Odd ILR Advice From Immigration Lawyer

[dominicmck]

Hi All,

So I had a consultation with an Immigration lawyer about getting SET-O after being Teir 2 for 5 years. Before this, I was Tier 5 for two years. They had a rather different opinion and requirements form what I commonly see on this site. While I have all my employment and time out of the country documents sorted (I hope), they had some worrying advice regarding "Continuous Residence".

The lawyer insisted that I needed 5 years "official" records of living arrangments. Tenancy agreements, mortgage documents etc. The problem is that for an 8-month period I was essentially subletting a room in a flat. While I have bank statements, electoral registration, and payslips with the address on it. I don't have a tenancy agreement for this.

In all the other posts about what documents are needed, almost never have I seen anything about this side of things. And searching the web for it rarely comes up. I'm wondering if the lawyer is making it seem harder so they can try charge extra fees to help with the application. Are they having a laugh, or am I actually missing 8 months of important info?

For those wondering, I contacted a lawyer as I wanted to get my application and documents checked by someone independent. Last time I renewed my visa there was a typo on my certificate of sponsorship that caused the application to fail. And with the current ILR prices, I was happy to pay a small amount to make sure I wouldn't get rejected over something silly and have to drop the big ££ again.

Thanks to all for any advice.

Dom

[CR001]

1. He is 'having a laugh' and talking nonsense. There is no requirement to submit evidence of 5 years of 'living arrangements'. Perhaps ask him to pinpoint where in the Immigration Rules Part 6a this is referred to.

2. You DO NOT need a solicitor for a Set(O) Tier 2 to ILR application. Free advice (and accurate) on the forum

[dominicmck]

Thanks for the quick reply. It did seem a bit out of left field. Glad to hear this isn't considered part of a normal application.

The advice on here seems to be quite good and consistent, which is what I've been basing my preparation on for the last year or so. Have to admit, it's a shock when a "professional" says your application might be in jeopardy over something you've never heard of.

[CR001]

Thanks for the quick reply. It did seem a bit out of left field. Glad to hear this isn't considered part of a normal application.

The advice on here seems to be quite good and consistent, which is what I've been basing my preparation on for the last year or so. Have to admit, it's a shock when a "professional" says your application might be in jeopardy over something you've never heard of.

You would be amazed at how many 'professionals' get even the most basic applications horribly wrong, to the detriment of the poor applicant.

[jason32]

Well their business runs on lying to clients, they make money off people rejections...rejection means appeal money and so on...lol ...just stay away.

[michali]

Is it possible the immigration advisor is referring to this in the check list of documents to be submitted on the Set M form? 'Evidence of continuous residence in the UK' I know on a couple of forums, this is the question applicants are asking. This appears to be in addition to the 6x12 pieces of correspondence addressed to the applicant and sponsor. However, I don’t see this listed on the Set O form.

[dominicmck]

Yea that wouldn't surprise me. They could just be lazy and give the same speech and ask for the same docs for all applications. Then later work out what's actually going in the application.

Thankfully I think it's all back under control. Been in touch with another their 2 to Set-o person from the same company. They were successfully earlier in the year so following their lead and this forum.

Thanks all.

[vinny]

The lawyer insisted that I needed 5 years "official" records of living arrangments.

Demand of only “official” documents could not be defended. There is no authority for such a restriction in legislation or the Immigration rules.

At the hearing before us, Mr Lewis acknowledged that a restriction providing that only official documents were acceptable evidence could not be defended. It was accepted on behalf of the Secretary of State that the statement in the decision letter that she would not consider such evidence was an error of law. It is not clear whether this was the reason that shortly before the hearing the Secretary of State withdrew her decisions in the two cases to which I referred at [2] above. Mr Lewis accepted that account should have been taken of the evidence before the Secretary of State, but submitted that the evidence put before her by Mr Khan for the period 1998 to 2002 carried little weight.

I leave aside the fact that the guidance enclosed with the letter dated 23 February 2013 appeared to concern marriage/cohabitation applications, a different type of application to Mr Khan's. I focus on what was stated in the letter itself. First, as Mr Lewis accepted, there is no authority for such a restriction in legislation or the Immigration Rules. Secondly, as recognised, for example in ZH (Bangladesh) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWCA Civ 8 at [3], the 14 year rule set out in Rule 276B(i)(b) is specifically directed to people who have managed to stay in the United Kingdom for 14 years or more without lawful authority, and is in effect an amnesty clause. It is likely that those in the United Kingdom without leave, and therefore without status, will have no official documentation, particularly in the early period of their residence. Thirdly, although most of the documents listed by the Secretary of State can be classified as "official" in the sense that they are from institutions and not individuals, a tenancy agreement and a letter from a landlord, which are listed, are difficult to classify as "official".

Further caselaws.