Appeal fees from October 2011

[Kitty]

Fees for immigration appeals from October:

http://freemovement.wordpress.com/2011/ ... m-october/

[mulderpf]

I think this is absolutely brilliant. Too many people seem to do a sloppy job in their applications and actually rely on appeals to have their applications approved. It is another crackdown on a "route" which has been abused which I think is brilliant.

I know this might be a gross generalisation, but I remember watching an episode of Border Force where I think it was student who could barely speak English was refused entry (because obviously he didn't qualify for the visa due to his bad English) - despite the fact that his English was so terrible, he immediately uttered the term "appeal, appeal!!".

It almost appears that some people know the appeal process better than the application process. Terrible generalisation, but just great news to hear that the government is finally doing something about abuses.

[Mk2010]

I think this is absolutely rubbish. Too many ECOs seem to do a sloppy job by refusing many genuine immigrant applications and actually rely on immigration judge at appeals to have their applications approved. It is another act from government to cook up those poor immigrant and abusing some of their rights to be with their dependent, father, mother etc.

Over 50% of appeal were successful shows that UKBA is incompetent to make a right decision in the first place. People wasted months or years of their life time because of their incompetency. This is absolutely outrageous.

[thebionicredneck2003]

Mulderpf,

I do agree that people make what you call "sloppy applications" and have to depend on appeals for approval, but on the flip side, is it fair that when a case worker has made a human error, that the applicant should pay for this mistake in addition to his/her visa application fee?

Seems to me that there is a grey area that has to be considered to ensure that there is some fairness in such cases.

[Kitty]

Given the length of time that the appeals process takes, I would be surprised if many people actually made a "sloppy application" simply on the basis that they could always just appeal.

If the quality of decision-making by ECOs was high, and consistent worldwide, then I would have less of a problem with this measure. AS things stand, I would rather UKBA got its house in order first.

Visa fees have rised rapidly recently, in excess of the processing costs. People who are appealing have often already paid handsomely for their application.

[Greenie]

I agree with Kitty.

Mulderpf to say that appealing a decision that has been refused it a 'route that has been abused' is absurd. Have you ever heard of 'access to justice'?

I suppose if you base your opinions on the UK immigration system on watching UK Border Force, one of the most unbalanced and propoganda like programmes on British television, we shouldn't be surprised.

[mulderpf]

As I said, I know that at least a part of my view is a gross generalisation and I understand that Border Force is there for entertainment and definitely not a representation of daily life at the UK borders (we are probably only shown the 1% which contribute to "entertainment value").

That said, some of my views are also based on people's comments on here and some conversations I've had with people. While I accept that maybe the majority of people do not rely on the appeal process, there is definitely an element of that (come on, we are all reading the same questions on the forum here where one of the most common questions about appeals is whether they can submit additional information - if they did a proper job in the first place, why would additional information be necessary.)

I am not saying scrap the process altogether, because there are mistakes made (however, same as the "abuse" I was talking about, this is definitely not in the majority of cases) - it is to stop people from automatically just shouting "well, what about an appeal?". It should not be an automatic response unless you know you won't be wasting someone's time. At the moment the sentiment is always, "why don't you appeal, you have nothing to lose!".

It should be appeal if you know you will succeed, otherwise your money will go down the drain.

Personally, I would have preferred a system whereby you have to pay £250 to appeal and if the decision is over-turned, you get your money back; but you can imagine what an admin nightmare it will be to start processing refunds.

This isn't a perfect solution, but will hopefully change the view of people that they should automatically appeal if they are not happy with a decision.

[koborim]

Given the length of time that the appeals process takes, I would be surprised if many people actually made a "sloppy application" simply on the basis that they could always just appeal.

If the quality of decision-making by ECOs was high, and consistent worldwide, then I would have less of a problem with this measure. AS things stand, I would rather UKBA got its house in order first.

Visa fees have rised rapidly recently, in excess of the processing costs. People who are appealing have often already paid handsomely for their application.

I agree with you here. With the sheer amount that immigrants have to pay for each application, I would question who would actually submit something that they did not look through with care.
I'm also sure that for every supposed 'sloppy application', there is a solid and convincing application that gets turned down.

