Immigrationboards.com

Hi,

Can someone advise what are the options that are available if ILR gets refused ?

Can the applicant appeal or does he not have that choice?

When is the right to appeal normally given and if this is not given what are the options ?


I take it that if the ILR is refused the applicant can still apply to extend his current leave as long as those reasons are not applicable to extend his current leave ?

You'd be given a right to appeal if your current leave is expired.
However,

right to appeal is there.

anush23 wrote:Hi,

Can someone advise what are the options that are available if ILR gets refused ?

Can the applicant appeal or does he not have that choice?

When is the right to appeal normally given and if this is not given what are the options ?


I take it that if the ILR is refused the applicant can still apply to extend his current leave as long as those reasons are not applicable to extend his current leave ?

Thanks.

If the current leave has not expired then is the right to appeal normally given ?

Is it favourable or not to have the right of appeal ?

Apologies if some queries are naive.

Thx

anush23 wrote:Thanks.

If the current leave has not expired then is the right to appeal normally given ?

Is it favourable or not to have the right of appeal ?

Apologies if some queries are naive.

Thx

you have right to appeal if ILR gets refused.

anush23 wrote:If the current leave has not expired then is the right to appeal normally given ?

Read this

Damanisshallo wrote:

anush23 wrote:If the current leave has not expired then is the right to appeal normally given ?

Read this

depends what kind of ILR is needed. appeal allowd on SET(M)

Your refusal letter would clearly say what your appeal rights are, or if any at all.

If this is a hypothetical question, then, provided you made an 'in time' application, generally

(i) if your current visa has expired by the time the decision is made on your ILR application, then you get the right of appeal. You will continue to be bound by the terms of your last visa, until all appeals have been exhausted.

(ii) if your current visa has not expired by the time the decision is made, then you do not automatically get the right of appeal. However you can re-apply in any category you are eligible for while your visa is still valid.

wpilr_nov12 wrote:Your refusal letter would clearly say what your appeal rights are, or if any at all.

If this is a hypothetical question, then, provided you made an 'in time' application, generally

(i) if your current visa has expired by the time the decision is made on your ILR application, then you get the right of appeal. You will continue to be bound by the terms of your last visa, until all appeals have been exhausted.

(ii) if your current visa has not expired by the time the decision is made, then you do not automatically get the right of appeal. However you can re-apply in any category you are eligible for while your visa is still valid.

yes this advice sounds correct.
after all why would anyone want ILR if they already have permission to stay here.
ive noticed a lot of people have confusion that ILR somehow gives them a solid footing and they will have more rights in UK but in reality even a naturalised citizen can have his passport taken away. an immigrant is pretty much always an immigrant and thats the reality.

sh1981 wrote: yes this advice sounds correct.
after all why would anyone want ILR if they already have permission to stay here.

The reason I wanted ILR as soon as I qualified, though still having 3 years left on a renewed work permit, was because I didn't want to have to try and move my family to another country in 28 days in case I lost my job.

sh1981 wrote:ive noticed a lot of people have confusion that ILR somehow gives them a solid footing and they will have more rights in UK

After getting ILR, my company did infact have a layoff. I was able to take my time, get public benefits (including financial support for traveling to interviews!), wife was able to continue working, and I found another job about 2 months later. It was VERY nice not having to be 'sponsored' or have to jump through any time-consuming bureaucratic immigration hoops, which might not succeed, to start a job. Once I was hired, I could just start.

Compare that with having to give up our home, my wife's job, move all of our stuff, along with our child (who was born here) to another country entirely, with no jobs waiting for us, and a completely uncertain future. There is no need for confusion about it. ILR gave me a rock solid foundation in comparison to where we were whilst I was on a work permit. And I'm pretty sure that such similar stability is very compelling to most of the people posting on this sub-forum.

Throw in the fact that for most, if not all, immigrants seeking citizenship, it is an absolutely necessary step in that process. Why would anyone put that off any longer if that is their goal?

sh1981 wrote:but in reality even a naturalized citizen can have his passport taken away. an immigrant is pretty much always an immigrant and thats the reality.

