Zambrano Settled Status EU settlement scheme Paper Application Form - NEW

[snooky]

@Second Part of Today's Post (@those that are refused based on)

Judge’s conclusions

The First Tier Tribunal Judge made the following findings in allowing the appeal:

Having regard to the totality of evidence, there was no dispute/challenge in the refusal decision that both Appellants are joint primary carers of a British citizen child.

There was no dispute that the British Citizen child is residing in the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, there was no dispute that the British Citizen child would not be able to continue to reside in the United Kingdom or in another EEA state if the Appellants left the United Kingdom for an indefinite period.

Accordingly, the Judge was satisfied that the Appellants met the criteria under Regulation 16(5) of the EEA Regulations.

The Judge stated that the Policy relied upon by the Secretary of State does not appear to be accurate in law. It does not represent a true reflection of the Court of Appeal judgement.

This conclusion is also apparent from the subsequent Supreme Court consideration of the case.
The Judge concluded that the reality was the Appellants made an application under the EEA Regulations and on the evidence before the Tribunal, they met the criteria under Regulation 16(5)of the EEA Regulations. As such they were entitled to succeed in their appeal under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2016.

All these are with you already

Hi snooky
can you please provide the case no

Hi

This came just some weeks after Patel vs SSHD 16 December 2019.

On 30 January 2020 and having heard a number of test cases, Judge Neville of the First-tier Tribunal (IAC) at Taylor House ruled that a person meeting the requirements Regulation 16 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (‘the 2016 Regulations’) has a derivative right of residence notwithstanding that he or she has not yet made an application under the Immigration Rules and pursuant to Article 8 ECHR. The upshot is that the novel concept set out in Home Office policy that a Zambrano carer must first make an unsuccessful fee-paid human rights application before an application under the 2016 Regulations can be submitted is unlawful.

Look through my post and you will find the full court ruling.

[lida56]

snooky,
Thanks for your comments, but as CR001 mentioned my son is a dependent adult. I may refer to the the guidance on 'Person with a zambrano right to reside', page 39 re primary responsibility for adult. I've read all the relevant laws and regulations, and submitted my son medical records for evidence of his dependency and his needs for my care, but I understood the HO is not fair in their decision making! I need to make sure if I'm better to send pre-action protocol now or wait for my complaint replies to write to PHSO, seems both rout a long way!? It is already one and half years in limbo, waiting for a decision and it is more than a month I made my first complaint, quite unreasonable and against human right standards!

[forney]

snooky,
Thanks for your comments, but as CR001 mentioned my son is a dependent adult. I may refer to the the guidance on 'Person with a zambrano right to reside', page 39 re primary responsibility for adult. I've read all the relevant laws and regulations, and submitted my son medical records for evidence of his dependency and his needs for my care, but I understood the HO is not fair in their decision making! I need to make sure if I'm better to send pre-action protocol now or wait for my complaint replies to write to PHSO, seems both rout a long way!? It is already one and half years in limbo, waiting for a decision and it is more than a month I made my first complaint, quite unreasonable and against human right standards!

The pre-action protocol letter gives the Home Office 14 days to respond, in normal circumstances. Given the current circumstances, you can ask for a shorter response period. It is hard to imagine a faster turnaround time that one or two weeks after you have sent the letter.

Complaints to the Home Office can be filed concurrently with your pre action letter.

Sending a pre action letter does not prevent you from complaining about the delays you experienced.

[LULUBABY]

@Forney,

My LTR expired on January 14th 2020. My initial application was submitted online last November but a day before my LTR expired which was on the 13th of January, the HO sent a paper application which I received, completed and send back around 21st of January. My LTR expired in their custody.

Per your refusal letter dated 8 September 2020:

An EU Settlement Scheme application based on a Zambrano right to reside will be refused where there is a realistic prospect that an application for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules, or otherwise relying on Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), would succeed. This is because if you are able to obtain leave to remain in the UK on one of these bases, you will not be required to leave the UK, which means xxxxx will not be compelled to leave the UK or the EEA. You cannot show that you would be required to leave the UK, and therefore cannot be considered a person with a Zambrano right to reside, if you have not made an application under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules or an Article 8 ECHR claim where there is a realistic prospect that such an application or claim would succeed.

There are two categories of refusal - those who currently have LTR and those who do not have LTR, but are refused EU Settlement Scheme and told to apply for LTR. You fall into the second category. Within the second category, some people who allowed their LTR to expire were granted settlement under EU Settlement Scheme. Other people who allowed their LTR to expire were refused settlement and told to re-apply for LTR. At this point, even if the AR is successful, I am not sure I would trust the Home Office. They do not seem to apply their rules in a consistent manner. The Home Office needs to explain why some people who allow their LTR to expire are granted settlement while others are refused settlement and told to apply for LTR.

Finally, a second wave of coronavirus is likely in the fall. The Courts may close again or slow down drastically. If you are going to go the legal route, you may want to do that now. If you wait for the AR, you may not get a decision before October, when a second wave may be in full force. If the AR decision is negative, what are you going to do? Are you confident you can get a hearing before 31 December 2020? Are you confident that you will have the same rights after 31 December 2020, to fight your case?

Hmmm,

What do you suggest I should do. I applied before 31st of January that is why I am going for AR. Honestly I’m confuse

Ngoo, don’t be confused. Since the lawyer wants to concentrate on the AR, try and establish from him what his plan B is. After AR, if there is a refusal, will he do PAP, then JR?. Just make sure both of you are on the same page. So you can be rest assured.

Don’t abandon your appeal, since the lawyer is only interested in the AR, then you concentrate on the appeal. Division of labour. Let the lawyer do his bit while you do yours ok?.