There is no smoke without fire, so the few careless individuals are costing the other good individuals dearly.
The government are using these careless individuals as an excuse to swindle more money off the immigrants.

[mulderpf]

From Unnecessary immigration appeals to end:

UK Border Agency statistics show that around two-thirds of appeals allowed by immigration judges are due to late evidence being submitted.

The rules change is designed to end unnecessary appeals and help make sure that applications are right first time. It will apply to all applicants applying from within the UK through the points-based system.

And whilst I know there are many people who will say that the figures are probably skewed (and I don't necessarily disagree with them), it does point out that it's a big issue.

[Greenie]

From Unnecessary immigration appeals to end:

UK Border Agency statistics show that around two-thirds of appeals allowed by immigration judges are due to late evidence being submitted.

The rules change is designed to end unnecessary appeals and help make sure that applications are right first time. It will apply to all applicants applying from within the UK through the points-based system.

And whilst I know there are many people who will say that the figures are probably skewed (and I don't necessarily disagree with them), it does point out that it's a big issue.

the problem is UKBA produce 'policy' which they rely on as 'law' and this policy dictates what documents they deem to be acceptable to prove that someone meets the rules. An applicant may produce another document which most reasonable people think is perfectly good evidnece they meet the rules but the UKBA does not. The policy is not always clear on what documents are required. In addition they change the policy whenever thy feel like it and apply it regardless of when the application was made.

UKBA don't even bother to turn up to most PBS appeals these days I wonder if this is so they can spend their time coming up with these 'statistics'.

[Mk2010]

From Unnecessary immigration appeals to end:

UK Border Agency statistics show that around two-thirds of appeals allowed by immigration judges are due to late evidence being submitted.

The rules change is designed to end unnecessary appeals and help make sure that applications are right first time. It will apply to all applicants applying from within the UK through the points-based system.

And whilst I know there are many people who will say that the figures are probably skewed (and I don't necessarily disagree with them), it does point out that it's a big issue.

Normal sane people would not want to go for the appeal. When visa applications were refused most applicants would be heartwrenching. Many of them would have to endure a long waiting process time and fees that goes up rapidly, stringent rules etc. An appeal is there to correct wrongdoing as part of natural justice of this democratic country.

Take for example, current appeal process for settlement case which normally takes 10-12 months to get things right! Do you really believe it is fair for someone spouse to be separated for such long time because some officer can not make a reasonable decision at a time? How can those officer sleep at night? Immigrant or not.. it is people lifeee!

The message here is quite clear, the paranoid government want to cut immigrant at any possible way.

Down with Green and Conservative! boooo

[mulderpf]

Yeah, but hopefully this will force people to apply correctly and with the correct decision. I mentioned people doing a sloppy job on their applications and this is meant to stop people from doing that. Look around on this forum - you have people who apply when they don't have all the documentation ready and then want to post it subsequent to their application (this ranges from IELTS certificates to NARIC certificates, bank statements, proof of accountant affiliations etc).

All this causes a tremendous amount of rework and by allowing this to go on for so long, means that the backlogs are just getting bigger and bigger, because of the attitude of "automatic appeal" so many people have. Do you honestly think that appeal decisions are deliberately held back simply to waste people's time? Have you never considered that maybe so much time is wasted in rework that it's just impossible to keep up.

By cutting the "demand" for appeals, might actually see some improvement in terms of waiting times. And the reason for the stringent rules is to help this process along, but because people are not sticking to it, it just makes matter worse.

[Kitty]

Yeah, but hopefully this will force people to apply correctly and with the correct decision...

I don't think charging fees for appeals will do anything to improve decision-making. There is the question of appellants being awarded costs, but that rather depends on the view of the judge.

I do think that fees will discourage people from appealing. As a by-product it may well reduce waiting-times in the appeals system, but it doesn't do anything for access to justice.

And the "sloppy" applications you refer to are often made by people who simply failed to refer to things like the ECG or IDIs. We often direct people to these documents when they come to the forum for advice, but it's not immediately obvious that an applicant should refer to the UKBA's internal guidelines.

