Tier 1 Ent ext refused (caseworker error) Applied for AR

[zimba]

It seems you do not understand the concept of third party at all.
You have failed to answer my question yet: What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?

[wonder17]

Get more advise from Zimba,
If you were company , you couldn't fix this matter.
but sole trader business !!!! I'm not sure.( you need advise)
What did your unaudited account say? does it say the money has been invest by your mother and father?

I have spent all this money into my business from business account. and my account clearly says it all

[wonder17]

It seems you do not understand the concept of third party at all.
You have failed to answer my question yet: What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?

Hi Zimba

I understand you you mean. so you mean this money won't count as investment.

[ukbiz]

My father & mother in law made all the transfers into my business account. But home office accepted all the payment into my business account from my father.
I am sole trader and all the money have come from India into my business account.
I can't see any rule says the third party can't transfer money into my business account. Also is there any rule says that I can't depend on third party funding which I haven't mentioned in the initial application?

thanks

If the money sent by your father equals to 50K then you still have the strong defence in AR, as you fulfilled the minimum investment criteria of 50K and your mother in Law 11K transfers should be discounted anyway and HO should not refuse due to her transactions as she was never a claimed third party as per your initial application !

But the question is was your father'a fund transfer equals to 50K?

[wonder17]

It seems you do not understand the concept of third party at all.
You have failed to answer my question yet: What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?

What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?
Answer: Third party letter is a surety to home office that its our money and ready to invest anytime.
To tell the Home office that we have funds to invest. Once the home office is satisfied with that. then would it matter if we have multiple sources to invest?
Sorry I don't understand this. and for me its clear error from home office as they did before.

Appreciate your time.

[Jazz2007]

It seems you do not understand the concept of third party at all.
You have failed to answer my question yet: What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?

What is the PURPOSE of getting a third party letter from someone if ANYONE can be a third party ?
Answer: Third party letter is a surety to home office that its our money and ready to invest anytime.
To tell the Home office that we have funds to invest. Once the home office is satisfied with that. then would it matter if we have multiple sources to invest?
Sorry I don't understand this. and for me its clear error from home office as they did before.

Appreciate your time.

Ideally, you should have invested via your personal account.Rules require you to invest.

In your case, money invested by declared third party during initial application and accepted by HO.

There is no harm in arguing in AR,

As ukbiz asked, if funds transferred by your declared third party are 50k then you have a strong chance.

[wonder17]

Ideally, you should have invested via your personal account.Rules require you to invest.

In your case, money invested by declared third party during initial application and accepted by HO.

There is no harm in arguing in AR,

As ukbiz asked, if funds transferred by your declared third party are 50k then you have a strong chance.[/quote]

Hi syed
I understand investment from personal account.
In my case all third party transfers are direct into my business account. Home office has no issue with that.
Problem is declared third party funds are no sufficient. so have to rely on second third party funds.
My solicitor said there in no rule that I can't relay on third party funding if not mentioned in initial application. So I have done all however he guided me till now from last 3 years.
Don't know whats right

[wonder17]

My father & mother in law made all the transfers into my business account. But home office accepted all the payment into my business account from my father.
I am sole trader and all the money have come from India into my business account.
I can't see any rule says the third party can't transfer money into my business account. Also is there any rule says that I can't depend on third party funding which I haven't mentioned in the initial application?

thanks

If the money sent by your father equals to 50K then you still have the strong defence in AR, as you fulfilled the minimum investment criteria of 50K and your mother in Law 11K transfers should be discounted anyway and HO should not refuse due to her transactions as she was never a claimed third party as per your initial application !

But the question is was your father'a fund transfer equals to 50K?

Hi
No problem is its not sufficient.

[mohsensari]

as I know in sole trade account, all capital account is belong to the sole owner, as for self-employed Ho didn't mention any thing about bank statement and transfer from you bank account to business bank account and showing your name in guidance (it applied for DL). they just can relay on unauidet account. if capital account shows 50,000 you can argue ( get advise more and dont give up).

[Jazz2007]

Ideally, you should have invested via your personal account.Rules require you to invest.

