Immigrationboards.com

hi,

we've spent 5 years as an extended family member (non-eu) of my brother (eu citizen). my visa will expire next month. We're given residence documentation attached to our passport and its not a biometric card.

i tried govt ID verification app on idiot-phone and online but without biometric card i couldn't process.

At this stage, shall i apply for eu -pr? or eu settled scheme?
Do I've to show dependency? Proof relationship with the sponsor?

- we're married and have children
- all has residence documents on passport
- we do not live on same accommodation as our sponsor
- we're not dependent on the sponsor now.

any advise will be appreciated.

Thanks

Hello

I posted extensively about this a few months ago and I need to find these posts for you.

Simply put, once your 5 years EEA EFM is over, you may apply for an ILR if: you are part of the household and/or dependent of your sponsor.

In both EUSS or PR under EEA rules, the Home Office checks if the relationship to the sponsor and the dependency are subsisting.

In clear, if you obtained an EEA EFM sponsored by your brother, your brother had to explain at the time that you are part of his household and dependent of him to the point where refusing you would prevent him from living in the UK and thus exercising Treaty Rights.

If you moved and you are now leading an independent life, having your own address, partner, job... etc. you then ceased to meet eligibility criteria for this route and you have to find another type of visa to continue to live in the UK.

I submit just this example to your consideration:

eea-route-applications/pr-application-r ... 85499.html

This too:

eea-route-applications/immigration-status-t288284.html

Permanent residence / EU Settlement Scheme applications / extensions are refused if the Extended Family Member of the EEA national breaks the conditions of dependency/part of household.

Zerubbabel wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 25, 2019 2:32 pm

.

In clear, if you obtained an EEA EFM sponsored by your brother, your brother had to explain at the time that you are part of his household and dependent of him to the point where refusing you would prevent him from living in the UK and thus exercising Treaty Rights.

If you moved and you are now leading an independent life, having your own address, partner, job... etc. you then ceased to meet eligibility criteria for this route and you have to find another type of visa to continue to live in the UK.

There are parts of that statement which is not legally sound.

Firstly, there is no requirement for a person to be dependent and member of the household of the Union Citizen, there are alternate requirements. Rather than AND it is OR.

Furthermore a person may be married and living with a partner and still receiving support from a relatives.

Provided that person will be unable to meet their essential needs without that support, they will continue to qualify.

Legally in the litterature published by the Home Office, it's always started "Dependent and/or part of the household".

We can always imagine a sponsor rich enough to pay the rent, bills, council tax, food, clothes... for a dependent not part of household but this case is remote.

In this case, the OP states:

- we do not live on same accommodation as our sponsor
- we're not dependent on the sponsor now.

Which means he is no longer eligible to anything under that route and would have to find a route of his own.

But I am 100% with you in the fact that its either Dependent OR part of household.

Firstly a literature from home office cannot be classified as legally. It is not a legal legislative document, has not gone through Parliament like the EEA Regulations or a directive or decision from the CJEU.
Having said so, the literature you mentioned but not cited is actually correct. They put the AND to ensure that people do not form the view that the requirements are mutually exclusive.

It will be crazy if the Home Office were to say a person will qualify if they were a dependent or member of the same household but will not qualify if they are a dependent and also member of the same household.

If an extended family member has a home he pays rent for, but needs the assistance of the EU citizen to cover their feeding cost or utility cost, they will still be dependent. There is no requirement for the dependency to be wholly or mainly.

What may seem obvious to logicians may be misinterpreted by others. Unfortunately, some people may misinterpret "or" to mean "and".

Interestingly, it took a High Court judgment to confirm the correct logical/legal interpretation of the disjunctive "or"!