14 years Illegal immigrant

2347526 · Post by **2347526** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:15 pm

I am an illegal immigrant who has overstayed in the UK over 14 years. I am an asylum seeker and I made my application when I arrived at the airport and it was declined 2 years after and I have stayed illegally since then. I have worked using my details most of my time here. I also have gained a financial qualification recently as all my previous jobs were unskilled and I wanted to improve my earnings. I am a single man (never married before), have no children and I have never travelled outside the UK all this time.
I have applied for ILR a few months ago and I am waiting to see if the Home Office will grant me the status. My concern is I donâ€™t know how long do I have to wait for the reply because I cannot just wait indefinitely as I need to know when will this end. My solicitor told me it could take years for the reply. I want to get married and my fiancÃ©e lives abroad. I am also on the edge as I lost my job and I cannot find one because I have no documents to show. This has affected me both physically and mentally. I need to know what are my rights in situation, what help I can get and what to do to speed up my process. Please advice.

sakura · Post by **sakura** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:58 pm

Applications under the 14 year LRC can take anything from a matter of months to several years - e.g. one or two years. For thisposter it took a little under a year, but other people have been known to wait longer, and I think his/her case is slightly different to your own (s/he seems to have applied as a family). Such applications are based on individual circumstances and therefore it is hard to give you a timeline.

There really isn't anything much you can do to speed up the process. You can ask your MP to write a letter, but I can't see how that would help - you applied only a few months ago so you really don't have anything to complain about (as opposed to if, for example, you have already been waiting a number of years). Once you have applied, it's just a waiting game and the BIA don't really care (or have a system in place) to hurry things along.

As for employment/money - I do not know of how you can support yourself - I suggest seeking professional advice, such as Citizens Advice Bureau. Just be aware, as I am sure you are, that there are now stricter penalities for employers who hire people without papers, which means finding a 'good' job would be very difficult.

Do you have any family/friends that can help you out?

RobinLondon · Post by **RobinLondon** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 5:33 pm

On a human level, I really feel for you. This is a bad situation, and it must be incredibly stressful.

From a procedural standpoint, I just have one thing to add. Don't leave the country while they're processing your application. Leaving the country technically invalidates your application, and you'd have to start from scratch all over again. 14 years...out the window! So please try to find a safe and legal way to hang on.

Good luck with all this.

2347526 · Post by **2347526** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 7:28 pm

There really isn't anything much you can do to speed up the process. You can ask your MP to write a letter, but I can't see how that would help - you applied only a few months ago so you really don't have anything to complain about (as opposed to if, for example, you have already been waiting a number of years). Once you have applied, it's just a waiting game and the BIA don't really care (or have a system in place) to hurry things along.
Isn't there a process to prioritise people's cases based on their length of stay? Saying to wait until BIA makes a decision is totally unfair. What about human rights, don't I qualify for any? I miss my family, I have lost relatives and this year alone I lost four relatives. I am paying the price for wanting a better life. I cannot leave the country as it will jeopardise my case and to stay is slowly killing me with frustration, stress and endless wait for the reply.

Do you have any family/friends that can help you out?
I don't like to ask for help from anyone. I am independent and always have been. I am using up my savings but it wouldn't last forever. All I want is for this to end.

Jeff Albright · Post by **Jeff Albright** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:13 am

2347526 wrote: Isn't there a process to prioritise people's cases based on their length of stay?

No. There are too many like you. By applying under the 14 year LRC, you are asking the Home Office to grant you status - this is a request for a favour rather than exercising your rights. Your staying knowingly in breach of the rules for 12 years does not give you those rights. The BA will consider your case but that will be according to their schedule, i.e. when they have the resources to do it and when your turn comes. You cannot possibly say that just by staying 12 years illegally in the country, they should now be obliged to give you case a priority and then grant you status. All you can do is just ask them to do a favour for you - resources permitting they might be able to do that.

Saying to wait until BIA makes a decision is totally unfair.

Is it fair to stay in breach of the laws whilst thousands of others come to the country legitimately and then earn their right to stay by following the rules? Is it fair towards many of the 14-year applicants who have been waiting in the queue for years? What is particularly special in your situation to make you jump that queue?

What about human rights, don't I qualify for any?

The starting point of answering this question is that you do not have a spouse or a child permanently living in the UK, as such you would not even qualify in principle. Furthermore, the bottom line is that you have knowingly remained in the country illegally for 12 years. The 14 year rule is the only way you can ask for the status to be granted.

