Referee for naturalisation

Hi
If I take the reference of manager at T-mobile and reference of a director (pvt organisation) .
Does the above two people fulfill the requirement of two referee required by homeoffice for naturalisation .
Regards
pk

Please suggest as according to guidelines it should be a doctor and my GP surgery says that they do not certfiy the application relating to home office .

You need one of the referees to be a professional person - the list of acceptable professional persons are here http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco ... iew=Binary

Director of a private organisation would be ok as long as it's VAT registered.

The other referee needs to be a British passport holder (doesn't have to be a professional person - my wife used a 'housewife').

Thanks a lot.

Below I quote the refere requirement:

From this statement it seem that one referee could be any nationality this is clear. It also does not say that s/he must leave in the UK.

But what about the referee which the referee NOt UK citizen and is not leaving in the UK ?. Has anyone tried this and work ?

5.1 One referee should be a person of any nationality who has professional standing, eg
doctor, minister of religion, civil servant, or a member of a professional body e.g. accountant
or solicitor (who is not representing you with this application).

The other referee must be the
holder of a British citizen passport and either a professional person or over the age of 25.
Both should declare that:-
• they are not a relative, solicitor or agent of the applicant, or related to the other referee;
• they are not employed by the Home Office;
• they have not been convicted of an imprisonable offence during the last 10 years (unless the conviction has
become spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974);
• they have known the applicant personally for more than 3 years;
• they are willing to give full details of their knowledge of the applicant;
• they will advise the Home Office of any reason why the applicant should not be naturalised.

I must admit that on a first look list of accepted professional referees sounds confusing. I just spoke to HO about referee of type "Engineer (with professional qualifications)" and lady on the other side of the line wasn't even sure what that actually meant. She eventually managed to say that anyone who got a university degree related to the profession they do should be fine.

vasa wrote:I must admit that on a first look list of accepted professional referees sounds confusing. I just spoke to HO about referee of type "Engineer (with professional qualifications)" and lady on the other side of the line wasn't even sure what that actually meant. She eventually managed to say that anyone who got a university degree related to the profession they do should be fine.

I thought to be a "Engineer (with professional qualifications)" you have to be a member of a professional body like Engineering Council (CEng) or similar rather than just have an university degree.

This page lists professional qualifications - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_pr ... ifications

Normally, Professional qualifications means they have got professional qualifications as an Engineer e.g CEng (Chartered Engineer).
As has been pinted by djb123, people acquire CEng from royal chartered ECUK. Anybody who has got degree in engineering does not necessarily an Engineer.

vasa wrote:I must admit that on a first look list of accepted professional referees sounds confusing. I just spoke to HO about referee of type "Engineer (with professional qualifications)" and lady on the other side of the line wasn't even sure what that actually meant. She eventually managed to say that anyone who got a university degree related to the profession they do should be fine.

pksachdeva wrote:Please suggest as according to guidelines it should be a doctor and my GP surgery says that they do not certfiy the application relating to home office .

I wonder why any doctor would refuse to do that for a patient. Does said medic believe he is being asked to give you a character reference?

Or is it symptomatic of a generally bad attitude in society where people do their jobs and nothing more?

JAJ wrote:

pksachdeva wrote:Please suggest as according to guidelines it should be a doctor and my GP surgery says that they do not certfiy the application relating to home office .

I wonder why any doctor would refuse to do that for a patient. Does said medic believe he is being asked to give you a character reference?

Or is it symptomatic of a generally bad attitude in society where people do their jobs and nothing more?

But he is being asked to give the equivalent of a character reference - "they have known the applicant personally for more than 3 years" and "they are willing to give full details of their knowledge of the applicant".

I didn't even consider asking my wife's doctor to be her referee when she applied for naturalisation as if they phoned him up he could tell them nothing as his only knowledge of her is what he can see in her medical records.

JAJ wrote:I wonder why any doctor would refuse to do that for a patient. Does said medic believe he is being asked to give you a character reference?

Or is it symptomatic of a generally bad attitude in society where people do their jobs and nothing more?