In your case, money invested by declared third party during initial application and accepted by HO.

There is no harm in arguing in AR,

As ukbiz asked, if funds transferred by your declared third party are 50k then you have a strong chance.

Hi syed
I understand investment from personal account.
In my case all third party transfers are direct into my business account. Home office has no issue with that.
Problem is declared third party funds are no sufficient. so have to rely on second third party funds.
My solicitor said there in no rule that I can't relay on third party funding if not mentioned in initial application. So I have done all however he guided me till now from last 3 years.
Don't know whats right[/quote]

We trust Solicitors more than Rules or policy guidance

[Jazz2007]

Apply for AR then prepare for a fresh application.
Inject required funds from your personal account
Or declared third party.Although, It's not guarenteed HO will accept new investment as your visa is expired already and they consider only granted period.

[zimba]

If you read the Tier 1E rules, in most cases the SOURCE of funds is VERY important. In many scenarios, it is in fact a deciding factor.
For example, If the SOURCE of funds is a venture capital then you can apply with just 50K or .... where you hold the money or who is holding the money is quite important. You can see this on several places in the guide and the rules.

The money is held in one or more regulated financial institutions

The money is disposable in the UK If the applicant is applying for leave to remain, the money must be held in the UK.

.....if you have held the money for less than 90 days, but you are providing third party evidence as the source of your funds, then the statements do not need to cover a consecutive 90 - day period of time

If the applicant is applying using money from a third party....which is either held by the third party or has been transferred to the applicant less than 90 days before the date of the application, he must provide all of the following specified documents,......
(i) An original written declaration from every third party that they have made the money available to invest in a business in the United Kingdom, ....

Why are you surprised ?

[wonder17]

If you read the Tier 1E rules, in most cases the SOURCE of funds is VERY important. In many scenarios, it is in fact a deciding factor.
For example, If the SOURCE of funds is a venture capital then you can apply with just 50K or .... where you hold the money or who is holding the money is quite important. You can see this on several places in the guide and the rules.

The money is held in one or more regulated financial institutions

The money is disposable in the UK If the applicant is applying for leave to remain, the money must be held in the UK.

.....if you have held the money for less than 90 days, but you are providing third party evidence as the source of your funds, then the statements do not need to cover a consecutive 90 - day period of time

If the applicant is applying using money from a third party....which is either held by the third party or has been transferred to the applicant less than 90 days before the date of the application, he must provide all of the following specified documents,......
(i) An original written declaration from every third party that they have made the money available to invest in a business in the United Kingdom, ....

Why are you surprised ?

SO is there any advice from you what could be done ?

[sm12]

Is it possible for you to get the funds transferred by your father now?
I'm guessing that you must have got another admin review option because the reason for the decision has changed?
If you want, you can try to go for admin review before you go for a fresh application. You can state that you have your mother in-law's permission in writing and can provide the letter if needed.

The chances of succeeding at AR may be low but worth a try.

[wonder17]

Is it possible for you to get the funds transferred by your father now?
I'm guessing that you must have got another admin review option because the reason for the decision has changed?
If you want, you can try to go for admin review before you go for a fresh application. You can state that you have your mother in-law's permission in writing and can provide the letter if needed.

The chances of succeeding at AR may be low but worth a try.

Would it matter now if funds transfer from father now? would it be considered.
Shame is most of the money came from my mother in law belongs to my father. Because they owed him.
I asked her to send me directly instead of paying back him in India. I did not realize it will going to be issue later.
Yes I am going for admin review.

[mohsensari]

Is it possible for you to get the funds transferred by your father now?
I'm guessing that you must have got another admin review option because the reason for the decision has changed?
If you want, you can try to go for admin review before you go for a fresh application. You can state that you have your mother in-law's permission in writing and can provide the letter if needed.

The chances of succeeding at AR may be low but worth a try.

