EC rejected - what are my chances in the Admin Review?

[kara]

Hi everyone,

My Tier 1 (General) EC was refused for 2 reasons:
1. on Past Earnings - ECO says
"You have submitted a breakdown of your claimed income from your employer, however you have provided no supporting evidence to corroborate that these payments have been made and received."
2. On Maintenance - ECO says:
"Your bank passbook shows that your account balance stood at Rs. 219978.37 on 9/7/08. Consequently you have not shown that you have maintained the required amount of 2800 pounds throughout this period."

I work online doing writing projects for an employer in the US and fortnightly payments in dollars are credited directly into my bank account in rupees by wire transfer. With my original application, I submitted (a) a letter from employer attesting that I'm employed with them since 2005 (b) a consolidated payslip for the period August 2007-2008, reflecting each payment, bonus/fines and net amount paid (and also my name and writer ID) (c) bank pass book showing all credits into my account (d) a letter from my bank stating that I have been receiving regular fortnightly payments in dollars into my account and listing the amounts (e) in my cover letter, I also provided my writer website, login ID and password because my writer panel has all my work, payments made, my profile, etc. Isn't that enough "evidence?"

For the maintenance requirement, I also had ADDITIONALLY, apart from my pass book balance, an FD for 1.45 lakhs and I have provided a letter from the bank stating that I could liquidate it at any time. I also mentioned this FD in my application and cover letter but the ECO appears to have totally ignored it, as well as wage payments shown as credits in my passbook .

I have applied for Admin Review stating that I have provided supporting evidence for earnings and mentioned (a) to (e) above. I have also explained about the FD.

Guys, what are my chances in the Admin Review and is it worth going for one in my case? I'm submitting it today.

Thanks in advance for your responses and for taking the time,

Kara.

[kara]

Please let me know if anyone can figure out what the ECO's reasoning was or what rule I've violated!

I'm at my wits end, trying to figure out what on earth was the problem and why the application didn't go through, despite all the effort taken to provide documentation and proof.

Could anyone let me know what your time lines have been on receiving a response from the Mumbai BHC on your admin Review application? I'm thinking about filing another Tier 1 application, because it may be faster, but if I have to file another application, I need to know where I went wrong at least!

Any ideas, anyone? Any advise or suggestions ot feedback would be much appreciated!

[cooolz]

It seems that Home office is not accepting proof for funds from Fixed Deposits.

See here

[themagger]

I think FD is not the problem here, FD proof was Kara's additional document. I have a sincere concern here over ECO's assessment. ECO has mentioned that, the bank passbook had XXXX balance on the last date, as far as i knw, passbooks show all the transactions made and consequently show the value of minimum balance maintained during the period. and regarding the first point Kara's passbook must be showing the deposit of Kara's fortnightly salary. So there is corroboration also, employer+bank, two different sources of evidence of income.
Also, regarding maintenance funds, In the guidance documet itself, BIA has mentioned that, for maintenance funds proof, we can EITHER submit a passbook OR a bank statement OR a letter from the bank clarifying that min balance during the 3 months was above XXX. So ideally if the min balance in the passbook was aboce 2800 GBP, it can't be rejected.

Senior members please shed some light...

[kara]

hello themagger,

I really appreciate your response, because frankly, the rejection was really depressing I was pretty sure it would go through successfully. and I just can't understand what I'm missing here, so I'm wondering how to correct the situation if I have to file again......

My last transaction date in my bank pass book was on 26th September, I submitted my application on 29th September. My bank pass book shows all transactions up to that date and the balance went slightly below 2800 pounds only on that one date the ECO mentioned. But I had the FD and also my bank letter stating that it could be cashed out any time and giving the value, so it's not exactly the same situation as stocks or bonds for instance, which it may not be possibe to liquidate immediately.

I should mention though, that the format of my bank's letter was something like, Ms.....'s balance has never fallen below XXX (the amount ECO mentioned) but she has additionally maintained an FD for XXX amount, which was encashable at any time.

And you're absolutely right, all my wages are reflected in my bank pass book because they were credited directly into my account - I've actually highlighted each payment. According to the guidance, they've stated that for proof of earnings, two pieces of evidence could be (a) payslips and (b) bank statements. I've supplied my bank pass book instead, because it's a savings account, the kind where they don't issue regular statements - is this the problem? Is this why the ECO didn't look into it and states that I have not provided "supporting evidence"?

Any insight, suggestions or pointers from anyone would be most welcome!

Thanks again for your response - and I will surely post the results of the Admin Review when I receive it, to let everyone know how it goes.

Kara

[kara]

Hello everyone,

I'm very happy to report that my Admin Review request was successful and the earlier refusal has been overturned.

Praise the Lord! My good wishes and prayers for everyone else who has applied.

Kara

[abhijack]

Hello everyone,

I'm very happy to report that my Admin Review request was successful and the earlier refusal has been overturned.

Praise the Lord! My good wishes and prayers for everyone else who has applied.

