The £18,600.00 minimum income immigration rule might be illegal

Good link that. With good few other links too.Thanks

Yes. The EU Human Rights thing can work both in our favour and against us at times. I have noticed that many people seem to overlook that or should I say not notice that they use it to their advantage when it suits but knock it when it doesn't.

I beg to disagree Kuya.

Great Britain has been a powerful nation for centuries, it should remain that way.

Germany is also a great and powerful nation, great economic strength, but weakened (we are told) by being within the Euro.

• Politicians, business men who benefit ($$), and leftie socialists who have funding, want to keep us in, power and wealth corrupt!
• There is no "far right", all the current main UK political parties are socialist.
• "Little Englanders", do you think patriotism is wrong?
• Interestingly the term Little Englander is defined as "a person opposed to the extension of the British Empire" hardly appropriate in this case, "Little Brusseller" might be more technically correct.

• Yes we could, we survived far better before - without the EU.
• Why should we share our prosperity / assets / NHS / jobs / housing / social security / (fishing) with economic migrants who have never contributed anything to our system? It pulls the country down.

The UK does not fit into the EU , neither do many of the southern countries, but they are weak, Great Britain should be strong.

• But the 18,600 rule has been required because of the EU open borders.

Let's talk about beer instead

I wonder if the pro and anti EU discussion might be better on another thread?

Talking of beer, my eldest son turned 18 on Thursday and showed sound taste and judgment by buying his ancient father a pint of Adnams Bitter (it was their "Ordinary Bitter" before they won a CAMRA award for it...)

Just been reading about a man who is concerned about the likelihood of his wife's spouse visa application being refused / accepted owing to being on the 18600 borderline. He has written to his MP on it and it turns out that his MP is Mark Harper, Immigration Minister! How ironic. Needless to say he got a "straight bat" type of reply.

I'm pretty sure we all have opinions on the current UK immigration rules/law and probably just what laws we'd implement given a chance.
Unfortunately, if we want/need to participate in UK immigration any time soon, then make no mistake we'd better follow the existing rules.

As with almost all other EU countries there has always been a financial 'income threshold'.
Just how and why UK finally agreed £18600 is open to questions, but in principle is outlined in the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) report.

There are always rumours about impending 'test cases' within EU courts, but so far I have not seen any evidence of even a single case, and certainly there are no such cases even 'forward scheduled' in either the European Court of Justice (ECJ), or the European Court of Human Rights.

I find this both disturbing and surprising.
Known terrorists and criminals can be prevented from deportation by legal experts, yet honest hardworking families who find themselves 'failed' under immigration rules seem unable to do the same.

Why?

I feel sorry for people like Kuya who are battling rules.

I think I'd be tempted to leave the UK to be somewhere with the woman I loved.....then make a plan to start a new life.......

Good link Kuya.

Best summed up by the third paragraph:

Also Expats who ARE married to people from outside the EU.

Just a personal opinion here, but I feel there are concerns with the so called EEA route in that these routes are so often limited, costly, and risky.
Resettlement in another EU country, even on a temporary basis, is likely to be an option only for those lucky few folks who have the resources to actually relocate (means physically move, find affordable housing and find jobs)

Positively, and number one, couples can eventually be together.

Negatively, securing those needed arrangements can be a source of great stress.
The EU sponsor must be able to support their non-EEA partner
The spouses risk becoming more dependent on their EU sponsor and further isolated from their support network of family and friends.

Doing so well in their 'new country' may even come to represent a bittersweet outcome for either party.
The sponsor/spouse may take to learning a new language and culture and actually start putting down roots that doesn't match combined aspirations.
After some time the likelihood of returning to the UK own country might become less likely.

For all sorts of reasons most couples find that they have to delay any plans to be together.
These folks must continue to live in a long-distance-relationships, with the sponsor making frequent visits to see their loved one.
This inevitably puts a huge financial burden on the sponsor and in turn places major limitations on developing opportunities to secure a viable and compliant position for UK immigration rules.