No any letter or further transfer of money can't help you in this stage as you must did all of them in initial period.
just you need to know what is legal frame of sole trader, any business account is belong to sole trade business is still personal account. to be clear for example if you have any business debt legally you are responsible to cover it personally even you don't have enough money in business, they take from your personal assets. the legal frame for sole trade is different than company. if you was give the money by DL the HO office need to clear that the money come from you because you are not share holder, you are just director of company therefore they need company bank statement to show you transfer the money in your name. for sole trader is clear that you invest money in your business. if your account shows 50,000 capital amount I think HO made wrong decision. but aware that HO challenge you to proof the money which is came from you mother is not part of your trading (as costumer).

[wonder17]

Is it possible for you to get the funds transferred by your father now?
I'm guessing that you must have got another admin review option because the reason for the decision has changed?
If you want, you can try to go for admin review before you go for a fresh application. You can state that you have your mother in-law's permission in writing and can provide the letter if needed.

The chances of succeeding at AR may be low but worth a try.

No any letter or further transfer of money can't help you in this stage as you must did all of them in initial period.
just you need to know what is legal frame of sole trader, any business account is belong to sole trade business is still personal account. to be clear for example if you have any business debt legally you are responsible to cover it personally even you don't have enough money in business, they take from your personal assets. the legal frame for sole trade is different than company. if you was give the money by DL the HO office need to clear that the money come from you because you are not share holder, you are just director of company therefore they need company bank statement to show you transfer the money in your name. for sole trader is clear that you invest money in your business. if your account shows 50,000 capital amount I think HO made wrong decision. but aware that HO challenge you to proof the money which is came from you mother is not part of your trading (as costumer).

I can prove that it was not part of the trading.
Also just to note: Payments we are talking about here form her are very old. even before I applied for the visa. I applied for initial visa in may 2013 and transfers made in march 2013.

[mohsensari]

was it part of your investment for your initial application?

[wonder17]

was it part of your investment for your initial application?

yes

[mohsensari]

How did you fill the ext application form? you should mention that how much was your investment used for your initial application.
very simple
your investment before initial application and if it was part of successful initial application+ money which invested behalf of you (with your father in law transferred)=50,000 your case is very strong.

[wonder17]

How did you fill the ext application form? you should mention that how much was your investment used for your initial application.
very simple
your investment before initial application and if it was part of successful initial application+ money which invested behalf of you (with your father in law transferred)=50,000 your case is very strong.

Those payments were the part of £50,000 investment

[sm12]

Did HO accept the investment at the time of initial application? Did they state at that time that they were accepting the investment that was made before the grant of the initial visa?

If they raised doubts about whether the transfer was an investment or not, then you will need to argue that you do have proof that you can provide to show that it is investment, which is why I was suggesting that you say that you have written permission. In addition to this, the other piece of evidence would be the statements of the bank account from which your mother in-law made the transfer.

I think some time back, there was someone on this forum who met the employment requirement while on section 3C and reapplied, so perhaps this can work with investment. It might help to invest the remaining amount from the third-party you showed in the initial application. Of course, it is a tricky situation, but if you do intend to make a fresh application later, then you need to do all that you can to maximise your chances at this stage by doing the above.

[wonder17]

Did HO accept the investment at the time of initial application? Did they state at that time that they were accepting the investment that was made before the grant of the initial visa?

If they raised doubts about whether the transfer was an investment or not, then you will need to argue that you do have proof that you can provide to show that it is investment, which is why I was suggesting that you say that you have written permission. In addition to this, the other piece of evidence would be the statements of the bank account from which your mother in-law made the transfer.

I think some time back, there was someone on this forum who met the employment requirement while on section 3C and reapplied, so perhaps this can work with investment. It might help to invest the remaining amount from the third-party you showed in the initial application. Of course, it is a tricky situation, but if you do intend to make a fresh application later, then you need to do all that you can to maximise your chances at this stage by doing the above.

Hi
Yes Home office accepted that amount as a investment at the time of initial application. So how come its not valid now. Can't understand.
It must be a mistake again.

[sm12]

If they previously accepted that it is investment, then you can argue that it is a mistake.
Do you still have the letter in which they accepted the investment at the time of the initial leave? If yes, then you can state in your admin review application that you can provide this letter which shows that the HO accepted this amount as investment at the time of your previous application.

[mohsensari]

I think your case is strong.