Remain focused and on track. (Mind the gap). Anytime you have doubts, go back and read all those Snooky’s posts. Read that Mubashir1981’s letter again, then read Snooky’s explanation of that letter.

Snooky is here again anyway, that was just the reassurance I needed because these past few weeks have been like: ‘right,left,centre,front,back,forward and backwards, all over the place’.

It’s still early days but hope you are feeling better.

[ojoke2020]

@those that are refused based on

has never made an application under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules or any other Article 8 ECHR claim, where that avenue is available; has been refused under Appendix FM or Article 8

ECHR but their circumstances have changed since the decision was made – for example, the applicant applied on the basis of their relationship with a British spouse, but the couple now have a British child.

Where a person wishes to remain in the UK on basis of family life with a British citizen , they can make an application for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. A derivative right to reside is a right of last restort which only applies if a person has no other means to remain lawfully in the UK.

There is significant overlap with the right to respect for private and family life which is protected by Article 8 of European Convention of Human Right (ECHR).

Please don't be worried and afraid. HO gives you Regulation 36 appeal because they actually know that the refusal precludes your British child and it not in accordance of EEA EU law.

They are playing Russian roulette with you guys and they certainly knows only few will have the balls to take them on.

I have provided you with all that you need to challenge the HO.

They don't come to court when you are refused under regulation 36.

Please read over old posts by members to give you confidence and right tools.

As you are seeing, getting closer to the end of the transitional period and the 16 December 2019 Patel vs SSHD supreme court ruling, which has open the way for people to do Zambrano, HO now keeps denying people to get EEA application forms.

I have said to you that your right is under EEA before EU Settlement Scheme.

Fight them through your EEA Drf1 and EU Settlement Scheme will be a done deal.

Another thing which I will re-mention, HO has no right to choose for any one either to do eu stay or domestic one.

This what judge Neville said 30 January 2020,

As such, the Respondent’s guidance (and their application of their guidance) erred in law as it is predicated on testing whether the TCN is being compelled to leave the EU, rather than testing what would happen if he or she were so compelled.

I have posted all these before. So please do not be frightened

@Snooky
I would first like to say a big THANKS to all Administration of this platform for great job in putting this together for someone like me. How I wish I had known this platform years back, maybe I would have been singing different song by now. Thank you, guys, because without this platform there won’t be me and other members.
@Snooky, I am very glad when I SAW YOUR POST. I knew without you mentioning names I was one of the folks who brought you back to the platform. They are saying in where I originated from that “A mother cannot hear the cry or voice of her child without looking back”. @snooky, on this platform I am one of your follower because you had shown me in the old and new platform that you’re a complete HUMANITARIAN and why did I say that, I remember when you were looking forward to get your Settle Status you were not bothered about your own application but kept encouraging and updating member of the platform, until @Mubashir1981 asked you to complaint about your own application. @Snooky you’re so kind, compassionate, considerate, devoted, supportive and above all UNSELFISH. You’re one of the few people who had their Settle Status from the old platform and still cross over to the new platform to support others. I remember you said we’re in it together until there will be no more Zambrano application. @Snooky you’re a person with integrity and honour. Even those you had helped or still helping to paddle their cannon can’t help others or give a quarter of what you have giving this platform. @Lulubaby kindly let me use your word which I agreed with “it is in you Snooky to help. We may not reward you but remember no good deed is in vain. Every good work has a reward”.

[LULUBABY]

snooky,
Thanks for your comments, but as CR001 mentioned my son is a dependent adult. I may refer to the the guidance on 'Person with a zambrano right to reside', page 39 re primary responsibility for adult. I've read all the relevant laws and regulations, and submitted my son medical records for evidence of his dependency and his needs for my care, but I understood the HO is not fair in their decision making! I need to make sure if I'm better to send pre-action protocol now or wait for my complaint replies to write to PHSO, seems both rout a long way!? It is already one and half years in limbo, waiting for a decision and it is more than a month I made my first complaint, quite unreasonable and against human right standards!

Hi Lida56, with a dependent Adult Zambrano it is very difficult, thanks to HO.

Nevertheless, over the years we have all seen that in immigration, nothing is really cast in stone, it not really black or white when a ‘smart lawyer is involved if there is loophole’.

Your child has always been taken care of and looked after by someone, you have not always been there with him, that not withstanding you are the mother and this is your child.

You used to be able to go to him regularly but not anymore. Explore all avenues. You can’t do it alone. Whoever helps you will ask a lot of questions and expect the answers in order to have the right information to work with.

Good luck and don’t give up.

[LULUBABY]

“Do not be frightened”, that was all I needed to hear. Thanks.

[LULUBABY]

@those that are refused based on

has never made an application under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules or any other Article 8 ECHR claim, where that avenue is available; has been refused under Appendix FM or Article 8

ECHR but their circumstances have changed since the decision was made – for example, the applicant applied on the basis of their relationship with a British spouse, but the couple now have a British child.

Where a person wishes to remain in the UK on basis of family life with a British citizen , they can make an application for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules. A derivative right to reside is a right of last restort which only applies if a person has no other means to remain lawfully in the UK.

There is significant overlap with the right to respect for private and family life which is protected by Article 8 of European Convention of Human Right (ECHR).

Please don't be worried and afraid. HO gives you Regulation 36 appeal because they actually know that the refusal precludes your British child and it not in accordance of EEA EU law.

They are playing Russian roulette with you guys and they certainly knows only few will have the balls to take them on.

I have provided you with all that you need to challenge the HO.

They don't come to court when you are refused under regulation 36.

Please read over old posts by members to give you confidence and right tools.

As you are seeing, getting closer to the end of the transitional period and the 16 December 2019 Patel vs SSHD supreme court ruling, which has open the way for people to do Zambrano, HO now keeps denying people to get EEA application forms.