Kara

sorry didnt see ur thread earlier..
anyways congrats....enjoy the mighty relief...

[prajapativijay]

Hello everyone,

I'm very happy to report that my Admin Review request was successful and the earlier refusal has been overturned.

Praise the Lord! My good wishes and prayers for everyone else who has applied.

Kara

Hi,

How much time did it take for your Admin Review Process? I would appreciate if you provide exact time for it.

Thanks

[kara]

Hi!

I applied for the Admin Review on October 29th and received my result on December 18.

Kara

[prajapativijay]

Hi!

I applied for the Admin Review on October 29th and received my result on December 18.

Kara

Dear Kara and All,

I had applied on 16th October,2008 for my self and got refusal on 13th November,2008 due to Maintenance Fund. But i got Admin Review chance so i had applied for it on 20th Nov,2008 and got acknowledgment for it on 24th Nov,2008. Now waiting for Admin Review Result. Let me explain my case in detail.

Initially i thought 3 months equal to 90 days hence i had provided Bank Authority letter from 18th July,2008 to 15th October,2008 with 12 month statement. My Bank Balance didn't go below 2.49lac(Equivalent to 3k pound) in those period(90 days). But they gave reason for refusal that on 15th and 17th July Balance was not sufficient and it's true. This was the only reason they gave. Even ECO gave me 85 points for(Education,Past Earnings,Age) and 10 Points for English Language. Even I am still maintaining required balance in my bank account.

I had explain in Covering letter with Admin Review Request form that "Due to Critical project work i could not get leave after 17th October hence i had applied it on 16th Oct,2008, even i am still maintaining required balance in my account(since July 18 to till now) and if you required then i can provide."

Now as per your experience what would be the chances for Admin Review of my Application? Please throw your lights on it.

Thank you,

[push]

The case worker applied the rule correctly. It seems a bit unlikely that you will get a favourable result from Admin Review - but then you dont have anything to lose.

[ramesh1]

I believe there are few people in this forum even got approval with only 90 days. I would appreciate if some one who got approval with 90 days of fund maint respond here it would give us some clear picture about 90days or 3 months.

[push]

The question is - even if they did, how will that help? Can we cite their examples to BHC/HO?

Guidelines say 3 months and not 90 days. They have used month count instead of day count. If we try to interpret the guidelines incorrectly then it is our fault.

Anyways, I have in anycase advised the applicant to file an appeal. Lets hope it gets through.

[ramesh1]

push_hsmp true as per the guidelines it should be 15th july to 15th october is my understanding what if he has provided only bank statements from 18th july to 15th october as already bank letter for him stated that it is 3 months (18th july to 15th october) so it should not be a problem since he provided 12 month statement it gave a chance for the CW?

[push]

push_hsmp true as per the guidelines it should be 15th july to 15th october is my understanding what if he has provided only bank statements from 18th july to 15th october as already bank letter for him stated that it is 3 months (18th july to 15th october) so it should not be a problem since he provided 12 month statement it gave a chance for the CW?

Please note that the member himself has said that he provided letter from Bank from 18th July,2008 to 15th October,2008 and NOT for 3 Calender Months (Bank could not have provided such a letter for "3Month period" as it would have been factually incorrect.

I had provided Bank Authority letter from 18th July,2008 to 15th October,2008 with 12 month statement.

Re the 12 month's statement, I believe the caseworker did look at the statements and as noted by the applicant himself (below) the balance dropped below the requisite levels within the 3 Months period i.e. on 15th and 17th July & hence the rejection.

My Bank Balance didn't go below 2.49lac(Equivalent to 3k pound) in those period(90 days). But they gave reason for refusal that on 15th and 17th July Balance was not sufficient and it's true.

So I am not sure what are you driving at. All I am saying is that the case worker did apply the rules correctly. Re the Admin Review, if BHC takes a slightly lenient view, they might approve the application although I would be a bit skeptical about that.

[prajapativijay]

Hi push_hsmp,

I am agree with your comments. But i have seen lots of people(in this forum) got visa even they maintain balance for around 88 to 90 days as BHC might be lenient on their cases. Hence i have applied on 16th October with 90 days period. Even i could applied on 19th October that way i could have required 3 month balance but did not get leave due to work load thus applied on 16th October.
Even maintenance balance did not go below 3k pound in those 90 days period and got good points(95) in other attributes(Education,Previous Earnings,Age,English Language). I am also maintaining required balance(around 3k pound) in my account till date and ready to provide statement if BHC want(also mentioned in covering letter with review request).

Thank you,

[push]

Hi push_hsmp,

I am agree with your comments. But i have seen lots of people(in this forum) got visa even they maintain balance for around 88 to 90 days as BHC might be lenient on their cases. Hence i have applied on 16th October with 90 days period. Even i could applied on 19th October that way i could have required 3 month balance but did not get leave due to work load thus applied on 16th October.
Even maintenance balance did not go below 3k pound in those 90 days period and got good points(95) in other attributes(Education,Previous Earnings,Age,English Language). I am also maintaining required balance(around 3k pound) in my account till date and ready to provide statement if BHC want(also mentioned in covering letter with review request).

