Because he had a kid. I know a woman who came here from Vietnam and did exactly the same thing and gave birth here. Because of that they could get flr.
I just watched it again, and like you say, the kid must have had a bearing on the case, still doesn't make it right though, I think he should have been deported as he knew exactly what he was doing when he overstayed.
Me too but I suppose in some respects using 7 grand to fight it is their cost for breaking the rules. By them doing that just doesnt make it fair for the rest who abide by the rules, I suppose youre always going to get some who buck the system.
It did make me wonder why they were living in a caravan when they can afford to pay a £7k solicitors fee, I just felt with in their particular case that we didn't get the full story. And regarding the chap from Wales who inherited his mothers property, I believe he could have sold that property to apply for the visa using cash savings. I must say though, I found the programme pretty interesting as it gave a reasonably accurate portrayal of the family and the visa process.
Yep certainly there were alternatives to fix some of the issues. Didnt quite understand why the guy didnt have to sell his house due to some pre-existing health issue, can only assume he was getting some sort of disability. The SA guys wife seemed to be stressed by it all, he could have made it easier on her wellbeing had he just gone home and applied.
in the programme it mentioned 47% of applications are unsuccessful. this is scaremongering. it must include visit visa applications. the great majority of settlement applications we see on this forum are granted.
I had the same take on it as you, rightfully or wrongly I assumed he was receiving DA thus making him exempt from the financial requirement. Good for him.
I was wondering about the 47% refusal rate given in the programme too, I just cannot see that figure being correct for spouse visas for all the reasons we know about.
but coming back to the SA chap--surely his wife must have met the financial requirements for FLR--he couldnt work . so why not deport then let them go through the same proceedure as the rest of us? it would be interesting to get the full story.
Yes 3.6. Meeting the financial requirement through “adequate maintenance” 3.6.1. Where the applicant’s partner is in receipt of any of the following benefits or allowances in the UK, the applicant will be able to meet the financial requirement at that application stage by providing evidence of “adequate maintenance” rather than meeting an income threshold: Carer’s Allowance. Disability Living Allowance. Severe Disablement Allowance. Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit. Attendance Allowance. Personal Independence Payment. If you have any of those, which the guy from Bromley did - because he said he'd received an Industrial Injuries Benefit in 2000... you don't need to show £18,600 pa just that you have enough to adequately maintain them - think that is the equivalent of JSA (Job Seekers Allowance) or something similar. Good programme - glad someone is bringing some attention to stupidity of it all.
I rather think that if the Tories win this uncalled-for election, the bar will be raised much higher in terms of minimum salary/bank deposits and the visa costs will at least double. May is including a commitment to drastically reduce immigration and she can not touch EU immigration at all. Ever.
its already skyrocketing-----2 x 25% increases in fees since the new rules came into force. but--then of course as the great unwashed are concerned--thats good--anything to help limit immigration.
I remember reading an article a long while back that stated that the independent body the Government employed to advise on the amount to set as the minimum salary requirement actually advised the Government on a higher figure than what the Government settled for which is of course £18,600 pa. So you could be right, it is difficult for me personally to see it going much higher but I've been wrong before.
Theresa May has been told that she can not stop or control EU migration and that one of the conditions for leaving is that relatives of EU citizens already settled in the UK will be able to enter, live and work in Britain for ever. Also Britain will need to recruit nurses and other health professionals from English-speaking countries. So something's got to give and it will be foreign spouses who will be worst hit. Of course if elected the Labour leader would remove all immigration controls ...
I was reading about this today, that is the EU starting point in the negotiation and I am thinking it will not be what they agree as it is against what we voted for. At the very least I want EU citizens to be treated exactly the same as our non EU spouses, to me that is fair.
I have a friend here (British, married to a Filipino) who is very friendly with one of Joseph Muscat's advisers - Muscat being Malta's Prime Minister and until June, EU President. We're told that the EU's position regarding migrants is very clear, "non-negotiable" and designed to punish. Assuming Brexit actually takes place, all British expats are to be given 3 months' notice to quit the EU but Britain must continue to accept new EU citizens throughout the "transition period" (believed to be 2 or 3 years). At the end of that time, the UK can not ask them to leave but must continue to permit their families to join them in the UK indefinitely. Oh and the European Court's primacy over Britain is to remain.
Oh well, I had 15 years with the first Mrs. for my 40 quid visa fee, so, must be grateful for small mercies.