I have said to you that your right is under EEA before EU Settlement Scheme.

Fight them through your EEA Drf1 and EU Settlement Scheme will be a done deal.

Another thing which I will re-mention, HO has no right to choose for any one either to do eu stay or domestic one.

This what judge Neville said 30 January 2020,

As such, the Respondent’s guidance (and their application of their guidance) erred in law as it is predicated on testing whether the TCN is being compelled to leave the EU, rather than testing what would happen if he or she were so compelled.

I have posted all these before. So please do not be frightened

@Snooky
I would first like to say a big THANKS to all Administration of this platform for great job in putting this together for someone like me. How I wish I had known this platform years back, maybe I would have been singing different song by now. Thank you, guys, because without this platform there won’t be me and other members.
@Snooky, I am very glad when I SAW YOUR POST. I knew without you mentioning names I was one of the folks who brought you back to the platform. They are saying in where I originated from that “A mother cannot hear the cry or voice of her child without looking back”. @snooky, on this platform I am one of your follower because you had shown me in the old and new platform that you’re a complete HUMANITARIAN and why did I say that, I remember when you were looking forward to get your Settle Status you were not bothered about your own application but kept encouraging and updating member of the platform, until @Mubashir1981 asked you to complaint about your own application. @Snooky you’re so kind, compassionate, considerate, devoted, supportive and above all UNSELFISH. You’re one of the few people who had their Settle Status from the old platform and still cross over to the new platform to support others. I remember you said we’re in it together until there will be no more Zambrano application. @Snooky you’re a person with integrity and honour. Even those you had helped or still helping to paddle their cannon can’t help others or give a quarter of what you have giving this platform. @Lulubaby kindly let me use your word which I agreed with “it is in you Snooky to help. We may not reward you but remember no good deed is in vain. Every good work has a reward”.

Hi Ojoke2020, you are in a similar situation that Mubashir1981 was in. I am glad you have been following from the old thread. Don’t give up, your DRF1 / EEA application and subsequent appeal will see you through.

When in doubt read that letter Mubashir1981 posted and also read Snooky’s explanation of that letter.

[LULUBABY]

Hi Everyone
I have been following you guys for a while, Thank you guys for doing a good job supporting each other, giving advice , cheering and consoling each other.

Well I applied to the Eusettlement scheme on 6 Jan 2020 under Zobrano DRC, I had a DRC that expired on the 20 Jan 2020, I had finished 5 yrs under that route, I also hold a Leave to Remain under 10 yr route which expires on the 20th of ths month.

They refused my case on the 3 of June 2020, on the basis that I hold a LTR which, I have renewed 2 times. Eusettlement Sc sent the refusal via email, and it went to junk mail, only to discover around end of August that they have made a decision after calling and checking the Resolution centre,

Anyway I felt it was pointless to do an AR, I called them and requested an application, And I have applied and sent it back yesterday. But I will renew the LTR as I don't want to end up stateless.

Please don’t fail to reapply for another Derivative card. Remember you had one before but it has expired. That is your ‘Joker’ for this HO poker game.

Go back in previous posts and read Mubashir1981’s letter. You definitely need that derivative card to succeed in your EU settlement scheme application.

Other members have renewed theirs and succeeded in their EU settlement application. JOIN THE QUEUE.

[snooky]

Hi everyone,
Hope you're all good. I'm a new participant on this platform but I've been following the trends for a long while now. Please I need your kind help about my derivative application that has just been refused and received today. I made an application on EU Settlement Scheme last year September which is still ongoing but put in a derivative application based on @Snooky's advice that it helps in getting positive decision July 2020. I received the derivative decision refused today but my EU Scheme has not been decided on (It's exactly a year I applied for that this September).

Please I need help on the right and quick steps to follow for my appeal. I have just 11 days to go as the letter read from the date the decision was sent (7th Sept., 2020).
@Ngoo, @Snooky, @IST, @Mubashir1981, @lulubaby just to mention few.

PLEASE HELP ME OUT!
Thank you in advance.

Hi

If you follow my post, I have made mentioned that all people should do Drf1 application and expect refusal.

This is because HO since 2 May 2019 have now left EEA Zambrano for the courts to decide. They shut the route with that erroneous guidance.

But within that up to December Patel ruling, almost all Zambrano and derivative cases to the courts were allowed by the judges because they were looking at the Regulations not the HO guidance policy.

Now that Patel 2019 has open up the avenue again, you see that HO uses clever tactics to deny people euss Zambrano application forms. This amount to bullying and unprofessional.

The derivative route both in EEA and EUSS has been made very difficult just to put people off.

HO can not choose even for you the route to follow leave under appendix fm then EU route. This flimsy suggestion shows totally disregard to the implementation of EU law.

As now, we have 2 ways of immigration and it's your choice to choose whichever will suit you. Technically for HO staff to advise you for an alternative is total contradictory to Immigration Act, OISC code of practice and Solicitors code of practice.

HO staff are not lawyers and can not advise anyone to apply according to the parliamentary act and the code of practice of immigration in this country. It shows contempt and facial bias of the system.

I don't need to quote laws again because it becomes repetitive. Everything you need and how to go about your appeal is on this platform.

Your case is just one of the soft to go through the court. HO take chances and hoping to get away.

Just appeal and dont forget to get new school and GP letters, and family pictures to be part of it.

Good luck

[LULUBABY]

Good morning All

I agree we are left in limbo,but if all of us without a good law knowledge we can follow what Snooky previously mentioned apply for EEA DRF1 and challenge the HO decision to Court, which most of us already have applied for EEA I think we will be oright and we have to fight till the end, and god blessing we all will win the battle.

Thank you so much for the reassurance. We are in this together. I really appreciate.

