ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Only for queries regarding Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). Please use the EU Settlement Scheme forum for queries about settled status under Appendix EU

Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Sun Mar 25, 2018 11:30 pm

The employee of SMP was paid full legal hourly rate. She worked 130 hours monthly which is far above the minimum legal requirement. So there was no under pay there.
I request all gurus experts to please HELP ME!!! In giving their experties. It is really helping me in preparing my AR. I know & I sincerely hope that God Forbid if the AR is turned down then in JR I would hopefully stand stronger chances to overturn this decision. Indeed this is my sincere hope. Please tell me very frankly & honestly is it correct what I am thinking? Where I really stand now? What are the honest chances of getting this decision turned down in AR.
I would be & am desperately waiting for maximum input from all my respectable members.

regularuser
Member
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 10:47 am
India

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by regularuser » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:40 am

Hi Abbas

Have you checked with your accountant that you got back SMP from HMRC ?

AS I have doubt why HO refuse to accept that time of employment because you get back that money from HMRC as SMP credit.

I have same scenario during my extension and my solicitor advised me not to include in total to your job requirement as actual you are not paying SMP to employee.

Good Luck with your AR

User avatar
marcnath
Moderator
Posts: 6493
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:27 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
United Kingdom

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by marcnath » Mon Mar 26, 2018 12:48 pm

seasky wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:40 pm
marcnath wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:01 pm
Unfortunately @seasky has a habit of making irrelevant personal opinions without the details of an individual applicant. I don’t think it is done with any bad intentions but just a matter of poor communication.
It is best to ignore and not add to your stress levels.
But given that you had the employee for a long time and even substituted part of maternity with a substitute you potentially had enough employment even excluding the maternity leave period. How short would you be if maternity was disallowed?
Also, the consolation is that even if the AR is unsuccessful, you definitely would have enough jobs for a fresh application
Marcnath, If you read my post I told him two things:

1. that he should not tell AR/CW "he could not sack her because of the law" (has no relevance and OP said it many times)
2. Not to tell AR/CW the he paid someone on maternity leave only SMP when she did much more work (that could open a whole can of worms)

Are you saying he should ignore and say the opposite?
You miss the point
seasky wrote:
Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:37 pm
You took a risk being at the minimum.
The above was the irrelevant comment made without knowing the details. (once details were know, this was an incorrect assumption).

And what triggered OP's response.

Unfortunately, you keep doing that - as you have continued in this thread with misreading the comment on OP's spouse's wage.

As I mentioned below, it is unfortunate that your otherwise useful contributions get clouded by your prejudices and personal opinions.

Anyway, this forum is not the place to engage in a to and fro - so this will be my last comment on this.
My comments are in no way meant to be advisory. I have no professional knowledge of immigration. These are based on my own experience, convictions and personal interpretation of publicly available information.

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:43 pm

I have received an opinion on my SMP issue from a very senior Immigration lawyer. I will paste below his & email correspondence. A request to all to kindly see to it & come back with your opinions please.

Dear Fazal

I write further to out telephone conversation. Please see a link below to the relevant guidance.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... 01_PDF.pdf

Please kindly refer to Page 34-

All the following rules and definitions apply to the extension and settlement job creation requirements:

(a) A full time job is one involving at least 30 hours of paid work a week.
(b) “The equivalent of” a full time job means two or more part time jobs which add up to 30 hours a week will count as one full time job, if both jobs exist for at least 12 months. However, one full time job of more than 30 hours work a week will not count as more than one full time job.
(c) The jobs must have existed for at least 12 months during the period of the most recent grant of leave as a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) migrant.
(d) A single job need not consist of 12 consecutive months (for example it could exist for 6 months in one year and 6 months the following year) providing it is the same job.

