- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, Administrator
Hi yes we have NHS records stating she was registered in 1970 - however the solicitor suggested that the term 'present and settled' means having leave to remain and proof of it?Amber_ wrote:The Immigration Act 1971 took effect on 1 January 1973. Applicants who were present and
settled in the UK on this date are deemed to have settled status, unless they:
were exempt from immigration control on this date, or
had the right of abode
Do you have any proof she was in the Country in 1970? Such as:
council tax letters
letters confirming tenancy or mortgage payments
electricity, gas or water bills
letters from employers that confirm employment
letters that confirm registration with a doctor?
ThanksAmber_ wrote:You need to be sure of that, it may not have a strict definition.
HiAmber_ wrote:Assuming she did not have the right of abode? Then get the GP to write a letter stating she's been present and settled in the UK since 1970 and have never left the UK in that time.
Thanks,Amber_ wrote:See https://www.gov.uk/right-of-abode/overview
Hi, thanks for your replyObie wrote:We have to remember that the British immigration act 1962 and the subsequent contro controversial one in 1968, were designed to restrict rights significantly.
In the absence of documentary proof that she met the criteria in the 1968 act, it is hard to say that she was present and settled when the 1971 to act came into force.
I would imagine present is based on fact, i.e. in the UK at the time. If you can argue that she had no restrictions and that she was present as per GP records I think that should be worth a shot.s. 33(2A) wrote:Subject to section 8(5) above, references to a person being settled in the United Kingdom are references to his being ordinarily resident there without being subject under the immigration laws to any restriction on the period for which he may remain
when you say 'of you could argue' who do u argue with? it seems as if the home office's stance is that she will be offered 2.5 years stay and feels as if the previous 40+ years have no relevance if we cant prove that she had ILR in the first instanceAmber_ wrote:I would imagine present is based on fact, i.e. in the UK at the time. If you can argue that she had no restrictions and that she was present as per GP records I think that should be worth a shot.s. 33(2A) wrote:Subject to section 8(5) above, references to a person being settled in the United Kingdom are references to his being ordinarily resident there without being subject under the immigration laws to any restriction on the period for which he may remain
yes,sent a letter from GP and DWP stating when her NI was issued and when she registered with the NHS.Amber_ wrote:Did you send proof of presence in the UK in 1970?
none, no form has been completed since my mum went to get a NOTL stamp in 2010Amber_ wrote:Indeed, what form did you complete?
they said that they are considering granting temporary leave to remain (2.5 years) under human rights - article 8.Amber_ wrote:Hen did they request bio metrics?