Complex Application Email -- Some questions

[anxiousapplicant25]

Hi guys,

Applied for ILR through Innovator (Tier 1) route, super-priority on March 8th.

My lawyer has been following up with Home Office, who informed them on the 20th that my application was (finally) under consideration. On the 24th, I got the dread especially complex email.

My questions are as follows:

Do we think that this means that my application is 'moving forward'? I know we can't predict timelines, but so many of my business decisions are very much related to my visa status, and I am wondering whether anyone's received a refusal or approval shortly after the complex email?

If the home office want further documentation, how soon after this do I get an email asking for this?

Why am I only getting this email now (as opposed to when I first applied)?

Not sure if this is the right forum post, but any info much appreciated.

[zimba]

This is pretty normal. Applying under super-priority is not advised for complex applications or routes like Tier 1. ILR under these routes often requires a detailed look into your business and the nature of work which is not possible in a very short timeframe. Tier 1 has the 'genuineness test' which you must pass before ILR is granted. A quick decision is only possible in some cases. For most applicants, this usually takes from several weeks to several months. No one can tell you what to expect as each application and business is unique.

[anxiousapplicant25]

Hi Zimba,

Thank you for this. I was under the impression that the 'genuineness' would have been validated by the Endorsing body, as opposed to having to 're-start' from the Home Office.

I suppose the issue is that it is very difficult running a business not knowing whether you will be in the country or not in the near future, as this obviously affects business direction.

[zimba]

Your business will be looked at and will be tested to see if it is genuine and innovative. Endorsing bodies cannot verify that you kept working under those conditions. You can stay in the UK and work under your specific visa as long as you have a visa or an in-time pending application. Applying for ILR is your own choice and hence you will be subject to the requirements under the rules for settlement. As I mentioned this is the norm under all business-related routes, so do not stress it much.

[anxiousapplicant25]

Hi guys,

Fast forward, I was asked for further documents on May 4th, which I provided on the eve of May 5th.

These documents were basic, a few contracts between my co-founder and I, as well as all of our bank statements. I was happy to provide these.

It's now been almost 3 weeks with no emails, and I am starting to get anxious. I know that we can't predict HO decisions or timeframes, but I am just wondering whether being asked for these additional documents is a good sign/bad sign, if there's anything I can do to potentially expedite (my MP isn't helpful -- is there a number I can call or email?)

[zimba]

There is no useful advice that can be given here. The circumstances of your case are not known to any of us here. Your evaluation of your case is also not important or relevant as this is up to the UKVI. As advised before, you should wait to hear back. Please note that you should expect a longer waiting time than just a few weeks. There is no process to expedite your application as UKVI does not hold on to your case just to mess with you. When they are done with their investigations, they will get back to you

[anxiousapplicant25]

Hi team,

My ILR was rejected but I would like to apply for administrative review.

I believe that the Case Worker did not look at the business plan closely enough, and rejected me on grounds that the Endorsing Body never raised as being an issue.

Do you know if you can re-submit evidence as part of administrative review? What does the form even look like?

[CR001]

Can you post the text of the refusal, taking out any personal information. Impossible for anyone to advise unless you post the exact refusal reasons etc.

Admin review is when you believe UKVI has made an error. You can't submit new evidence. Admin review will consider the evidence when you applied and the reasons for refusal.

[anxiousapplicant25]

Paragraphs INN 22.1. and INN 22.1D. of Appendix of Innovator of the Immigration Rules state:
INN 22.1. If the decision maker is satisfied all the suitability and eligibility
requirements for settlement are met the applicant will be granted settlement.
INN 22.1D. If the decision maker is not satisfied that the applicant meets all the
suitability and eligibility requirements for settlement or permission to stay, the
application for settlement will be refused.

Based on the licensing agreement you have provided, the similarities between [X] (My business) and [Y] my cofounder business (Separate) and [Your cofounders] involvement with your business as both a shareholder and director, I am not satisfied that you have created a genuine, original business plan that meets new or existing market needs and/or creates a competitive advantage over existing businesses and therefore I am not satisfied you meet the suitability and eligibility requirements for settlement of Appendix Innovator.