I miss my family, I have lost relatives and this year alone I lost four relatives. I am paying the price for wanting a better life. I cannot leave the country as it will jeopardise my case and to stay is slowly killing me with frustration, stress and endless wait for the reply.

Everyone understands this. But at the end of the day, it was your decision to stay in the UK and stay in breach of the laws. Despite all this, if you still want to have your status legalised, you just have to sit tight and wait for your turn. Or you can always write to the relevant BA section and ask them to look at your file and see if they could kindly give it to someone who has time and availability to consider it outside the queue and give them the reasons why you believe that your case should be prioritised.

republique · Post by **republique** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:31 am

Jeff Albright wrote:
2347526 wrote: Isn't there a process to prioritise peo
No. There are too many like you. By applying under the 14 year LRC, you are asking the Home Office to grant you status - this is a request for a favour rather than exercising your rights. Your staying knowingly in breach of the rules for 12 years does not give you those rights. The BA will consider your case but that will be according to their schedule, i.e. when they have the resources to do it and when your turn comes. You cannot possibly say that just by staying 12 years illegally in the country, they should now be obliged to give you case a priority and then grant you status. All you can do is just ask them to do a favour for you - resources permitting they might be able to do that.

Is it fair to stay in breach of the laws whilst thousands of others come to the country legitimately and then earn their right to stay by following the rules? Is it fair towards many of the 14-year applicants who have been waiting in the queue for years? What is particularly special in your situation to make you jump that queue?

The starting point of answering this question is that you do not have a spouse or a child permanently living in the UK, as such you would not even qualify in principle. Furthermore, the bottom line is that you have knowingly remained in the country illegally for 12 years. The 14 year rule is the only way you can ask for the status to be granted.

Everyone understands this. But at the end of the day, it was your decision to stay in the UK and stay in breach of the laws. Despite all this, if you still want to have your status legalised, you just have to sit tight and wait for your turn. Or you can always write to the relevant BA section and ask them to look at your file and see if they could kindly give it to someone who has time and availability to consider it outside the queue and give them the reasons why you believe that your case should be
prioritised.

AMEN to that.
While I find it applaudable that you seemed to be able to take care of yourself these past 14 year on your own, I have to add many legal people who play by the rules feel the same about their wait and have to deal with the fickle HO changing the rules in front of them so I can't offer much sympathy on that level.

4444 · Post by **4444** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 6:28 am

2347526 wrote:I am an illegal immigrant who has overstayed in the UK over 14 years. I am an asylum seeker and I made my application when I arrived at the airport and it was declined 2 years after and I have stayed illegally since then. I have worked using my details most of my time here. I also have gained a financial qualification recently as all my previous jobs were unskilled and I wanted to improve my earnings. I am a single man (never married before), have no children and I have never travelled outside the UK all this time.
I have applied for ILR a few months ago and I am waiting to see if the Home Office will grant me the status. My concern is I donâ€™t know how long do I have to wait for the reply because I cannot just wait indefinitely as I need to know when will this end. My solicitor told me it could take years for the reply. I want to get married and my fiancÃ©e lives abroad. I am also on the edge as I lost my job and I cannot find one because I have no documents to show. This has affected me both physically and mentally. I need to know what are my rights in situation, what help I can get and what to do to speed up my process. Please advice.

are you sure your case is not a legacy case. you can phone this number 02086041742 to find out if your case is a legacy case or not. if it is you might benefit coz most people whose cases are identified as legacy cases are getting ILR. the creteria in deciding legacy cases is far much relaxed than the
normal creteria. i am sure you will benefit from this and you will get your ILR since you made a claim of asylum long time ago. they are dealing with legacy cases much quicker now

good luck

fazsaf · Post by **fazsaf** » Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:33 am

4444 wrote:
2347526 wrote:I am an illegal immigrant who has overstayed in the UK over 14 years. I am an asylum seeker and I made my application when I arrived at the airport and it was declined 2 years after and I have stayed illegally since then. I have worked using my details most of my time here. I also have gained a financial qualification recently as all my previous jobs were unskilled and I wanted to improve my earnings. I am a single man (never married before), have no children and I have never travelled outside the UK all this time.
I have applied for ILR a few months ago and I am waiting to see if the Home Office will grant me the status. My concern is I donâ€™t know how long do I have to wait for the reply because I cannot just wait indefinitely as I need to know when will this end. My solicitor told me it could take years for the reply. I want to get married and my fiancÃ©e lives abroad. I am also on the edge as I lost my job and I cannot find one because I have no documents to show. This has affected me both physically and mentally. I need to know what are my rights in situation, what help I can get and what to do to speed up my process. Please advice.
are you sure your case is not a legacy case. you can phone this number 02086041742 to find out if your case is a legacy case or not. if it is you might benefit coz most people whose cases are identified as legacy cases are getting ILR. the creteria in deciding legacy cases is far much relaxed than the
normal creteria. i am sure you will benefit from this and you will get your ILR since you made a claim of asylum long time ago. they are dealing with legacy cases much quicker now