[snooky]

Hi Everyone
I have been following you guys for a while, Thank you guys for doing a good job supporting each other, giving advice , cheering and consoling each other.

Well I applied to the Eusettlement scheme on 6 Jan 2020 under Zobrano DRC, I had a DRC that expired on the 20 Jan 2020, I had finished 5 yrs under that route, I also hold a Leave to Remain under 10 yr route which expires on the 20th of ths month.

They refused my case on the 3 of June 2020, on the basis that I hold a LTR which, I have renewed 2 times. Eusettlement Sc sent the refusal via email, and it went to junk mail, only to discover around end of August that they have made a decision after calling and checking the Resolution centre,

Anyway I felt it was pointless to do an AR, I called them and requested an application, And I have applied and sent it back yesterday. But I will renew the LTR as I don't want to end up stateless.

HI

If I can understand you, HO refused your application for settled status euss though you have already done 5 years and your crime is to get LTR.

All I can say is that, the HO caseworkers who dealt with your application is just probably a year 11 leaver being paid £7.30 and just following tick boxes.

This person used the Supervening criteria wrongly towards your application.

There's know law in the Withdrawal Agreement that precludes you from having your INDEFINITE. Read it

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/wh ... ns-rights/

Page 7 of Zambrano guidance clearly states you qualify.

Where you have established that the applicant has made a valid application and, using this guidance, is (or, as the case may be, for the relevant period was) a
‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ as defined in
Annex 1 to Appendix EU, you must then use EU Settlement Scheme: EU, other EEA and Swiss citizens and their family members and, where relevant, EU Settlement Scheme: family member of a qualifying British citizen to establish whether – subject to the reference below to rule EU13 of Appendix EU – they have either:

• completed a continuous qualifying period of 5 years in any, or any combination of, qualifying category covered by condition 3 of rule EU11 (or, where relevant,
of EU12) of Appendix EU and so are to be considered for indefinite leave to enter or remain

• completed a continuous qualifying period of less than 5 years in any qualifying category covered by condition 1 (or, where relevant, of condition 2) of rule
EU14 of Appendix EU and so are to be considered for limited leave to enter or remain


Also page 95 of the Main Caseworkers Guidance clearly affirms this

Continuous qualifying period of 5 years.

The supervening rule could not be used in your case because you have retain you right by completing 5 years of Zambrano which if you were not a TCN, HO will have issue you your SS.

You can argue that the supervening rule is not part of the Withdrawal Agreement, disenfranchises you, rob you from your EEA which you have already accrued.

Remember other domestic INDEFINITE Holders can apply to the scheme all because the want to be protected and have the 5 year limit of ILR under euss than domestic immigration.

If you have an appeal right, just do it, either then that put in PAP to ask them to reconsider and if the fail JR.

HO policy guidance is not law and it is at odds with the statute law passed by the parliament and the Withdrawal Agreement agreed with eu27

[Caseyd]

Happy Sunday Everyone

@Lulubaby and Snooky thank you for the advise.

@ Snooky by the I found out they have made a decision it was in August . They emailed the decision on the 3 of June and went to spam., And I had no appeal I applied on the 6th of Jan 20

I have since re applied and sent in a new application to the Eusettlement Sc on the 8 of ths month, however I haven't renewed my DRC it expired 20 of Jan 2020 coz I really thought I had a strong case as Snooky mentioned.

[LULUBABY]

Happy Sunday Everyone

@Lulubaby and Snooky thank you for the advise.

@ Snooky by the I found out they have made a decision it was in August . They emailed the decision on the 3 of June and went to spam., And I had no appeal I applied on the 6th of Jan 20

I have since re applied and sent in a new application to the Eusettlement Sc on the 8 of ths month, however I haven't renewed my DRC it expired 20 of Jan 2020 coz I really thought I had a strong case as Snooky mentioned.

That’s ok. It’s just that from your post I could see that despite the fact that you already completed your 5 years on the Zambrano route they still refused you settlement on the scheme. Unbelievable.

Apparently they ‘fixed weave-on hair extensions on their eye lashes’ so couldn’t see that. I felt if you renew the expired detivative card they will then be able to ‘touch the card and feel it’.

Of course with the new settlement scheme application you will have a right to appeal. There won’t be anymore hiding place for them.

Snooky is back our CONFIDENCE is back. AHOY there Home Office !!!!!.

[ravindra121]

My application been refused, i need you guys advise specially snooky's. including letter format will be much helpful. buy i am not in UK anymore. I came to SL while my application pending. but decision been taken to refuse my application.




Reasons why your application has been refused

We have considered whether you meet the requirements for settled status (also known as indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (also known as limited leave to enter or remain) under the EU Settlement Scheme. Unfortunately, based on the information and evidence provided or otherwise available, and for the reasons set out in this letter, you do not meet the requirements.

To qualify under the scheme you need to meet the requirements that are set out in Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules. You can find out more about the requirements here w w w. go v. u k / se t t l e d - st a t u s- e u - ci ti ze n s- f a m i l i es/ e l igi b i l i t y.

You have applied to the EU Settlement Scheme as the primary carer of a British citizen in the UK. Your application has been refused because the information available to us does not show that you are a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ on this basis.

To qualify for settled or pre-settled status as a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’, you must have a right to reside in the UK because you meet the

relevant requirements in the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (‘the EEA Regulations’). As you state that you are the primary carer of a British citizen, it is regulation 16(5) that is relevant in your circumstances. However, we are not satisfied that you meet the requirements of regulation 16(5) because you have not demonstrated that XXXXXXXXXX would be unable to remain in the UK if you left the UK for an indefinite period.

You can only be considered a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ where XXXXXXXXXX would be unable to reside in the UK or the European Economic Area (EEA) if you were required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.

In order to demonstrate that XXXXXXXXXXXX would be unable to reside in the UK or EEA if you left the UK for an indefinite period, you must be able to show that you would be required to leave the UK as you had no other means to remain lawfully in the UK as his primary carer.

An EU Settlement Scheme application based on a Zambrano right to reside will be refused where there is a realistic prospect that an application for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules, or otherwise relying on Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), would succeed. This is because if you are able to obtain leave to remain in the UK on one of these bases, you will not be required to leave the UK, which means XXXXXXXXXXX will not be compelled to leave the UK or the EEA.

You cannot show that you would be required to leave the UK, and therefore cannot be considered a person with a Zambrano right to reside, if you have not made an application under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules or an Article
8 ECHR claim where there is a realistic prospect that such an application or claim would succeed.

An Appendix FM application or Article 8 ECHR claim will be considered to have a realistic prospect of success where the applicant has family life in the UK with a British citizen and there is no apparent reason why such an application or claim would be refused.

Although you previously applied for leave under Appendix FM and this was refused, from the information and evidence provided or otherwise available, it is considered that your circumstances have changed since that decision was made. Your son XXXXXXXXXX was registered as a British citizen on 14
November 2019. You are therefore now the parent of a British citizen child.

Following your change of circumstances, it is considered that such an application or claim has a realistic prospect of success in your case because it is accepted, for the purposes of your EU Settlement Scheme application, that you are the primary carer of a British citizen child and because there is no apparent reason why an Appendix FM application or Article 8 ECHR claim would be refused.

Hi

I have gone over your refusal. Is there another part that you haven't published.

Is like you were not given an appeal right.

If you have an appeal right then let us know the number and we can say something

Please note that this assessment is without prejudice to the outcome of any future Appendix FM application or Article 8 ECHR claim you may submit which will be determined on the basis of its individual merits.

As you did not submit a further Appendix FM application or Article 8 ECHR claim in these circumstances, you have failed to show that you would be required to leave the UK and that xxxxxxx would be unable to reside in the UK or EEA if you left the UK for an indefinite period. Accordingly,

your application on the basis of being a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ has been refused.It is considered that the information available does not show that you meet the eligibility requirements for settled status set out in rule EU11 of Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules or those for pre-settled status which are set out in rule EU14 of that Appendix. Therefore, you have been refused settled status and pre-settled status under rule EU6.

We are currently working remotely due to COVID-19 and only have access to electronic copies of the documents you submitted in support of your application. We are therefore unable to return your supporting documents at this time. However, steps will be taken to return your documents as soon as possible. In the meantime, please ensure that you keep us up to date with any change of address to ensure that documents are returned to the correct location. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.


Next steps

If you have additional information or evidence that shows you meet the requirements, you can make another application to the EU Settlement Scheme at any time online at: ht t p s : / /a p p l y- f o r - e u - se t t le d - st a tu s. ho m e of f i ce . g o v. u k.

Applications are free of charge and you have until 30 June 2021, or until any status you currently hold under the scheme ceases to be valid, to reapply.

If you wish to re-apply as a person with a derivative right to reside, you will need to call the EU Settlement Resolution Centre to request another paper
application form. Their contact information can be found at ww w. go v. u k / con t a ct -
u kvi - i n si d e - o u t s i de - u k/y/ i n si d e - th e - uk/ e u - se t t le m en t - sch em e - se t t l ed - a n d - pr e -
se t t l ed - sta t u s .

If you wish to apply on another basis, you may be able to apply online at apply- for-eu-settled-status.homeoffice.gov.uk. You can find out more about the requirements at ww w. g o v. u k/ se t t l ed - st a t u s- eu- ci t i ze n s - f a m i l i es/e l i gi bi l i t y.

Alternatively, you can apply for an administrative review if you think the decision maker made an error or did not follow the published guidance, or where you have new information or evidence in support of your application.

You have 28 calendar days from the date on which you receive this decision to apply for an administrative review.

Information on how to apply for an administrative review, the process and the fees payable are all available online at: ww w. go v. u k / gu i d a n ce / e u - set t l e m e n t -
sc h e m e - a pp l y- f o r -a n - ad m i ni st r at i ve - r e vi e w.

The administrative review application form is available online at: h tt p s: / / vi sa s -
i m m i gr at i o n . se r vi ce . go v. u k/ p r od u ct /a dm i n - r e vi e w.

If you have any questions or would like to discuss this letter, you can call the EU Settlement Resolution Centre anytime from Monday to Friday (excluding bank holidays), 8am to 8pm Saturday and Sunday, 9:30am to 4:30pm. Opening
hours during bank holidays can be found on gov.uk:

w w w. go v. u k/ c o n t a ct - ukvi - in s i de - o u t si de - u k/ y/ i n si d e - t h e - uk/ e u - set t l em e nt -
sc h e m e - se t t l ed - a nd - p r e - se t t l ed - sta t u s: Calling from inside the UK: 0300 123 7379

[snooky]

Happy Sunday Everyone

@Lulubaby and Snooky thank you for the advise.

@ Snooky by the I found out they have made a decision it was in August . They emailed the decision on the 3 of June and went to spam., And I had no appeal I applied on the 6th of Jan 20

I have since re applied and sent in a new application to the Eusettlement Sc on the 8 of ths month, however I haven't renewed my DRC it expired 20 of Jan 2020 coz I really thought I had a strong case as Snooky mentioned.

Hi

The whole thing is that, you have completed 5 years of derivative right to reside under EEA regulation 16.

I dont know the age of your child but Derivative Residence Card is only Issued for 5 years at most.

The only calculated EU Leave within the wider EU law. So it could be issued for a Day, Week, Months and Years depending on the age of the child.

So technically if hadn't been that the HO has made Zambrano Derivative an uncomfortable Leave under EU, you could have qualify for Article 21(1) TFEU which Grant's you Permanent Residence.

The HO interpretation is wrong we all know that and the UK courts haven't also looked into it probably because those who have had their Zambrano 5 years already, some have initiated a class action in court against the HO after it went through FTT and they were given the following.........

It was submitted on behalf of the appellants that this ought to include the ability to build a family life with a TCN partner by the means of a derived right of residence to that spouse.

However, the FtT did not accept this part of the appellants’ case. While it was accepted that there was ‘some force’ in these arguments [57], there was no authority explicitly providing for the Directive to be applied ‘by analogy’ to Zambrano carers.

Ultimately, the appellants faced an insurmountable hurdle in that entitlement to a permanent right of residence by the TCN does nothing to fulfil the objectives of the TFEU; refusing to provide a right of permanent residence to a Zambrano carer after five years’ continuous residence as such does nothing to “[deprive a] Union citizens of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights conferred by virtue of their status” nor “interfere, in particular, with a Union citizen’s freedom of movement”.

Now according to the Judge's comments this case of Article 21(1) had to be decided by High Court and probably Supreme Court.

There's a clear advantage for Zambrano derivative holders given permanent residency but it's too late to see that in the UK as we have left.

This one of the reasons which hasade the UK left the union. Zambrano is becoming bigger than how HO want it.

To conclude, you don't need to renew you DRC - Derivative Right Card. You have to enforce your right of retained right under the continuous period criteria under the Withdrawal Agreement and the Guidance.

The both the Withdrawal and Guidance made provision for

Eligibility requirements - Indefinite leave to enter or remain
The applicant meets the eligibility requirements for indefinite leave to enter or remain as a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ (or, as the case may be, as a ‘person who had a derivative or Zambrano right to reside’ who relies on having been a 'person with a Zambrano right to reside’ before they moved into any – and have since remained in any or any combination – of the other categories to which thedefinition of a ‘person who had a derivative or Zambrano right to reside’ refers) if, at the date of application, they meet condition 3 of rule EU11 of Appendix EU.

If you read this, you will see that HO caseworkers should deal with,

A. Present Zambrano carers, B. Past Zambrano Carers,
C. Past Participle Zambrano Carers, E. Present Continuous Zambrano Carers, D Future Zambrano Carers.

Words matters in law.

Code 8
An “unauthorised person” is someone who is not regulated in accordance with legislation to provide immigration advice or services.

Being employed at a regulated organisation does not mean that the person is automatically permitted to provide immigration advice or services. This also applies to those who are regulated by one of the designated professional bodies or the qualifying regulators (under the Legal Services Act 2007).

Full text

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... dards-2016

HO and their staff are not above the law to clearly state on a paper that you have to do application on another route. The staff are unregulated and not legal professionals within the Immigration professional code.


Good luck

[Ngoo]

@Forney,

My LTR expired on January 14th 2020. My initial application was submitted online last November but a day before my LTR expired which was on the 13th of January, the HO sent a paper application which I received, completed and send back around 21st of January. My LTR expired in their custody.

Per your refusal letter dated 8 September 2020:

An EU Settlement Scheme application based on a Zambrano right to reside will be refused where there is a realistic prospect that an application for leave to remain under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules, or otherwise relying on Article 8 (the right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), would succeed. This is because if you are able to obtain leave to remain in the UK on one of these bases, you will not be required to leave the UK, which means xxxxx will not be compelled to leave the UK or the EEA. You cannot show that you would be required to leave the UK, and therefore cannot be considered a person with a Zambrano right to reside, if you have not made an application under Appendix FM to the Immigration Rules or an Article 8 ECHR claim where there is a realistic prospect that such an application or claim would succeed.

There are two categories of refusal - those who currently have LTR and those who do not have LTR, but are refused EU Settlement Scheme and told to apply for LTR. You fall into the second category. Within the second category, some people who allowed their LTR to expire were granted settlement under EU Settlement Scheme. Other people who allowed their LTR to expire were refused settlement and told to re-apply for LTR. At this point, even if the AR is successful, I am not sure I would trust the Home Office. They do not seem to apply their rules in a consistent manner. The Home Office needs to explain why some people who allow their LTR to expire are granted settlement while others are refused settlement and told to apply for LTR.

Finally, a second wave of coronavirus is likely in the fall. The Courts may close again or slow down drastically. If you are going to go the legal route, you may want to do that now. If you wait for the AR, you may not get a decision before October, when a second wave may be in full force. If the AR decision is negative, what are you going to do? Are you confident you can get a hearing before 31 December 2020? Are you confident that you will have the same rights after 31 December 2020, to fight your case?

Hmmm,

What do you suggest I should do. I applied before 31st of January that is why I am going for AR. Honestly I’m confuse

Ngoo, don’t be confused. Since the lawyer wants to concentrate on the AR, try and establish from him what his plan B is. After AR, if there is a refusal, will he do PAP, then JR?. Just make sure both of you are on the same page. So you can be rest assured.

Don’t abandon your appeal, since the lawyer is only interested in the AR, then you concentrate on the appeal. Division of labour. Let the lawyer do his bit while you do yours ok?.

Remain focused and on track. (Mind the gap). Anytime you have doubts, go back and read all those Snooky’s posts. Read that Mubashir1981’s letter again, then read Snooky’s explanation of that letter.

Snooky is here again anyway, that was just the reassurance I needed because these past few weeks have been like: ‘right,left,centre,front,back,forward and backwards, all over the place’.

It’s still early days but hope you are feeling better.

@Lulubaby, thanks for your support. Indeed I actually need to Mind the gap I decided to reapply cos I believe is the best option for me. I rang the EU settlement team on Friday evening to request for a new application, luckily the lady I spoke to had no idea what to do. She was reading the requirements off the computer she then said to me u need to call UK VISAS and Immigration. I then told her no I don’t need to call them because I qualify to make an EU settlement application and moreover this will be my second application as the first application was refused, and on the refusal letter, the HO stated that I should either apply for an AR or Reapply so I have decided to reapply. She then said ok you should get the application form in 10 working days.

[IST]

Snooky

Welcome back
Is good to have you back in the forum, you brought the confidence and spirit back to all of us.

[IST]

Good morning All

I agree we are left in limbo,but if all of us without a good law knowledge we can follow what Snooky previously mentioned apply for EEA DRF1 and challenge the HO decision to Court, which most of us already have applied for EEA I think we will be oright and we have to fight till the end, and god blessing we all will win the battle.

Thank you so much for the reassurance. We are in this together. I really appreciate.

Welcome Lulubaby

We are all in together,and we got Snooky back so even more stronger now.

[snooky]

@ravindra121

Honestly I do not have any love for AR unless you're ready to go through AR, PAP, JR and Court.

I have mentioned this over and over within my post.

If you look at the refusal rate both in initial assessment to AR, Derivative Right people comes on top and representing 90%.

I will always say that though it takes time for a decision to be made, spending £80 AR is not worth it as you can redo your application for free to get proper right of appeal when refused.

AR for derivative is farce. Reorganise yourself and put in strong evidence and good cover letter as you have more material today

[snooky]

@All

What I would want you to understand is that Laws are there to make society a civilised people but not to take away their right.

There has been a lot of Positive Discrimination in especially UK immigration which we need to fight off.

I am of the view that Legislators intentionally make Laws to put loopholes in and to make people access it in view of suiting their particular case or need.

No law is straight, no law is even legal and no law couldn't be challenged.

I am always looking within the phrases, the time, when, where and what. All cases look similar but not the same.

In law the biggest loophole given to us is the Mitigation Article. This means irrespective of the Act, a judge decision can change if you can convince him/her with a good evidence which is ultra vires (beyond reasonable doubt). This happened or has to happen because of this or so

Laws are not static and especially British laws are what we call evolving laws. They move first and will always keep changing.

Since the first guidance as compare to the current ones, there's significant change both for the SSHD and for US.

HO as usual has made v7 of the guardians so much complicated that even most people can not follow. Bear in mind that guidance should be easily followed because it gives advise and it is an advice to make the system work out of the law.

So if the guidance is now looking like the Parliamentary laws then it is not fit for purpose. Companies are taken to the courts for labelling complicatedly. Why not the HO.

Let us explore the laws together for all and sundry. Laws are ideas and arguments.

[Chris90]

Hi all,
Happy to see this here still providing hope.
The reason why I am posting is as followed

Home office is bound to follow all laws, regulations and anyone can successfully challenge any refusal decision if it was successful challenge before in the courts (caselaws). If your case has the same or similar material facts of cases heard by the courts it is likely to succeed if you argue your case correctly.

For those who had no leave under APPENDIX FM , especially if you have never held it , home office has no lawful right to refuse your claim if you meet the requirements of a Zambrano carer.

For those who currently hold leave under APPENDIX FM this case is slightly different and not as strong as those without it, however it is still challengeable if done correctly.

Remove the fear you may have of home office powers and it may become a little easier to battle with them. PLEASE REMEMBER THE LAWS ARE NOT JUST THERE TO PROTECT HOME OFFICE and this is why they do not turn up to defend every case in court.

Please keep in mind if shah did accept home office view and not challenge them on their decision, most would not even have a legal argument.

Keep in mind home office has no power to tell an applicant which route to apply for. If you meet the requirements of any route and you apply for it, you should get it if not ALWAYS APPEAL. In some cases you may have to go judicial review.

People PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, DO NOT EXPECT HOME OFFICE TO BECOME COMPASSIONATE suddenly when exercising their duty in controlling immigration numbers.

Snooky was successful not because of compassion of home office but the backing of the court's. He is helpful and accurate in his approach. DRF1 is where you have the power to assert your rights of derivative residence.. Settlement scheme will not be in your favour without first establishing your right of residence under EEA DRF1 application and even if it does it will be rare as each case will have different circumstances.

If you have submitted a DRF1 application and have not received any COA, request one here:
nweurocoarequests@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

If you are concerned about the lack of decision, search the gov.uk for the standardized pap (pre-action protocol) letter, fill it out and email it to home office if you consider judicial review.

With all that said and done it won't be easy but it is certainly achievable if you follow the steps.

[snooky]

Hi all,
Happy to see this here still providing hope.
The reason why I am posting is as followed

Home office is bound to follow all laws, regulations and anyone can successfully challenge any refusal decision if it was successful challenge before in the courts (caselaws). If your case has the same or similar material facts of cases heard by the courts it is likely to succeed if you argue your case correctly.

For those who had no leave under APPENDIX FM , especially if you have never held it , home office has no lawful right to refuse your claim if you meet the requirements of a Zambrano carer.

For those who currently hold leave under APPENDIX FM this case is slightly different and not as strong as those without it, however it is still challengeable if done correctly.

Remove the fear you may have of home office powers and it may become a little easier to battle with them. PLEASE REMEMBER THE LAWS ARE NOT JUST THERE TO PROTECT HOME OFFICE and this is why they do not turn up to defend every case in court.

Please keep in mind if shah did accept home office view and not challenge them on their decision, most would not even have a legal argument.

Keep in mind home office has no power to tell an applicant which route to apply for. If you meet the requirements of any route and you apply for it, you should get it if not ALWAYS APPEAL. In some cases you may have to go judicial review.

People PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, DO NOT EXPECT HOME OFFICE TO BECOME COMPASSIONATE suddenly when exercising their duty in controlling immigration numbers.

Snooky was successful not because of compassion of home office but the backing of the court's. He is helpful and accurate in his approach. DRF1 is where you have the power to assert your rights of derivative residence.. Settlement scheme will not be in your favour without first establishing your right of residence under EEA DRF1 application and even if it does it will be rare as each case will have different circumstances.

If you have submitted a DRF1 application and have not received any COA, request one here:
nweurocoarequests@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

If you are concerned about the lack of decision, search the gov.uk for the standardized pap (pre-action protocol) letter, fill it out and email it to home office if you consider judicial review.

With all that said and done it won't be easy but it is certainly achievable if you follow the steps.

Welcome,

Happy to see you post.
Your advise is well taken and previous contributions are golden.

Do not let this be the last, come offen so that people can have hope,

We need facts not fiction
We need deeds not promises

The world is running out of time so do Zambrano Applications running out of patience.

Enough of HO abuse and contempt given to the Articles, Regulations, Wider Laws and Precedents.

The amended aspects of the Guidance when read in their entirety and in conjunction with the caselaw it seeks to rely upon, have never made any sense and on publication months ago, appeared to have been hurriedly drafted, imposed upon the public, with Home Office decision-makers doggedly and blindly applying it to refuse Zambrano applications.

Despite strong contentions to the effect that the amended Policy Guidance did not accurately reflect the Court of Appeal decision in Patel v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 2028 nor the EEA Regulations, applications are refused just since that submission in 2019.

I can't understand why HO thinks their guidance is law and supersedes statute laws.

Guidance policy or Advice note should reflect the law. But this is the case HO's is not and no one is complaining.

HO is in contempt. The time has come for 2 May guidance be torn off and new done to reflect the regulations and the supreme court Patel ruling.

[Ngoo]

Snooky

Welcome back
Is good to have you back in the forum, you brought the confidence and spirit back to all of us.

@1ST,
Thanks for your help. You are right! Snooky has brought back the confidence and courage that we needed in the forum. @ Snooky, welcome back once again.

[LULUBABY]

Personally I think is nothing to loose if you apply again,as Snooky has previously Is better to make a new application as is free. Pls senior members advice

It is everything to lose. You don't have a lot of time left. When you apply for the scheme via a route, you should know why you are eligible. If you just keep applying to the scheme, hoping to be approved on one, without a real understanding of why you should be approved, you may wake up one day and find that the Home Office has changed its mind. Moreover, you won't even know how to challenge their decision. The best option is to choose a path that you feel strongly you are eligible for, and fight for it.

It is not a good idea to follow people blindly - unless they are willing to pay the price to represent you if something goes wrong. You should always try and have at least a basic understanding of what is happening and why.

Well said forney, truly we were following blindly ,now we have been stock inthe middle of the sea. Someone who was really giving us directives, advices because of a little misunderstanding, the person backs out. I got two assumptions;
- Either the person have seen that there is no way forward to help or the directives he or she gave was wrong, or
- the person is forecasting lots of refusal and trying to run away from the way forward and not ready to defend his or her advice concerning the EEA drf1 card and don't want to be face with such embarrassment and now decided to quit despite all the plea and a mistake from one member. That is really inhuman seeing your neighbour's dieing and u prefer to sit quiet inthe name of angry.

Though one was not obliged to advice,was just a freewill as no one is paying, but you don't just leave people in jeopardy like that. Instead, God will never forgive anyone who does that type of acts.

Please no one should misunderstand me just being frustrated.


Also is funny mubashi1981 who was here and all of us tried to see into his application for help, is not even there to help people based on his or her experience. Minds of people
Thanks
[/quote

@Second Part of Today's Post (@those that are refused based on)

Judge’s conclusions

The First Tier Tribunal Judge made the following findings in allowing the appeal:

Having regard to the totality of evidence, there was no dispute/challenge in the refusal decision that both Appellants are joint primary carers of a British citizen child.

There was no dispute that the British Citizen child is residing in the United Kingdom.

Furthermore, there was no dispute that the British Citizen child would not be able to continue to reside in the United Kingdom or in another EEA state if the Appellants left the United Kingdom for an indefinite period.

Accordingly, the Judge was satisfied that the Appellants met the criteria under Regulation 16(5) of the EEA Regulations.

The Judge stated that the Policy relied upon by the Secretary of State does not appear to be accurate in law. It does not represent a true reflection of the Court of Appeal judgement.

This conclusion is also apparent from the subsequent Supreme Court consideration of the case.
The Judge concluded that the reality was the Appellants made an application under the EEA Regulations and on the evidence before the Tribunal, they met the criteria under Regulation 16(5)of the EEA Regulations. As such they were entitled to succeed in their appeal under the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2016.

All these are with you already

Hi Sebel, how are you?. Hope ok. Permit me to use words, “Please no one should misunderstand me just being frustrated”.

My child knows I am always following posts on this forum to get information for my ‘papers’ and I usually speak out and lash out (depending on the post) after reading.

My child at times sees my write up’s for my defence, I usually highlight stuff (Snooky this, Mubashir1981, IST this, page this, page that etc).

I read your previous post to my 7 year old and just want to share my child’s reaction to what you wrote.

“What?. That’s not nice, that’s rude mummy?. Why did she say that to ‘Uncle Snooky’.
I told him my child I don’t know if Snooky is Uncle or Aunty. “Seriously, mummy?”.

Afterwards I asked my child what you should do if you saw those people you said all those things about.

My child replied me that you should say “Oopsy, only joking, sorryyyyy”.

Minds of children.