VisasPlus

Stubuzz,

One other thing occured to me. By making your wife use the form for a general visit visa, rather than a family visit visa, VFS took away your wife's legal right of appeal ( had the visa been refused). This must be an illegal action, and is worth mentioning to the Embassy ( if you feel so inclined).

Sianey,

I was away ( as theolgit said).

As I understand the recent changes you can now choose either the 6 months prior to the date of application ( in your case the date you started receiving maternity pay) or the 12 months prior to that same date. During either of those periods you must have met the financial requirement of 18,600 GBP. So, it won't matter if you have a low salary month during the 12 months as long as you meet the requirement in that 12 months. This is all covered in paragrpah 13 of Appendix FM-SE ( which is quite long, so I won't cut and paste here).

Don't forget the other documentation you will need to meet the requirements :

Bank statements covering the period of the wage slips, plus

© A letter from the employer confirming:

(i) the length of the person's employment;

(ii) the gross annual salary and the period over which it has been paid at this level;

(iii) the entitlement to maternity, paternity or adoption leave; and

(iv) the date of commencement and the end-date of the maternity, paternity or adoption leave.

As your well informed readers will know, to get a pension letter (or any other notarial requirements and affirmation) for the UK can now only be obtained in the UK Embassy Bangkok.

Our directors have decided to offer to take the pension request personally to the embassy for a fee of 400 Baht (plus government fee). This is you will appreciate below cost unless the update is great but will save customers travelling or posting.

On the British Embassy web site, it states the requirements as follows:

• Photocopy of your current British passport
  
• Original evidence of your current pension/income which will be returned to you
  
• Your local address to be typed on the letter
  

Please ensure the pension/income evidence you provide is in a form that is simple and easy to understand and contains the key financial amounts that are required for inclusion in the letter. According to Thai Immigration, your pension currency should not be converted into Thai Baht.

However, as with many things involving governments including the UK nothing is always so simple. It would seem that Bangkok is using ‘on the spot’ judgemental decisions as to whether certain documents will be accepted as evidence (see examples below).

We therefore can only offer our best advice on what you are submitting and the final decision rests with the consular, if they will not accept the documents we will bring them back but have to charge you should you wish to re submit with new documents. Obviously of course, if you have gone personally or submitted by post then it would have cost you more.

Examples:

· A client took a letter showing his dividend money from his business partnership that had full address, VAT number. The head partner signed it. They wanted the company licence number.

· The businesses lawyer in UK signed a letter confirming income (it was rental not earned). They stated the auditor should sign it.

Firstly as a retired UK accountant, I was not aware the law had changed on either of the above. Partnerships do not have a licence as requested; it is limited companies that require to register. Partnerships, SME’s and small Limited companies are not required to have an auditor or even an accountant if SME or partnership.

In the past our Honorary Consuls Barry and Howard knew these things and used common sense.

Finally a comment from an Embassy official, ‘the rules are changing all the time and it is difficult to keep up with them’, surely that is there job, I as a British taxpayer think so

Lloyd

Visas-Plus

Why did you not have her apply as the wife of an EU National.

Required documents include getting the Marriage Certificate certified by the MFA then getting it translated into English, no Insurance is required, turn around is usually 2 days.

Presumably because she already has the visa, and he was questioning the terms of it, not complaining about it.

Next time getting the visa will be easier will be easier.

Not necessarily. It depends on the policy of every particular country, and sometimes particular embassy/consulate.

Indeed it does. Perhaps I should have said "should be easier".

I think the answer is basically no. There is a category that allows a parent to visit the UK for up to 12 months if they have a child at school, but there are two requirements that your wife probably cannot meet :

1. have a child with valid leave as a pre-points-based system student or a Tier 4 (Child)

2. have a child who is attending an independent fee paying day school in one of the child student immigration categories.

Otherwise it will have to be a normal visitor visa, and you would need to be careful of "abusing" the visit visa requirements.

I beg to differ from the above opinions. In a multiple entry visa (for example a 6 months or 1yr multiple entry business visa for schengen countries), duration of stay refers to maximum permitted stay in schengen territory for each visit. If you are visiting for the 4th or 5th time on a multiple entry visa, the immigration officer does not start looking at old records to calculate and determine how many days are still remaining.

I'm sorry, but I also beg to differ. This is guidance from the German Embassy ( in Manila) :

"In general you receive your first Schengen-visa with a validity covering only the duration of your planned stay in the Schengen-Area (e.g. from November 1 to 12). The maximum duration of stay in the Schengen-Area is always the number of days that are stated in the visa ! The duration is counted from the date of the first entry into the Schengen-Area."

It would be unrealistic if, for instance you were granted a one year multiple entry visa with a 90 day stay, to be able to stay for 90 days, then leave for one day, then return for 90 days, then leave, etc. That would mean that you could stay all year apart from the three days that you left the country. Immigration officers in the Schengen area are indeed instructed to count the days of each visit, but often don't bother.