good luck

Well done 4444, you've given him the right advice by asking him to enquire about whether his case is legacy or not. I've also send him message through pm yesterday asking him to to do the same thing.

My case is very similar to him except I came to this country legally. I made the application under 14 year rule, but later my case was picked up as legacy and I've just been granted ILR ! I wish him all the best and I think he'll get ILR soon.

Fez

2347526 · Post by **2347526** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:23 am

I called the number given but they could not tell me whether my case is a legacy case or not. I was told I have to write a letter to Liverpool 8 (the address given) to see the progress of my case. Do you think its a good idea?

Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?

I see from your points of view that I have just applied for ILR and also that a lot of people are in my situation waiting for their replies and I respect your advice. Thank you all.

Jeff Albright · Post by **Jeff Albright** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:23 pm

2347526 wrote: Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?

Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.

fazsaf · Post by **fazsaf** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 3:51 pm

Jeff Albright wrote:
2347526 wrote: Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?
Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.

What your solicitor said is indeed confusing. My solicitor said exactly the same thing to me when I asked her if she things whether my case should be treated as legacy to which she replied NO since I made an application under 14 year rule therefore my case would be decided under 14 year rule Not under legacy. And guess what Case resolution directorate (CRD) picked up my case as legacy and I've just been granted ILR under legacy and Not under 14 year rule.

I would suggest you should try other forum where you'll be able to get lot more information about legacy cases. see the following link. Note you'll have to register with the forum before you'll be able to gain access.

http://www.ukresident.com/forums/index. ... opic=65488

I would also suggest you write to HO and explain them that your case should be treated as legacy since you claimed asylum all those years ago. I don't know how good your solicitor made the case under 14 year application ? If he did and mentioned all the factors i.e. your length of stay, strength of connections, your education, your contribution to the society by working, paying taxes etc, then you stand a very good chance of being granted ILR under legacy.

I wish you all the best.

Regards

Fez

4444 · Post by **4444** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 4:03 pm

Jeff Albright wrote:
2347526 wrote: Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?
Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.

i think you are wrong Jeff. i beleive his case is deffinately a legacy case. yes i know he is appyling under 14year rule but because he has claimed asylum before his case will be dealt as a legacy case and they will consider all the factors in the 14year application. just phone the number i gave you. they will be able to confirm if your case is a legacy case or not

Thandia · Post by **Thandia** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:18 pm

4444 wrote:
Jeff Albright wrote:
2347526 wrote: Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?
Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.
i think you are wrong Jeff. i beleive his case is deffinately a legacy case. yes i know he is appyling under 14year rule but because he has claimed asylum before his case will be dealt as a legacy case and they will consider all the factors in the 14year application. just phone the number i gave you. they will be able to confirm if your case is a legacy case or not

He's already phoned the number & they were apparently unable to tell him whether his case was legacy or not BUT they did give him an address to write too for a different team that deals with long residence applications. It kinda seems like Jeff may be right on this one.

4444 · Post by **4444** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 5:55 pm

Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
Jeff Albright wrote:
2347526 wrote: Also my solicitor told me that I have applied under the 14 year rule which is different from legacy cases and they are two different departments. It is confusing, could someone please explain?
Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.
i think you are wrong Jeff. i beleive his case is deffinately a legacy case. yes i know he is appyling under 14year rule but because he has claimed asylum before his case will be dealt as a legacy case and they will consider all the factors in the 14year application. just phone the number i gave you. they will be able to confirm if your case is a legacy case or not

He's already phoned the number & they were apparently unable to tell him whether his case was legacy or not BUT they did give him an address to write too for a different team that deals with long residence applications. It kinda seems like Jeff may be right on this one.

thandia

are you aware that there are some people whose cases get picked up later to be dealt as legacy cases. i wud advice him to write to the address he was given and tell them that his case should also be considered as a legacy case in that it meets the creteria of the published policy which was announced by the former Home Secretary (Jonh Reid ) in July 2006. fez case is identical to this case. fez applied under the 14year rule and his case was picked up later and was decided as a legacy case.