Kind regards

YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO POST LAWYERS DETAILS ON THE FORUMS

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:46 pm

Dear Joe
I really appreciate your comments given over the phone with regards to SMP matter which has been the basis of Home Office refusal of my ILR application.
What I understand is then 2 full time jobs needs to be created during my most recent extension period of leave.
Now I had in my last two years extension period starting from February 2016 till 7 February 2018. In that period I had in total this employee who went on maternity leave & another worker who was employed for 3 months from August 2017 till October 2017 on 130 hours monthly. So in total during my last two years of extension leading to 5 years settlement I had these two jobs only.
So this SMP was also considered by me as part of the employment during that last 2 years extension period making a total of 2 full time employment.
Now this SMP lady’s employment period is:

She joined in August 2015 as full time worker on 130 hours monthly. In September 2016 she took maternity leave so she went on SMP from September 2016 till May 2017. She came back in June 2017 & started full time job on 130 hours monthly & up-till NOW she is working for the company. Further as mentioned I had employed one more worker on full time basis from August 2017 till October 2017.
So the above is the total employment I have in my company.
Now if you see this link page 35 of the link you send me then below Table E: Job creation table it says:
If you are applying for a second extension or 5 year settlement application:
• You can only score points for employment activity from your most recent extension period of leave.
• You cannot claim points for any employment activity from your initial period of leave (as this can only be used to score points for your first extension application).
So Joe, with this whole picture of mine how this point of yours of page 34 point (d)

(d) A single job need not consist of 12 consecutive months (for example it could exist for 6 months in one year and 6 months the following year) providing it is the same job.
How this would take care of my total employment as mentioned above covered?
Please do let me have your precious comments by return.
Kind regards
Fazal Abbas
Sent from my idiot-phone

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:47 pm

His reply to my email:

Hi Fazal

In regards to page 35 of the guidance, you cannot rely on the same job for the same period of your initial 3 years.

However, the Guidance makes it clear that you can-

‘Maintain the 2 jobs created in your initial leave for a further 12 months’

This is exactly what we will be targeting. In other words, the law allows us to ‘maintain’ jobs as oppose to always ‘create jobs’ in the extension phase of your visa.

Kind regards

seasky
BANNED
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:01 pm
United Kingdom

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by seasky » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:59 pm

My first impression is this lawyer does not know what s/he is talking about. I would prefer gurus comment as you have a complicated situation.

S/he has not responded to why SMP should be considered a job, rather relating to the rather obvious fact that you can keep people employed throughout, you do not have to fire them and hire other for "Job creation" for ILR phase (Isn't that the best business long term employees)

seasky
BANNED
Posts: 1077
Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:01 pm
United Kingdom

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by seasky » Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:02 pm

Here is a creative idea: confer with an employment lawyer not an immigration lawyer

The need to help define if a lady in SMP is employed and/or in job

User avatar
marcnath
Moderator
Posts: 6493
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:27 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
United Kingdom

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by marcnath » Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:53 am

1954abbas wrote:
Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:47 pm
His reply to my email:

Hi Fazal

In regards to page 35 of the guidance, you cannot rely on the same job for the same period of your initial 3 years.

However, the Guidance makes it clear that you can-

‘Maintain the 2 jobs created in your initial leave for a further 12 months’

This is exactly what we will be targeting. In other words, the law allows us to ‘maintain’ jobs as oppose to always ‘create jobs’ in the extension phase of your visa.

Kind regards
I hope you are not paying much to this lawyer. And not going to depend on this argument for your AR. HO did not refuse your extension based on not "creating" a job - they refused it by not including SMP period as a valid job.
My comments are in no way meant to be advisory. I have no professional knowledge of immigration. These are based on my own experience, convictions and personal interpretation of publicly available information.

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Wed May 02, 2018 5:10 pm

Hi everyone. I have some excellent news to give you all. After all this long waiting & terrible nightmare today in the morning we finally got our BRP. My sincere thanks to everyone for your very kind support. Specially to seasky, marcnath, Parveenkumar7, 10020132 & to Zimba. I cannot tell you how much we are relieved. Indeed now we have a Home Secretary from our great country Pakistan!!!😃

Parveenkumar7
Newly Registered
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:19 am
India

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by Parveenkumar7 » Wed May 02, 2018 5:44 pm

Congratulations and good luck for future!

User avatar
zimba
Moderator
Posts: 21928
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:13 pm
Location: UK
Mood:
United Kingdom

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by zimba » Thu May 03, 2018 11:48 am

Congratulations :D
So the issue of SMP is resolved now and it seems that HO has taken the common sense approach top it. Great to hear
Advice is given based on my personal research and experience only. Do NOT contact me via private message for immigration advice

1954abbas
Newbie
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: Tier 1 Entrepreneur - ILR

Post by 1954abbas » Sat May 05, 2018 4:15 pm

Oh yes Zimba, a very strong grounds/arguments were submitted with regards to SMP. I can put here for future guidance if needed.

Ground 3: Statutory Maternity Leave
6. It is submitted that the original decision maker applied incorrect legislation framework; and Immigration Rules, in deciding that the statutory maternity pay of .........,,, cannot be included in the calculation of hours, as the employee was not working for you during this period.
7. It is submitted that the original caseworker decision that .........cannot be regarded as an employee because she was on maternity leave is clearly an ignorance of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
8. First, the sections 71(1), (2) and (4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, gives statutory protection to the employee on maternal leave. This includes having all the privileges and entitlements as being employee during the statutory maternity leave period. Sections 71(1), (2), (4) of the Act state that:
“Employment Rights Act 1996
71
(1)An employee may, provided that she satisfies any conditions which may be prescribed, be absent from work at any time during an ordinary maternity leave period.
(2)An ordinary maternity leave period is a period calculated in accordance with regulations made by the
6
Secretary of State. (3)........
(3A)............
(4)Subject to section 74, an employee who exercises her right under subsection (1)—
(a)is entitled , for such purposes and to such extent as may be prescribed, to the benefit of the terms and conditions of employment which would have applied if she had not been absent,
(b)is bound , for such purposes and to such extent as may be prescribed by any obligations arising under those terms and conditions (except in so far as they are inconsistent with subsection (1)), and
(c)is entitled to return from leave to a job of a prescribed kind.
(5)In subsection (4)(a) “terms and conditions of employment”—
(a)includes matters connected with an employee’s employment whether or not they arise under her contract of employment, but
(b)does not include terms and conditions about remuneration.”
9. It is clear from the above statutory provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996, under section 71(4) that an employee who has under maternity leave have same terms and conditions of employment which would have applied if she has not been absent. Therefore, for all purposes, this includes under the Employment Rights Act 1996, and Statutory instruments rights, such as Immigration Rules,Ms ........ is treated as an employee, and working for the Applicant.
10. Since the contract of employment is not broken, continuous employment will continue to accrue during ordinary maternity leave (the first 26 weeks’ entitlement) and additional maternity leave (the second 26 weeks’ entitlement) for the purposes of statutory employment rights.
11. Second, for all extent and purposes, the protection under Employment Rights Act 1996, overrides any immigration rules, as employee protection rights under Employment Rights Act 1996 are statutory rights enforced through the Act of the Parliament, whilst, immigration rules are enforced through secondary instruments.
12. Third, in any event, there are no such provisions in the Immigration Rules, nor there is such a policy of the SSHD that states that employee that is on maternity leave does not count as employee. It is submitted that the original caseworker has no bases both in terms of immigration rules and under any policy to conclude that the ......... does not count as an employee.
13. Therefore, the SSHD’s caseworker’s decision that Ms ............. is not an employee and was not working for the Applicant is based on incorrect applications of the statutory provisions, and therefore, an unlawful reason for refusal.
14. In the light of the above extensive submissions the SSHD’s decision to refuse the Applicant’s Indefinite leave to remain, is clearly flawed and therefore, unlawful. In the circumstances, the decision must be quashed in this administrative review challenge and the Applicant must be granted indefinite leave to remain.

Locked