Money from third party

Hi

If I understand correctly, the £200k can come from third parties, who could be parents, relatives or friends. A declaration that the money is available to the applicant for running the business.

Now, does this mean the £200k collected from third parties has to be held by the applicant? If so, then the £200k is technically the applicant's money and not the third parties' as the money is being held in the applicant's account. A business account wouldn't necessarily exist since the business doesn't have to be established before application.

If the money can be kept by the third parties, then how does one enforce the cash injection? They could simply refuse it after application. The applicant can't take the contributors to court using the declaration, right?

Thanks

The situation you describe could apply in any and all situations (not just to money garnered from third parties). The capital sum has to be available to invest but there is nothing to prevent anyone applying for a visa on the basis of capital sum but then not implementing their business intentions after they enter. However, the most obvious outcome of this would be a refusal of an extension of their leave and then the necessity to leave the UK.

Lucapooka wrote:The situation you describe could apply in any and all situations (not just to money garnered from third parties). The capital sum has to be available to invest but there is nothing to prevent anyone applying for a visa on the basis of capital sum but then not implementing their business intentions after they enter. However, the most obvious outcome of this would be a refusal of an extension of their leave and then the necessity to leave the UK.

Right. But does the £200k have to be held by the applicant? If the contributors are from overseas, can they be held in their local (regulated) bank accounts?

No and yes. I urge you to read the guidance; all of this laid out in very clear language.

Lucapooka wrote:The situation you describe could apply in any and all situations (not just to money garnered from third parties). The capital sum has to be available to invest but there is nothing to prevent anyone applying for a visa on the basis of capital sum but then not implementing their business intentions after they enter. However, the most obvious outcome of this would be a refusal of an extension of their leave and then the necessity to leave the UK.

So the declaration is purely symbolic, because the third-party money may not actually be available to the applicant when he/she implements the business idea.

Any declaration is symbolic until the declared intention actually occurs! If it were otherwise investors would be required to seed their money in UK enterprises and then apply for leave to enter on that basis. If they were refused it would then be necessary to retrieve their money. That would be ridiculous.