Thandia · Post by **Thandia** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:31 pm

4444 wrote:
Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
Jeff Albright wrote:
Your solicitor is absolutely right. Your case is indeed not a legacy case, as you have applied under the standard Rules.

Suggest you write to the relevant section, ask them to give your case priority and give reasons why you believe you should be given this priority.
i think you are wrong Jeff. i beleive his case is deffinately a legacy case. yes i know he is appyling under 14year rule but because he has claimed asylum before his case will be dealt as a legacy case and they will consider all the factors in the 14year application. just phone the number i gave you. they will be able to confirm if your case is a legacy case or not

He's already phoned the number & they were apparently unable to tell him whether his case was legacy or not BUT they did give him an address to write too for a different team that deals with long residence applications. It kinda seems like Jeff may be right on this one.
thandia

are you aware that there are some people whose cases get picked up later to be dealt as legacy cases. i wud advice him to write to the address he was given and tell them that his case should also be considered as a legacy case in that it meets the creteria of the published policy which was announced by the former Home Secretary (Jonh Reid ) in July 2006. fez case is identical to this case. fez applied under the 14year rule and his case was picked up later and was decided as a legacy case.

I am well aware of that. However, the advice being given to the OP is based on the here & now & on the facts of his case right now & not on what might be or what could be or could happen later. Surely if his case does become a legacy case then the info pertaining to the case will then pertain to the legacy case. I don't think Jeff is wrong based on the here & now. He did advice the OP to write to the team address he was given & requet that his case be given priority stating his reasons. One thing I know for certain about the home office is that just because A has been given status based on similar grounds to B does not mean B's case will be handled in exactly the same manner. I remember someone here complaining about the fact that his friend had been granted ILR after 10 years legal stay & they had the exact situation as him but his ILR wasn't granted. So, again I'm in no way saying you're wrong, I'm just saying based on the current facts, Jeff isn't wrong either.

fazsaf · Post by **fazsaf** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:50 pm

Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
i think you are wrong Jeff. i beleive his case is deffinately a legacy case. yes i know he is appyling under 14year rule but because he has claimed asylum before his case will be dealt as a legacy case and they will consider all the factors in the 14year application. just phone the number i gave you. they will be able to confirm if your case is a legacy case or not

He's already phoned the number & they were apparently unable to tell him whether his case was legacy or not BUT they did give him an address to write too for a different team that deals with long residence applications. It kinda seems like Jeff may be right on this one.
thandia

are you aware that there are some people whose cases get picked up later to be dealt as legacy cases. i wud advice him to write to the address he was given and tell them that his case should also be considered as a legacy case in that it meets the creteria of the published policy which was announced by the former Home Secretary (Jonh Reid ) in July 2006. fez case is identical to this case. fez applied under the 14year rule and his case was picked up later and was decided as a legacy case.

I am well aware of that. However, the advice being given to the OP is based on the here & now & on the facts of his case right now & not on what might be or what could be or could happen later. Surely if his case does become a legacy case then the info pertaining to the case will then pertain to the legacy case. I don't think Jeff is wrong based on the here & now. He did advice the OP to write to the team address he was given & requet that his case be given priority stating his reasons. One thing I know for certain about the home office is that just because A has been given status based on similar grounds to B does not mean B's case will be handled in exactly the same manner. I remember someone here complaining about the fact that his friend had been granted ILR after 10 years legal stay & they had the exact situation as him but his ILR wasn't granted. So, again I'm in no way saying you're wrong, I'm just saying based on the current facts, Jeff isn't wrong either.

Hi Thandia, I think you've missed the point here. What 4444 said was that since OP claimed asylum all those years ago, he could ask HO to treat his case as legacy, whether HO then grants him ILR under legacy or not is of course depends on his individual case. You rightly said that just because his case is similar to mine doesn't neccessary means he'll get ILR as well. But thats not what we are arguing about, what we're suggesting is OP should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy with all the relevant reasons discussed previously. OP made an application under 14 year rule, so as it stands his case is not legacy, I think we all understand that ! Difference lies whether his case should be treated as legacy or not, and we strongly believe it should be.

I would be interested to know whether based on his individual circumstances, do you think his case should be treated as legacy or not ? if not do you think he should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy? or any other suggestions which you might have ?