I think it's part of a trend among doctors not to get involved in extra-medical activities for their patients, or to make a charge when they absolutely have to. Examples are things such as letters of reference, insurance forms, and letters explaining medical reasons for absence from work when such a letter is required by the company or a medical insurer but not by the law of the land. When it is difficult to refuse such things, a charge is usually made. This is obviously reasonable when a lot of time is needed (as in an insurance report, for example).

I agree that given countersigning a naturalisation application takes only a couple of minutes it seems a bit churlish not to do so — although is a countersignatory not saying that he or she supports the person's application for naturalisation (as opposed to someone countersigning a passport application, who is merely confirming identity)? Perhaps the doctor feels unable to make that assessment?

On a more general point, it does seem that applicants for naturalisation who don't happen to mix socially in "professional circles" and don't perhaps have children of school age do quite often have trouble finding acceptable sponsors. I wonder if the Home Office is aware that this can be a real problem...

I feel this requirement to allow only certain professionals to serve as referees is quite an outdated one. It's possible this was relevant years ago when people went to church every Sunday (priests/ministers), went to their local bank and met with their manager personally on a regular basis (Bank managers), made regular visits to their GP (Physician), said hello to the local police chief (Police), etc etc. In today's world of ATMs, increasing number of non-religious people, medical centers, etc. restricting referees to just such professions is not appropriate any more. They should expand the list to a larger number of professions, e.g. IT managers, Company executives etc.

JAJ wrote:

pksachdeva wrote:Please suggest as according to guidelines it should be a doctor and my GP surgery says that they do not certfiy the application relating to home office .

I wonder why any doctor would refuse to do that for a patient. Does said medic believe he is being asked to give you a character reference?

Or is it symptomatic of a generally bad attitude in society where people do their jobs and nothing more?

When I asked my doctor to confirm my presence in the UK based on my appts, he refused stating they don't do that. So in general, I don't think doctors want to get involved in anything outside their domain.

Extract from Case working Chapter 6

6.3.6 Referees - Qualifications
6.3.6.1 All applicants, except those seeking to renounce British nationality, are asked to provide two referees so that we can be satisfied about a person’s identity. We would not routinely contact referees, but may do so on the authority of a senior caseworker if this could resolve any concerns about the application

global gypsy wrote:I feel this requirement to allow only certain professionals to serve as referees is quite an outdated one. It's possible this was relevant years ago when people went to church every Sunday (priests/ministers), went to their local and met with their manager personally on a regular basis (Bank managers), made regular visits to their GP (Physician), said hello to the local police chief (Police), etc etc. In today's world of ATMs, increasing number of non-religious people, medical centers, etc. restricting referees to just such professions is not relevant any more. They should expand the list to a larger number of professions, e.g. IT managers, Company executives etc.

The list of acceptable professional persons already covers quite a range of different type of professions including IT professionals (who are members of the British Computer Society) and company directors.

global gypsy wrote:I feel this requirement to allow only certain professionals to serve as referees is quite an outdated one. It's possible this was relevant years ago when people went to church every Sunday (priests/ministers), went to their local and met with their manager personally on a regular basis (Bank managers), made regular visits to their GP (Physician), said hello to the local police chief (Police), etc etc. In today's world of ATMs, increasing number of non-religious people, medical centers, etc. restricting referees to just such professions is not relevant any more. They should expand the list to a larger number of professions, e.g. IT managers, Company executives etc.

It's not outdated. It's probably that these people can be easily traced and brought in for questioning were something dodgy to happen.

republique wrote:When I asked my doctor to confirm my presence in the UK based on my appts, he refused stating they don't do that. So in general, I don't think doctors want to get involved in anything outside their domain.

You have the legal right to demand a copy of the records he holds about you.

I am just about to apply for naturalisation but as I have just started a new job in a different part of the country. I am slightly concerned about who could act as my referees:

"The referees should have known you personally for at least three years."

Could my current GP and/or boss act as my referees; they've known me for only 6 months?

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Cheers,

Miami.

Christophe wrote:

JAJ wrote:

pksachdeva wrote:I wonder why any doctor would refuse to do that for a patient. Does said medic believe he is being asked to give you a character reference?