Thank you,

I can understand your pain but all I am saying is, if the rules are applied strictly (which I believe is the case more often than not) then your disqualification is justified. Now that you have already appealed lets wait for the outcome and hope for the best. Lets hope the New Year brings you a good news.

[push]

Additionally:
3 months = 31+28+31= 90 days for Jan Feb March
3 months = 28+31+30= 89 days for Feb March April
3 Months = 31+31+30 = 92 days for July Aug Sept

A possible explanation for the cases that you have cited. Anyways, I wish you luck with your application. Do tell us how it goes.

[ramesh1]

Push that is good note to calcuate the 3 month slot as appropriate when i was browsing a website

http://www.hsmphelphere.com/news_tier1_ ... enance.php

i believe they are consultants for tier-1 it seems they say 90 days.

again i am feeling unfair about the 3 month rule because for different people (based on their 3 month slot) no of days varies as you stated above again as an average 90days (3*30) should be fair deal hmm..but whatever BHC decides is the catch.

to add to the abov consultants many consultants whom i talk to india also states only 90days....very misleading hmm....

[push]

Push that is good note to calcuate the 3 month slot as appropriate when i was browsing a website

http://www.hsmphelphere.com/news_tier1_ ... enance.php

i believe they are consultants for tier-1 it seems they say 90 days.

again i am feeling unfair about the 3 month rule because for different people (based on their 3 month slot) no of days varies as you stated above again as an average 90days (3*30) should be fair deal hmm..but whatever BHC decides is the catch.

to add to the abov consultants many consultants whom i talk to india also states only 90days....very misleading hmm....

It does not matter how we or other consultants interpret the HO's requirement because we/consultants are not going to make a decision on VISA applications. What is important here is the the Caseworker's interpretation of the rule, who clearly seems to think (& I would say rightly so) that 3 months is 3 calendar month and not 90 days. We can continue to argue on the point but can not affect the outcome of a VISA application.


I would advice the member to file an admin review (I think he has already filed one) saying that he interpreted 3 months to mean 90 days and that he continue to maintain the balance a number of days beyond 90 day period. They might show some leniency or be a bit more practical/reasonable and might come back with a positive outcome.

[sv23367]

I would suggest to maintain the balance for atleast 100 days prior to the date of application. When we apply immediately after crossing 90 days there are high chances for rejection.

[push]

I would suggest to maintain the balance for atleast 100 days prior to the date of application. When we apply immediately after crossing 90 days there are high chances for rejection.

Sounds prudent but we are discussing a case where someone submitted statement covering 90 days and got a rejection.

[push]

Push that is good note to calcuate the 3 month slot as appropriate when i was browsing a website

http://www.hsmphelphere.com/news_tier1_ ... enance.php

i believe they are consultants for tier-1 it seems they say 90 days.

again i am feeling unfair about the 3 month rule because for different people (based on their 3 month slot) no of days varies as you stated above again as an average 90days (3*30) should be fair deal hmm..but whatever BHC decides is the catch.

to add to the abov consultants many consultants whom i talk to india also states only 90days....very misleading hmm....

Additionally to put to rest any doubts about this (although I am quoting from a different section (Earnings) of the Guidance Notes, I think it fairly represents HO's approach), please note:

83. All the periods we specify are calendar months (for example 14 January – 13 February).

[prajapativijay]

Push that is good note to calcuate the 3 month slot as appropriate when i was browsing a website

http://www.hsmphelphere.com/news_tier1_ ... enance.php

i believe they are consultants for tier-1 it seems they say 90 days.

again i am feeling unfair about the 3 month rule because for different people (based on their 3 month slot) no of days varies as you stated above again as an average 90days (3*30) should be fair deal hmm..but whatever BHC decides is the catch.

to add to the abov consultants many consultants whom i talk to india also states only 90days....very misleading hmm....

It does not matter how we or other consultants interpret the HO's requirement because we/consultants are not going to make a decision on VISA applications. What is important here is the the Caseworker's interpretation of the rule, who clearly seems to think (& I would say rightly so) that 3 months is 3 calendar month and not 90 days. We can continue to argue on the point but can not affect the outcome of a VISA application.


I would advice the member to file an admin review (I think he has already filed one) saying that he interpreted 3 months to mean 90 days and that he continue to maintain the balance a number of days beyond 90 day period. They might show some leniency or be a bit more practical/reasonable and might come back with a positive outcome.

I got result for Admin Review and Refusal is upheld. so i have applied again as fresh application and got visa this time.
Visa Status:
Application Date: 12-Jan-2009
Visa Stamp Date: 14-Jan-2009 Valid till 14-Jan-2012
Documents and Passport received on 17-Jan-2009

Now, are there any discussion board link for current job market? If yes then can we discuss on that?

Thanks

[ramesh1]

stamped in 2 days and got it in one week? huh..surprising. So no integra check and all those stuffs?