Regards

Fez

Thandia · Post by **Thandia** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:40 am

fazsaf wrote:
Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
Thandia wrote:

He's already phoned the number & they were apparently unable to tell him whether his case was legacy or not BUT they did give him an address to write too for a different team that deals with long residence applications. It kinda seems like Jeff may be right on this one.
thandia

are you aware that there are some people whose cases get picked up later to be dealt as legacy cases. i wud advice him to write to the address he was given and tell them that his case should also be considered as a legacy case in that it meets the creteria of the published policy which was announced by the former Home Secretary (Jonh Reid ) in July 2006. fez case is identical to this case. fez applied under the 14year rule and his case was picked up later and was decided as a legacy case.

I am well aware of that. However, the advice being given to the OP is based on the here & now & on the facts of his case right now & not on what might be or what could be or could happen later. Surely if his case does become a legacy case then the info pertaining to the case will then pertain to the legacy case. I don't think Jeff is wrong based on the here & now. He did advice the OP to write to the team address he was given & requet that his case be given priority stating his reasons. One thing I know for certain about the home office is that just because A has been given status based on similar grounds to B does not mean B's case will be handled in exactly the same manner. I remember someone here complaining about the fact that his friend had been granted ILR after 10 years legal stay & they had the exact situation as him but his ILR wasn't granted. So, again I'm in no way saying you're wrong, I'm just saying based on the current facts, Jeff isn't wrong either.
Hi Thandia, I think you've missed the point here. What 4444 said was that since OP claimed asylum all those years ago, he could ask HO to treat his case as legacy, whether HO then grants him ILR under legacy or not is of course depends on his individual case. You rightly said that just because his case is similar to mine doesn't neccessary means he'll get ILR as well. But thats not what we are arguing about, what we're suggesting is OP should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy with all the relevant reasons discussed previously. OP made an application under 14 year rule, so as it stands his case is not legacy, I think we all understand that ! Difference lies whether his case should be treated as legacy or not, and we strongly believe it should be.

I would be interested to know whether based on his individual circumstances, do you think his case should be treated as legacy or not ? if not do you think he should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy? or any other suggestions which you might have ?

Regards

Fez

I think you missed MY point entirely. My point was simply that the long residence route & the legacy concession are 2 separate ways to get to an end point. Therefore, neither Jeff nor 4444 are wrong in their response. It's a matter of weighing the options. As the OP has already called the CRD & been given the contact details for the long residence team, would it not be wiser for him to keep moving up the queue for long residence where he's already been for several months or start joining the legacy queue which only gives an assurance that cases will be decided by 2011 unless there are compelling circumstances, none of which the OP seems to fall under?

I think the question here is which route has a greater chance of success because he obviously cannot fall into both routes. I don't believe I am sufficiently versed in immigration law to be able to weigh the pros & cons appropriately & give an answer that is suited to the circumstances of the OP. However, I would urge him to follow the advise issued by ILPA regarding legacy cases & sending in further info using that route before deciding on going down that route-

"If IEB say that the case is not being treated as part of the legacy, an individual may want to take legal advice before deciding whether to write to the UK Border Agency to ask that the case is treated in this way. Just because a case is expedited (i.e. it is agreed to deal with it immediately) does not guarantee any particular result. Some cases may result in the individual being detained and removed. Individuals should consider taking legal advice before asking for their case to be treated as a priority.".

Information above pertains to legacy cases & is from http://www.ilpa.org.uk/infoservice/Info ... es%206.pdf

fazsaf · Post by **fazsaf** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 4:27 pm

Thandia wrote:
fazsaf wrote:
Thandia wrote:
4444 wrote:
thandia

are you aware that there are some people whose cases get picked up later to be dealt as legacy cases. i wud advice him to write to the address he was given and tell them that his case should also be considered as a legacy case in that it meets the creteria of the published policy which was announced by the former Home Secretary (Jonh Reid ) in July 2006. fez case is identical to this case. fez applied under the 14year rule and his case was picked up later and was decided as a legacy case.