Or is it symptomatic of a generally bad attitude in society where people do their jobs and nothing more?

I think it's part of a trend among doctors not to get involved in extra-medical activities for their patients, or to make a charge when they absolutely have to. Examples are things such as letters of reference, insurance forms, and letters explaining medical reasons for absence from work when such a letter is required by the company or a medical insurer but not by the law of the land. When it is difficult to refuse such things, a charge is usually made. This is obviously reasonable when a lot of time is needed (as in an insurance report, for example).

I agree that given countersigning a naturalisation application takes only a couple of minutes it seems a bit churlish not to do so — although is a countersignatory not saying that he or she supports the person's application for naturalisation (as opposed to someone countersigning a passport application, who is merely confirming identity)? Perhaps the doctor feels unable to make that assessment?

On a more general point, it does seem that applicants for naturalisation who don't happen to mix socially in "professional circles" and don't perhaps have children of school age do quite often have trouble finding acceptable sponsors. I wonder if the Home Office is aware that this can be a real problem...

Working in the medical profession, I magine it's simply a case of not knowing what is involved. The signing of the form only takes a minute or two, but I would want to know what I'm actually signing. If I was a GP, and the person asking me for a reference had been registered at my surgery for 5 years, but I'd never actually laid eyes on them (due to their fortunate good health), would it be entirely appropriate to sign a form as a referee?

It would be a different case if the doctor knew the patient well, I suppose...

I asked my GP if is able to sign as a refree in our Naturalisation forms. He very kindly agreed and after signing, he mentioned that they usualy charge £20 per applicant but told us to give that to a charity of our choice.

We have been his patients for the last 8 years and we live in Scotland.

Miami wrote:I am just about to apply for naturalisation but as I have just started a new job in a different part of the country. I am slightly concerned about who could act as my referees:

"The referees should have known you personally for at least three years."

Could my current GP and/or boss act as my referees; they've known me for only 6 months?

No, not if they've known you for only 6 months. But "knowing you personally for at least three years" doesn't mean that the person has to be in frequent contact with you now — just because you've moved away from the part of the country you've lived in before doesn't mean that the people you know from living there have stopped knowing you (if that makes sense...).

drjabberwocky23 wrote:Working in the medical profession, I magine it's simply a case of not knowing what is involved. The signing of the form only takes a minute or two, but I would want to know what I'm actually signing.

If any GP found it difficult to read the form and understand it within that time, it should be a matter of concern.

republique wrote:When I asked my doctor to confirm my presence in the UK based on my appts, he refused stating they don't do that. So in general, I don't think doctors want to get involved in anything outside their domain.

That's something different from acting as a referee.

Marco 72 wrote:

republique wrote:When I asked my doctor to confirm my presence in the UK based on my appts, he refused stating they don't do that. So in general, I don't think doctors want to get involved in anything outside their domain.

That's something different from acting as a referee.

No you misunderstand. I asked him to be a referee, as he could establish he knew me for 3 years based on my record of appts. I am saying that referees collaterally establishes your presence in the UK as well primarily your good character so to speak.

republique wrote:No you misunderstand. I asked him to be a referee, as he could establish he knew me for 3 years based on my record of appts. I am saying that referees collaterally establishes your presence in the UK as well primarily your good character so to speak.

Referees are not required to say anything about the applicant's presence in the UK during the qualifying period. All they have to do is confirm your identity, that the details on page 4 are correct (to the best of their knowledge) and that they have no convictions. That's it. When I applied for naturalisation my referees were people I hadn't seen in years, who had no idea where I had been living in the meantime.

When I asked my GP to certify my passport application he checked the surgery records to make sure he had known me for two years, as required. I'm sure if I had asked him to certify my physical presence in the UK he would have refused. People only see their GP's once every few months - how do they know you're not living somewhere else?

Perhaps you should make it clear to your GP that you are not asking them to confirm your presence in the UK. If you like you can ask them to confirm that you have been a patient there for X years and use that, together with other documents (passport, letters from employers, bank statements, etc) to establish proof of residence.