Immigrationboards.com

This post is to add a data point rather than to seek advice.

I'm a UK citizen exercising EEA treaty rights in Netherlands. My Taiwanese 'registered partner', equivalent of civil partner in the UK, has an Article 10 residence card confirming her EEA rights too.

We just arrived at London City Airport and showed our Netherlands residence cards. I walked up to the UKBA agent and said "She's my Surinder Singh" with our partnership certificate plus a whole load of documentation ready to show proof of living together etc.

The agent gave her a normal tourist stamp and waved us through. No inspection of the residence cards, documents, nothing.

Being a bit puzzled/curious and wanting some explanation for why we didn't get the 'Code 1A' (I know it's not that anymore but I refer to it by that), I rang the doorbell of the Border Force office at the baggage claim to get them to explain.

We had a bit of a debate between 4 agents vs us two, and she was insistent that the correct tourist stamp had been used, and not code 1A because Taiwan is a non-visa country and that we were only here temporarily. She said if my partner were from a Visa country then they would have given that stamp.

Then I asked if we were coming for a permanent basis. The agents said she would need an EEA Family Permit, "because her passport has to be endorsed before she arrives". I asserted that it's not a required document, but they wouldn't back down, so I let it pass because it's all academic for now.

It was important for me to get the right stamp today because I wanted to show treaty rights now so that there might be less hassle down the road when we do come for good. I do wish to feed this information back to UKBA or Home Office somehow because I'm 99% sure I'm right on this regard!

Be very wary how you approach this. There was a recent refusal under Surinder Singh due to the applicant's statement in the EU FP application quoting the 'SS' rules. The decision to refuse was due to the couple having prior intention of re-entering under the Surinder Singh route and thereby 'circumventing the Immigration Rules'.

Casa wrote:Be very wary how you approach this. There was a recent refusal under Surinder Singh due to the applicant's statement in the EU FP application quoting the 'SS' rules. The decision to refuse was due to the couple having prior intention of re-entering under the Surinder Singh route and thereby 'circumventing the Immigration Rules'.

Surely there have been enough ECJ cases, even with the most recent O&B vs Netherlands, to state that so long as you're improving family ties and living long enough abroad, it doesn't count as abuse.

I'm guessing there's more to the story, but it seems strange to refuse outright on prior intention to move back?

I thought you do not need the EEA family permit if you have a residence card from another EU state?

Read the link https://blogs.kent.ac.uk/eu-rights-clin ... pril-2015/

Just reading again, and it says still best to apply for the permit.

returntotheuk wrote:I thought you do not need the EEA family permit if you have a residence card from another EU state?

Read the link https://blogs.kent.ac.uk/eu-rights-clin ... pril-2015/

Just reading again, and it says still best to apply for the permit.

That is HMG & HO speaking - they would say that wouldn't they.

Shades of Sir Humphrey <--- English cultural reference to a classic 1970s cult TV sitcom, "Yes, Minister!"

(think House of Cards but with jokes)

ninmurai wrote:

Casa wrote:Be very wary how you approach this. There was a recent refusal under Surinder Singh due to the applicant's statement in the EU FP application quoting the 'SS' rules. The decision to refuse was due to the couple having prior intention of re-entering under the Surinder Singh route and thereby 'circumventing the Immigration Rules'.

Surely there have been enough ECJ cases, even with the most recent O&B vs Netherlands, to state that so long as you're improving family ties and living long enough abroad, it doesn't count as abuse.

I'm guessing there's more to the story, but it seems strange to refuse outright on prior intention to move back?

I believe the inference is that the relocation to another EU state, wasn't to 'move the centre of life' and settle there, but purely as a means of 'circumventing the immigration rules' by applying under Surinder Singh...hence the abuse.