I am well aware of that. However, the advice being given to the OP is based on the here & now & on the facts of his case right now & not on what might be or what could be or could happen later. Surely if his case does become a legacy case then the info pertaining to the case will then pertain to the legacy case. I don't think Jeff is wrong based on the here & now. He did advice the OP to write to the team address he was given & requet that his case be given priority stating his reasons. One thing I know for certain about the home office is that just because A has been given status based on similar grounds to B does not mean B's case will be handled in exactly the same manner. I remember someone here complaining about the fact that his friend had been granted ILR after 10 years legal stay & they had the exact situation as him but his ILR wasn't granted. So, again I'm in no way saying you're wrong, I'm just saying based on the current facts, Jeff isn't wrong either.
Hi Thandia, I think you've missed the point here. What 4444 said was that since OP claimed asylum all those years ago, he could ask HO to treat his case as legacy, whether HO then grants him ILR under legacy or not is of course depends on his individual case. You rightly said that just because his case is similar to mine doesn't neccessary means he'll get ILR as well. But thats not what we are arguing about, what we're suggesting is OP should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy with all the relevant reasons discussed previously. OP made an application under 14 year rule, so as it stands his case is not legacy, I think we all understand that ! Difference lies whether his case should be treated as legacy or not, and we strongly believe it should be.

I would be interested to know whether based on his individual circumstances, do you think his case should be treated as legacy or not ? if not do you think he should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy? or any other suggestions which you might have ?

Regards

Fez

I think you missed MY point entirely. My point was simply that the long residence route & the legacy concession are 2 separate ways to get to an end point. Therefore, neither Jeff nor 4444 are wrong in their response. It's a matter of weighing the options. As the OP has already called the CRD & been given the contact details for the long residence team, would it not be wiser for him to keep moving up the queue for long residence where he's already been for several months or start joining the legacy queue which only gives an assurance that cases will be decided by 2011 unless there are compelling circumstances, none of which the OP seems to fall under?

I think the question here is which route has a greater chance of success because he obviously cannot fall into both routes. I don't believe I am sufficiently versed in immigration law to be able to weigh the pros & cons appropriately & give an answer that is suited to the circumstances of the OP. However, I would urge him to follow the advise issued by ILPA regarding legacy cases & sending in further info using that route before deciding on going down that route-

"If IEB say that the case is not being treated as part of the legacy, an individual may want to take legal advice before deciding whether to write to the UK Border Agency to ask that the case is treated in this way. Just because a case is expedited (i.e. it is agreed to deal with it immediately) does not guarantee any particular result. Some cases may result in the individual being detained and removed. Individuals should consider taking legal advice before asking for their case to be treated as a priority.".

Information above pertains to legacy cases & is from http://www.ilpa.org.uk/infoservice/Info ... es%206.pdf

I don't think I've missed your point. No one is suggesting that long residency rules and legacy rules are the same, they're separate rules indeed. I did make this clear in my previous posts, since my own case was decided under legacy and Not under 14 year rule even though I initially made an application under 14 year rule. All we ask OP to contact HO and enquire whether his case is legacy or not, if not could they treat his case as legacy ? Of course he should seek legal advice before proceeding, I've also send him PM few days ago and asked him to get all the relevant information regarding legacy cases and always take legal advice before proceeding.

As regards to whether he stands a better chance to be granted ILR under 14 year rule or legacy, the answer got to be legacy and this is not just my opinion but the opinion of most of the solicitors I've spoken to, since the criteria they're applying is far relaxed under legacy then under existing rules. See Legacy 4 on the following link.

http://www.ilpa.org.uk/

As regards to expediting the case, again it depends on his individual circumstances. See the following link.

http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco ... iew=Binary

But first thing for OP is to get HO to treat his case as legacy and then after taking legal advice he could ask HO to expedite his case ( if he has exceptional circumstances).

Non of us are qualified to give legal advice (at least I am not). Our opinions are based on knowledge and experiences we have on particular area. Our opinion should not be taken as same as qualified legal person, and I would suggest OP to seek legal advice and please let us know if you've any new information as we all are talking about you and we haven't heard from you recently.

I wish everybody all the best and hope you get speedy resolution to your cases.

Fez

chuggletops · Post by **chuggletops** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:24 pm

If a newbie - albeit it one with quite a lot of experience in UK immigration - might be allowed to stick in four pennoth at this point and steer back to the original post.

If 2347526 had been refused asylum in 1996 he will have been served with an immigration decision - if he claimed at port it would have been a refusal of leave to enter. Under Para 276B(i)(b) of the Immigration Rules the 14 years has to be accrued prior to the service of such a decision. The same requirement existed under the Long Residence Concession - although that is now a moot point as it was withdrawn in (I think) 2006, but few people outside of the Home Office and the AIT seem to have noticed.

On the information available the application is bound to fail.