There might be some cheap accomodation available in Romania and Bulgaria within the next year, for anybody who fancies the EEA route.

But why should native Brits have to go to the back of the queue, in order to live in their homeland with their spouse?

You just used the OTHER "n" word, and put your finger on it.

The legislation is intended to limit immigration into the UK from Pakistan and Bangladesh, but nobody can say so...

Working outside Europe altogether, in the Middle East, or in my case in China for five years, does offer another route round the problem.

I am currently looking at ILR documents for the Isle of Man and came across this:

Question from "Immigration in the Isle of Man"

http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/cso/immigrationintheisleofmanpub.pdf

Frequently Asked Questions

If the UK allows in Romanians and Bulgarians in large numbers to work,
for example, will we have to follow suit and allow them to work here?

Yes, they will be eligible to work here as citizens of EU countries.
However, they will still need to secure a Work Permit. A permit will only
be granted if there are no suitable Isle of Man workers, so Isle of Man
workers will remain protected. Under Protocol 3 (the agreement which
defines the Isle of Man’s relationship with the European Union) EU
nationals must be treated the same by the Island as British nationals. It
would be possible to stop issuing work permits to EU nationals but this
would also have to include British nationals. Clearly this would have a
significant impact on the labour available on the Island.

So although the Isle of Man has connections with the EU they are looser than the connections that the UK have with the EU. The Isle of Man puts its own workers first even if applicants are from the EU. Anyone from outside the Isle of Man applies for a job here, they have to fill out a work permit and if there is an IOM worker to do the job that applies, then the Isle of Man worker gets the job.

Is there any evidence that foreign workers are registering to receive
benefits?
National Insurance records show that over 99% of those foreign
nationals who apply for Isle of Man National Insurance numbers do so
for the purpose of employment and not to enable them to claim benefits.

Is there any entitlement for foreign nationals to Jobseeker’s Allowance?
Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) has two routes of entitlement – a
contribution based entitlement (for which national insurance
contributions must have been paid in the relevant tax years) and an
income-related (means-tested) entitlement. An immigrant’s social
insurance contributions paid in their home country may count towards
entitlement to contribution based JSA if they have commenced a period
of insurance (i.e. work as an employed or self-employed earner) on the
Isle of Man and the bi-lateral agreement between the UK and their home
nation (if there is one) provides for this.
For entitlement to income-based JSA, the applicant must meet a
residential qualification. Broadly speaking, they (or their partner) must
be an Isle of Man worker, as defined by the Control of Employment Act
and be available for or looking for work. Entitlement to income support is
subject to the same residential qualification as applies to income-based
JSA (see above).

How does immigration control operate in the Isle of Man?
Under Protocol 3, EEA nationals are free to come and live or work on the
Isle of Man (subject to obtaining a work permit) and are not required to
apply for entry or to register with any agency. The citizens of many
countries outside the EEA do require visas in order to enter the UK and
travel on to the Isle of Man.

In other words, EU members are free to come to the Isle of Man but will not get work where an Isle of Man worker applies for that job and is suitably qualified and will not get benefits unless they have paid in to a social fund elswhere in the EU or in the Isle of Man etc etc

Then why is it that every government after Ted Heath's has steadfastly refused to hold a referendum on Europe? The answer surely is that they scared of a "no" vote as opinion poll after opinion poll indicates that the majority of the population want out of Europe.

I may be wrong but I think the government can exempt itself from abiding by certain key pieces of legislation where it would be in the National Interest for it to do so. Certainly this is true with anti-terrorism cases where suspects have fewer rights than those suspected of non-terrorism offences. However I rather doubt that Mrs May could keep a straight face if she tries to claim that keeping the £18,600.00 rule is in Britain's National Interest!

How long will it be, I wonder, before she decides not to allow non-EU spouses to enter the UK visa-free via the EEA route?

According to a note I received from the Manila Embassy, the higher income bands needing to be met are dependent on where the child was born. If the child is born abroad, then the higher levels do apply.

When kids are involved it is much worse for everyone involved.
How sad