This is technically true, but the cases in which a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship stripped from them are rather obvious and/or extreme: gross fraud in obtaining it, treasonous actions against the nation or society, crimes against humanity and that sort of thing. It has never been a common occurrence and I don't get the impression that it ever will be.

1. When do you plan on applying

2. When does your current visa expire

3. What particular complications do you foresee with your application?

ouflak1 wrote:

sh1981 wrote: yes this advice sounds correct.
after all why would anyone want ILR if they already have permission to stay here.

The reason I wanted ILR as soon as I qualified, though still having 3 years left on a renewed work permit, was because I didn't want to have to try and move my family to another country in 28 days in case I lost my job.

sh1981 wrote:ive noticed a lot of people have confusion that ILR somehow gives them a solid footing and they will have more rights in UK

After getting ILR, my company did infact have a layoff. I was able to take my time, get public benefits (including financial support for traveling to interviews!), wife was able to continue working, and I found another job about 2 months later. It was VERY nice not having to be 'sponsored' or have to jump through any time-consuming bureaucratic immigration hoops, which might not succeed, to start a job. Once I was hired, I could just start.

Compare that with having to give up our home, my wife's job, move all of our stuff, along with our child (who was born here) to another country entirely, with no jobs waiting for us, and a completely uncertain future. There is no need for confusion about it. ILR gave me a rock solid foundation in comparison to where we were whilst I was on a work permit. And I'm pretty sure that such similar stability is very compelling to most of the people posting on this sub-forum.

Throw in the fact that for most, if not all, immigrants seeking citizenship, it is an absolutely necessary step in that process. Why would anyone put that off any longer if that is their goal?

sh1981 wrote:but in reality even a naturalized citizen can have his passport taken away. an immigrant is pretty much always an immigrant and thats the reality.

This is technically true, but the cases in which a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship stripped from them are rather obvious and/or extreme: gross fraud in obtaining it, treasonous actions against the nation or society, crimes against humanity and that sort of thing. It has never been a common occurrence and I don't get the impression that it ever will be.

if family includes children, things change, your wife would not have to move back with you. thats a human rights issue, they could be studying in school here in uk.

public benefits instead of an advantage like most people think is rather something that makes you disabled. i have never in my entire life worked as hard as i did while on my spouse visa, purely cause i was in a foreign land and knew i wouldnt get no 'help'. having no recourse to public funds was a blessing in disguise and now i have an established business.

ouflak1 wrote:

sh1981 wrote: yes this advice sounds correct.
after all why would anyone want ILR if they already have permission to stay here.

The reason I wanted ILR as soon as I qualified, though still having 3 years left on a renewed work permit, was because I didn't want to have to try and move my family to another country in 28 days in case I lost my job.

sh1981 wrote:ive noticed a lot of people have confusion that ILR somehow gives them a solid footing and they will have more rights in UK

After getting ILR, my company did infact have a layoff. I was able to take my time, get public benefits (including financial support for traveling to interviews!), wife was able to continue working, and I found another job about 2 months later. It was VERY nice not having to be 'sponsored' or have to jump through any time-consuming bureaucratic immigration hoops, which might not succeed, to start a job. Once I was hired, I could just start.

Compare that with having to give up our home, my wife's job, move all of our stuff, along with our child (who was born here) to another country entirely, with no jobs waiting for us, and a completely uncertain future. There is no need for confusion about it. ILR gave me a rock solid foundation in comparison to where we were whilst I was on a work permit. And I'm pretty sure that such similar stability is very compelling to most of the people posting on this sub-forum.

Throw in the fact that for most, if not all, immigrants seeking citizenship, it is an absolutely necessary step in that process. Why would anyone put that off any longer if that is their goal?

sh1981 wrote:but in reality even a naturalized citizen can have his passport taken away. an immigrant is pretty much always an immigrant and thats the reality.

This is technically true, but the cases in which a naturalized citizen can have their citizenship stripped from them are rather obvious and/or extreme: gross fraud in obtaining it, treasonous actions against the nation or society, crimes against humanity and that sort of thing. It has never been a common occurrence and I don't get the impression that it ever will be.

Hi all: ILR is a solid back ground here just only not for public fund (which may considered as a support if needed) but uncertainty of present situation and contineous immigration rules change.