Legacy might be minded to exercise discretion, eventually, but they have a hideous backlog of cases and there's just about a snowball's chance in a sauna of getting shifted up the queue.

Thandia · Post by **Thandia** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:38 pm

fazsaf wrote:
Thandia wrote:
fazsaf wrote:
Thandia wrote:

I am well aware of that. However, the advice being given to the OP is based on the here & now & on the facts of his case right now & not on what might be or what could be or could happen later. Surely if his case does become a legacy case then the info pertaining to the case will then pertain to the legacy case. I don't think Jeff is wrong based on the here & now. He did advice the OP to write to the team address he was given & requet that his case be given priority stating his reasons. One thing I know for certain about the home office is that just because A has been given status based on similar grounds to B does not mean B's case will be handled in exactly the same manner. I remember someone here complaining about the fact that his friend had been granted ILR after 10 years legal stay & they had the exact situation as him but his ILR wasn't granted. So, again I'm in no way saying you're wrong, I'm just saying based on the current facts, Jeff isn't wrong either.
Hi Thandia, I think you've missed the point here. What 4444 said was that since OP claimed asylum all those years ago, he could ask HO to treat his case as legacy, whether HO then grants him ILR under legacy or not is of course depends on his individual case. You rightly said that just because his case is similar to mine doesn't neccessary means he'll get ILR as well. But thats not what we are arguing about, what we're suggesting is OP should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy with all the relevant reasons discussed previously. OP made an application under 14 year rule, so as it stands his case is not legacy, I think we all understand that ! Difference lies whether his case should be treated as legacy or not, and we strongly believe it should be.

I would be interested to know whether based on his individual circumstances, do you think his case should be treated as legacy or not ? if not do you think he should write to HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy? or any other suggestions which you might have ?

Regards

Fez

I think you missed MY point entirely. My point was simply that the long residence route & the legacy concession are 2 separate ways to get to an end point. Therefore, neither Jeff nor 4444 are wrong in their response. It's a matter of weighing the options. As the OP has already called the CRD & been given the contact details for the long residence team, would it not be wiser for him to keep moving up the queue for long residence where he's already been for several months or start joining the legacy queue which only gives an assurance that cases will be decided by 2011 unless there are compelling circumstances, none of which the OP seems to fall under?

I think the question here is which route has a greater chance of success because he obviously cannot fall into both routes. I don't believe I am sufficiently versed in immigration law to be able to weigh the pros & cons appropriately & give an answer that is suited to the circumstances of the OP. However, I would urge him to follow the advise issued by ILPA regarding legacy cases & sending in further info using that route before deciding on going down that route-

"If IEB say that the case is not being treated as part of the legacy, an individual may want to take legal advice before deciding whether to write to the UK Border Agency to ask that the case is treated in this way. Just because a case is expedited (i.e. it is agreed to deal with it immediately) does not guarantee any particular result. Some cases may result in the individual being detained and removed. Individuals should consider taking legal advice before asking for their case to be treated as a priority.".

Information above pertains to legacy cases & is from http://www.ilpa.org.uk/infoservice/Info ... es%206.pdf
I don't think I've missed your point. No one is suggesting that long residency rules and legacy rules are the same, they're separate rules indeed. I did make this clear in my previous posts, since my own case was decided under legacy and Not under 14 year rule even though I initially made an application under 14 year rule. All we ask OP to contact HO and enquire whether his case is legacy or not, if not could they treat his case as legacy ? Of course he should seek legal advice before proceeding, I've also send him PM few days ago and asked him to get all the relevant information regarding legacy cases and always take legal advice before proceeding.

As regards to whether he stands a better chance to be granted ILR under 14 year rule or legacy, the answer got to be legacy and this is not just my opinion but the opinion of most of the solicitors I've spoken to, since the criteria they're applying is far relaxed under legacy then under existing rules. See Legacy 4 on the following link.

http://www.ilpa.org.uk/

As regards to expediting the case, again it depends on his individual circumstances. See the following link.

http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco ... iew=Binary

But first thing for OP is to get HO to treat his case as legacy and then after taking legal advice he could ask HO to expedite his case ( if he has exceptional circumstances).

Non of us are qualified to give legal advice (at least I am not). Our opinions are based on knowledge and experiences we have on particular area. Our opinion should not be taken as same as qualified legal person, and I would suggest OP to seek legal advice and please let us know if you've any new information as we all are talking about you and we haven't heard from you recently.

I wish everybody all the best and hope you get speedy resolution to your cases.