[mulderpf]

Don't read one half of what I'm saying. I'm saying, people will be forced to be more careful and apply correctly the first time (e.g. correct documentation) as they cannot now just rely on having a second chance to correct their mistakes. If you apply with the correct documentation, chances are much higher that the decision will be in your favour than if you apply with the incorrect documentation, hoping that you can collect some extra stuff later and submit it after the fact.

[Kitty]

Don't read one half of what I'm saying.

I read the whole statement. I just thought the reference to "the correct decision" merited a response.

I'm saying, people will be forced to be more careful and apply correctly the first time (e.g. correct documentation) as they cannot now just rely on having a second chance to correct their mistakes.

I understand your point; I just don't agree with you. Anyway, people can still "rely" on an appeal if they are willing to pony up the appeal fee. The introduction of fees simply restricts appeals to people who can afford it. It says nothing about the merit of the appeal.

If you apply with the correct documentation, chances are much higher that the decision will be in your favour than if you apply with the incorrect documentation, hoping that you can collect some extra stuff later and submit it after the fact.

I agree with this in general, but I think you overestimate the number of people who actually do apply with the intention of relying on an appeal.

If the quality of decision-making at certain diplomatic posts were higher, and if there were more consistent guidance for applicants, I might have a different opinion. The UKBA's priorities should lie in these areas.

[mulderpf]

I understand where you are coming from, however, I have this need to just point out something for you to see my point of view (don't expect you to agree though):

When I talk about people relying on an appeal, I'm not talking about people applying with the specific intention of having to go the appeal route, I'm talking about people "carelessly" applying and thinking that if things go wrong, they can always fall back on the appeal.

If the figure of two-thirds can be considered correct, it would mean that 2/3rds of people applied with incorrect or insufficient documents to start off with.

Conversely, I'll point out on your behalf that it means that 1/3 of initial decisions were wrong - and it would be a very valid argument. However, please note that only about 35% of appeals have the original decision over-turned. So that means that 33% of 35% of all decisions are considered to be wrong (bear in mind though that during an appeal, you can often invoke other parts of immigration law which is not available to you during your application). That means that approximately 11% of rejection decisions are over-turned without the submission of new evidence. That is far from a large majority of cases and also, we do not know how many of these decisions are as the result of other factors being considered (e.g. on humanitarian basis etc). That leaves 89% of all appeals which are either dismissed or allowed because of new evidence...

As I said, this isn't perfect, but definitely a step in the right direction to "clean-up" the immigration system and get things flowing, rather than constantly having to go back and redo work that's been done already.

[Mk2010]

I understand where you are coming from, however, I have this need to just point out something for you to see my point of view (don't expect you to agree though):

When I talk about people relying on an appeal, I'm not talking about people applying with the specific intention of having to go the appeal route, I'm talking about people "carelessly" applying and thinking that if things go wrong, they can always fall back on the appeal.

If the figure of two-thirds can be considered correct, it would mean that 2/3rds of people applied with incorrect or insufficient documents to start off with.

Conversely, I'll point out on your behalf that it means that 1/3 of initial decisions were wrong - and it would be a very valid argument. However, please note that only about 35% of appeals have the original decision over-turned. So that means that 33% of 35% of all decisions are considered to be wrong (bear in mind though that during an appeal, you can often invoke other parts of immigration law which is not available to you during your application). That means that approximately 11% of rejection decisions are over-turned without the submission of new evidence. That is far from a large majority of cases and also, we do not know how many of these decisions are as the result of other factors being considered (e.g. on humanitarian basis etc). That leaves 89% of all appeals which are either dismissed or allowed because of new evidence...

As I said, this isn't perfect, but definitely a step in the right direction to "clean-up" the immigration system and get things flowing, rather than constantly having to go back and redo work that's been done already.

Don't you start with cleaning up immigration system or the paranoidgovernment trying to clean up immigrant in this country?
Not all immigrants coming here are to exploit this sod country. How about immigration from Europe whose some are here .. unemployed, fraud, on benefits yet the government seem unable to control.

How about local people whose cheat the benefit system on the expense of hardworking tax payer like myself. The government need to acts accordingly not to get oversensitive with immigration. Immigrants are just small minority of the whole population.

[mulderpf]

Not all immigrants coming here are to exploit this sod country.

I should know, I'm an immigrant.