While you may relevant qualifications and experience in the field and you have provided evidence that you business has been actively trading, your business is still based off of a business plan for an already active and trading business. That fact that [Your Cofounder] was not only a shareholder in your business but was also being paid a significant percentage of your business revenue confirms that xxxxxx existed simply as an extension of her original business and that you were meeting business needs that had already been met by her own business.


My rebuttal:

Endorsing body was aware of this and continued endorsement.
Although we did use the company brand, we created a company in a different sector, offering a different ask to clients and counsellors alike (our business strategy and organisational strategy pivoted to address this new market)
Our business addresses the market segment which was not being captured by my co-founder's existing business
Our licensing agreement allowed us to ensure that best clinical practice was implemented

All of this was in our endorsing body's letter -- they have expressed surprise at this outcome, and are drafting a letter addressing these points. Would this be able to be added to an admin review?

I can't offer more information unfortunately around the nuances of the above arguments because of privacy.

[zimba]

It looks like UKVI's main concern is mostly about the heavy involvement of other individuals with active business (in a very similar field and market) in your line of work. The fact that they are involved and gain financially from your business may suggest that your business is not really unique or innovative but simply an extension of an already established business. The rules require that your business should be innovative in that regard, rather than closely replicating another business model.

Note that the view the endorsing body may take on your business may not simply be enough to satisfy the requirement under the rules. Simply saying the two businesses are involved in different sectors may not be enough as you also need to justify why those individuals with very similar interests and business models are so involved in your business.

[anxiousapplicant25]

Understood ZImba, so you think the question here is actually why is my cofounder so interested in my business? Could we not make an argument that she did not have the time nor the capacity to address another gap in the market, and that I had the time to do so/grow the business?

[zimba]

Yes. You need to demonstrate that your business is innovative on its own. The fact that you are following/replicating a very similar and already established business (whose owner also happens to be a director/shareholder in your business) undermines your claim for having an 'innovative' business.

[Ganesh95]

Paragraphs INN 22.1. and INN 22.1D. of Appendix of Innovator of the Immigration Rules state:
INN 22.1. If the decision maker is satisfied all the suitability and eligibility
requirements for settlement are met the applicant will be granted settlement.
INN 22.1D. If the decision maker is not satisfied that the applicant meets all the
suitability and eligibility requirements for settlement or permission to stay, the
application for settlement will be refused.

Based on the licensing agreement you have provided, the similarities between [X] (My business) and [Y] my cofounder business (Separate) and [Your cofounders] involvement with your business as both a shareholder and director, I am not satisfied that you have created a genuine, original business plan that meets new or existing market needs and/or creates a competitive advantage over existing businesses and therefore I am not satisfied you meet the suitability and eligibility requirements for settlement of Appendix Innovator.

While you may relevant qualifications and experience in the field and you have provided evidence that you business has been actively trading, your business is still based off of a business plan for an already active and trading business. That fact that [Your Cofounder] was not only a shareholder in your business but was also being paid a significant percentage of your business revenue confirms that xxxxxx existed simply as an extension of her original business and that you were meeting business needs that had already been met by her own business.


My rebuttal:

Endorsing body was aware of this and continued endorsement.
Although we did use the company brand, we created a company in a different sector, offering a different ask to clients and counsellors alike (our business strategy and organisational strategy pivoted to address this new market)
Our business addresses the market segment which was not being captured by my co-founder's existing business
Our licensing agreement allowed us to ensure that best clinical practice was implemented

All of this was in our endorsing body's letter -- they have expressed surprise at this outcome, and are drafting a letter addressing these points. Would this be able to be added to an admin review?

I can't offer more information unfortunately around the nuances of the above arguments because of privacy.

Hi, were you given the option by which the application will be varied by the Secretary of State to extend your leave as innovator founder for further three years? Thanks.

[anxiousapplicant25]

No, I was not

[waltercho]

Hi anxiousapplicant25

Can you please update on your application status?
I am also an innovator visa holder and would like to prepare myself for all possible scenarios
Thanks

[anxiousapplicant25]

Hi,

My visa was rejected. I applied for admin review and now transferred to a skilled worker visa.