A while back, I had been on an academic discussion about MPs and their communications. One of the topics discussed was the sheer volume of emails that they get, primarily as a campaign tool and also because it is free and easy to send. Some MPs' offices had come up with similar ideas; either requiring all inward correspondence to be by post/snail mail or responding to emails by snail mail (which precluded recipients from instantly hitting reply or forwarding it to a third party, such as a newspaper). The idea was that people will think a little more about the issue if they had to write an issue down on paper and stick a stamp on it, rather than forwarding somebody else's draft.
I would imagine that the Home Office is taking the same approach. You are more likely to think about an issue and explore resolving it in different ways if you will have to pay £5 for it rather than if it was a free email.
My gut feeling is that it is not an earning mechanism, but a volume management mechanism, though I wonder why such a non-round figure as "£5.48". Presumably the contract is denominated in a currency other than GBP.
vinny wrote:Even more worrying is when their advice may be
wrong.
Well, they are
changing suppliers. It may be worth observing if the quality of advice improves.
I am not a lawyer or immigration advisor. My statements/comments do not constitute legal advice. E&OE. Please do not PM me for advice.