
I have referred Table 5.

Marcnath, yes I have submitted the invoices so that's ok.

Is there anyway to check online that company is registered for corporation tax?

Or can this fact be established through documents like fps report, payslip, recent filing history or p35 may be?

i think no company in UK is registered for PAYE actively paying NI but not registered for corporation tax. Or do you think is it possible for a company to just register for PAYE actively paying it but not register for corporation tax?

Thanks

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 01, 2018 8:40 am

Marcnath, yes I have submitted the invoices so that's ok.

Is there anyway to check online that company is registered for corporation tax?

Or can this fact be established through documents like fps report, payslip, recent filing history or p35 may be?

i think no company in UK is registered for PAYE actively paying NI but not registered for corporation tax. Or do you think is it possible for a company to just register for PAYE actively paying it but not register for corporation tax?

Thanks

It is an argument worth following. All companies need to register for CT if they are trading. And if you have PAYE, then you are trading. Of course, you could still not register for CT and be in violation. But it is worth arguing anyway.

If you submitted your accounts, it may have tax payment made - again not a definitive proof but something you can use to argue.

Thanks.

Could you also share your thoughts, if it is possible to check the corporation tax registration online. From company house website or may be some other website?
Thanks

dsinghsunny wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 01, 2018 9:14 am

Thanks.

Could you also share your thoughts, if it is possible to check the corporation tax registration online. From company house website or may be some other website?
Thanks

No, not that I am aware of. At least not on any publicly available website.

hi guys,

So AR has refused as well.

I want to go for JR.

Just need you people advice that how will I proceed now?

Hire a solicitor, he will send a PAP first and then it will go in FTT if PAP rejected and then UT.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks