Extension for child over 18

[maniani]

One of mine friend got his wife and 16 year son in UK in September 2012 under Appendix FM rules and now his son is over 18 and the visa is going to expire. His son work as full time salaried employed but unmarried. Now, I want to will his son qualify under FLR(M) to extend his visa with his mother. If his wife and son extended visa for another 2 and half year and later his wife will be eligible for ILR under SET(M), then will his son able to get ILR. If possible, which form will be correct for his son?

[maniani]

any advice please.

[SoHopeful]

As his son was 16 at the time of the initial application he can follow the same process as his mother.

[vinny]

Be careful of

The applicant must not be leading an independent life

.

[maniani]

Be careful of

The applicant must not be leading an independent life

.

The child is Self-employed. Will this consider as independent life?

[vinny]

Please click on any given links for further information.

[maniani]

Please click on any given links for further information.

Sorry, the child is full time employed. I have seen this paragraph i introduction to immigration rules:-

"must not be leading an independent life" "must not be leading an independent life" or "is not leading an independent life" means that the applicant does not have a partner as defined in Appendix FM; is living with their parents (except where they are at boarding school, college or university as part of their full-time education); is not employed full-time (unless aged 18 years or over); is wholly or mainly dependent upon their parents for financial support (unless aged 18 years or over); and is wholly or mainly dependent upon their parents for emotional support. Where a relative other than a parent may act as the sponsor of the applicant, references in this definition to “parents” shall be read as applying to that other relative.

[/quote]

Is this also apply on for ILR application for child over 18?

[maniani]

Please click on any given links for further information.

Sorry, the child is full time employed. I have seen this paragraph i introduction to immigration rules:-

"must not be leading an independent life" "must not be leading an independent life" or "is not leading an independent life" means that the applicant does not have a partner as defined in Appendix FM; is living with their parents (except where they are at boarding school, college or university as part of their full-time education); is not employed full-time (unless aged 18 years or over); is wholly or mainly dependent upon their parents for financial support (unless aged 18 years or over); and is wholly or mainly dependent upon their parents for emotional support. Where a relative other than a parent may act as the sponsor of the applicant, references in this definition to “parents” shall be read as applying to that other relative.

Is this also apply on for ILR application for child over 18?[/quote]

Any suggestion vinny.

[vinny]

Thanks for pointing out the changes to the Immigration rules. I had forgotten about that.

[Obie]

It seems like its effect is on the Under 18, as opposed to the over 18s . That is my reading. Dont make much sense though, does it Vinny?

[vinny]

Yes. You are right! The "unless" implies that full-employment is allowed for ages 18 years or over. Strange requirement. However, this is in line with the previous judgments.

[Obie]

It brings us back to the default position. Your original advise was spot on and should not have been disturbed.

However, on a different note, it makes little sense how a 16 years old could be disadvantaged for working but an 18 years old will not.

Wonder what goes on in the minds of the drafter of these rules.

[vinny]

I guess we have to watch out in case they change the wording from "unless" to "if".

[Obie]

I recon it is an error in drafting and they will change it soon when they notice.

It will not be the first.

[vinny]

Who knows? Perhaps the drafters had intended it this way.

Until they change the rules, one may say that it's consistent with the earlier judgments and removes doubt that full-employment for dependent children ages 18 or over is allowed.

[maniani]

Who knows? Perhaps the drafters had intended it this way.

Until they change the rules, one may say that it's consistent with the earlier judgments and removes doubt that full-employment for dependent children ages 18 or over is allowed.

Ok so there is no problem in full time working for the child over 18?

[vinny]

Apparently.

[maniani]

Dear Vinny,

the child is now 17 year 10 months and is full time employed. He is going to apply for extension of visa with FLR(M) with his mother at PEO Croydon. Will full time employment create a problem for him?

[vinny]

As Obie pointed out, being under 18 and in full-time employment may be a problem (from the way the definition/rule is worded)!

[maniani]

Is child able to apply for ILR after five year FLR(M) as the mother is unable to pass B1 and Life in the UK?

[vinny]

No. D-LTRC.1.1 is subject to 298, which is subject to 298(i).

[maniani]

No. D-LTRC.1.1 is subject to 298, which is subject to 298(i).

As the mother will apply for ILR on SET(M), what form will be correct for child over 18? Will it be SET(F) or SET(O).

[vinny]

Your child 18 or over must apply separately on their own form. They need to download and complete form SET(F).

[maniani]

Your child 18 or over must apply separately on their own form. They need to download and complete form SET(F).

If the wife is unable to pass Life in the UK and B1 English test, how many she and her son can renew visa under FLR(M)?

[maniani]

Dear Vinny

If the wife is unable to pass Life in the UK and B1 English test, how many she and her son can renew visa under FLR(M)?