Fez

I think you missed MY point entirely. My point was simply that the long residence route & the legacy concession are 2 separate ways to get to an end point. Therefore, neither Jeff nor 4444 are wrong in their response. It's a matter of weighing the options.

4444 · Post by **4444** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:42 pm

chuggletops wrote:If a newbie - albeit it one with quite a lot of experience in UK immigration - might be allowed to stick in four pennoth at this point and steer back to the original post.

If 2347526 had been refused asylum in 1996 he will have been served with an immigration decision - if he claimed at port it would have been a refusal of leave to enter. Under Para 276B(i)(b) of the Immigration Rules the 14 years has to be accrued prior to the service of such a decision. The same requirement existed under the Long Residence Concession - although that is now a moot point as it was withdrawn in (I think) 2006, but few people outside of the Home Office and the AIT seem to have noticed.

On the information available the application is bound to fail.

Legacy might be minded to exercise discretion, eventually, but they have a hideous backlog of cases and there's just about a snowball's chance in a sauna of getting shifted up the queue.

you are very right thats why fez and i where suggesting that he should also make HO aware that his case fits the creteria for legacy case so that if he is refused under the 14year rule then his case might also be considered under the legacy programme which have much relaxed creteria of obtaining ILR

chuggletops · Post by **chuggletops** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:01 pm

Are you sure?
Look at the earlier link:

http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco ... iew=Binary

The legacy is defined as all asylum cases that are incomplete and are not being processed by regional asylum teams.

He had an asylum decision in 1996.
He's also made a current application which would tend to lock him out of the Case Resolution Directorate's orbit.
He can ask, but I personally won't hold my breath on this one.

fazsaf · Post by **fazsaf** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:29 pm

4444 wrote:
chuggletops wrote:If a newbie - albeit it one with quite a lot of experience in UK immigration - might be allowed to stick in four pennoth at this point and steer back to the original post.

If 2347526 had been refused asylum in 1996 he will have been served with an immigration decision - if he claimed at port it would have been a refusal of leave to enter. Under Para 276B(i)(b) of the Immigration Rules the 14 years has to be accrued prior to the service of such a decision. The same requirement existed under the Long Residence Concession - although that is now a moot point as it was withdrawn in (I think) 2006, but few people outside of the Home Office and the AIT seem to have noticed.

On the information available the application is bound to fail.

Legacy might be minded to exercise discretion, eventually, but they have a hideous backlog of cases and there's just about a snowball's chance in a sauna of getting shifted up the queue.
you are very right thats why fez and i where suggesting that he should also make HO aware that his case fits the creteria for legacy case so that if he is refused under the 14year rule then his case might also be considered under the legacy programme which have much relaxed creteria of obtaining ILR

You are absolutely right 4444, we both are suggesting that OP should contact HO and ask them to treat his case as legacy, since he stands much better chance of being granted ILR under legacy because the criteria they're applying is much relaxed. But we haven't heard any good reasons on this forum why his case should not be treated as legacy until chuggletops suggested that since OP asylum case was concluded therefore in his opinion he doesn't think OP case should be treated as legacy.

Quote:
The legacy is defined as all asylum cases that are incomplete and are not being processed by regional asylum teams.

Above quote is correct but it is only selective. See the quote from ILPA site below.

"cases where asylum has been refused and any appeal dismissed, but the individual remains in the UK" This clearly applies to OP.

See the link below. Click info services then legacy cases.

http://www.ilpa.org.uk/

4444 can u please tell us what is your case? Since I didn't have the chance to go through all of your post to find out about your case.

Fez

4444 · Post by **4444** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:06 am

yes you are right fez his case clearly meets the legacy cases creteria. coz it was decided and refused long time ago and he was not removed. he shud deffinately ask the HO that his case treated as such.

2347526 · Post by **2347526** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:22 pm

Hi every one.

I received a letter from the HO saying that they received my application and that my application is valid. They also stated that further enquires need to be made and that my the application has been passed to a team to do so. They told me to check on their website for their turn around times and that I should NOT contact or write to them except in urgent circumstances. The website link is:

http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/britis ... tingtimes/

My solicitor adviced me to go and visit my MP and explain my circumstances. He/She (as I dont know my MP) will write to the HO and help in either expedite my case or at least give me permission to work to support myself.

Any advice on the above matters?

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

14 years Illegal immigrant

14 years Illegal immigrant

Re: 14 years Illegal immigrant

Re: 14 years Illegal immigrant