I think you must have shown that the total time in Italy/Schengen would be 6 days. Having asked for that, that is what they gave. To me that is an indication that they were not happy to give a longer period, for whatever reason, possibly they were worried that if they gave a longer period than you asked for, it might be misused. It is a multiple entry visa, but with a maximum stay of only 6 days, that is pretty meaningless. You could enter for say 2 days, leave and re-enter for 4 days. That would be the end of that visa, though.

The thing to do is stay only the 6 days you asked for. Next time getting the visa will be easier will be easier.

Has there been any changes regarding self-employed sponsers? Do they still want a tax return and 12 months worth of bank statements?

The changes for self-employed are pretty minor : These are the revised requirements :

In respect of self-employment in the UK as a partner, as a sole trader or in a franchise all of the following must be provided:

(a) Evidence of the amount of tax payable, paid and unpaid for the last financial year.

(b ) The latest:

(i) annual self-assessment tax return to HMRC ( a copy or print out);

(ii) Statement of Account (SA300 or SA302); and,

(iii) the same for the previous financial year if the latest return does not show the necessary level of gross income, but the average of the last 2 financial years does.

(c ) Proof of registration with HMRC as self-employed if available. This evidence must be either an original or a certified copy of the registration documentation issued by HMRC.

(d) Each partner's Unique Tax Reference Number (UTR) and/or the UTR of the partnership or business.

(e) Where the person holds or held a separate business bank account(s), monthly bank statements for the same 12-month period as the tax return(s).

(f) Monthly personal bank statements for the same 12-month period as the tax return(s) showing that the income from self-employment has been paid into an account in the name of the person or in the name of the person and their partner jointly.

(g) Evidence of ongoing self-employment through:

(i) evidence of payment of Class 2 National Insurance contributions (for self-employed persons); or,

(ii) current Appointment Reports from Companies House (for Directors).

(h) One of the following documents must also be submitted:

(i) The organisation's latest annual audited accounts with:

(1) the name of the accountant clearly shown; and,

(2) the accountant must be a member of an accredited accounting body specified in paragraph 19 (g)(ii) of Appendix A of these rules;

(bb) If the applicant’s business is not required to produce annual audited accounts, the latest unaudited accounts and an accountant’s certificate of confirmation, from an accountant who is a member of a UK Recognised Supervisory Body (as defined in the Companies Act 2006);”.

(ii) A certificate of VAT registration and the latest VAT return ( a copy or a print-out) confirming the VAT registration number, if turnover is in excess of £73,000;

(iii) Evidence to show appropriate planning permission or local planning authority consent is held to operate the type/class of business at the trading address (where this is a local authority requirement); or

(iv) A franchise agreement signed by both parties.

(i) The document referred to in paragraph 7(h)(iv) must be provided if the organisation is a franchise.

The main change, I guess, is that the requirement for audited accounts has been amended

What were the actual changes? I didnt bother applying for a settlement visa recently as I didnt meet the financial requirements, has there been any changes to this?

The financial requirements remain the same, unfortunately. It is the specified documents that has changed a little, to make it possible to provide the required evidence !

Bottom line:

should I worry ?

I don't think so. I think what they have done is realise that the first lot of requirements was crap, and they have amended them. Those amendments came into force today. They are now saying that the amendments ( which are better than the original) can be applied to applications such as yours, by making the amendments retrospective.

The amended immigration rules, that went before parliament recently, came into force today ( HC 760 ). Amazingly, the government placed even more rules before parliament yesterday ( HC 820), and they come into force today. What is amazing is that new rules usually introduce something into law from the date they are passed. The rules passed yesterday, which are now law, seem to say that, even if you applied for your wife's settlement visa two months ago, the decision will be made in accordance with the laws that came into force today, and not in accordance with the laws that were in place when you applied. This could mean that you will now be asked to provide documents that you never even knew you were going to need when you applied. Of course, it could also mean that you get away with not providing some documents. For instance, the old rules required you to produce a contract of employment and P60s. The new rules don't, so if you applied two months and didn't provide those documents, then you possibly won't have to provide them now. Confused ? Me too. Here is the relevant section of the new rules introduced today :

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO

THE STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN IMMIGRATION RULES

PRESENTED TO PARLIAMENT ON 12 DECEMBER 2012 (HC 820)

1. This explanatory memorandum has been prepared by the Home Office and is laid

before Parliament by Command of Her Majesty.

2. Purpose of the Instrument

2.1 The purpose of these changes is:

• To apply most of the changes to the Immigration Rules on family and private life

contained in the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules laid on 22 November

2012 (HC 760) to all applications decided on or after 13 December 2012, rather

than only to applications made on or after that date. This will provide greater

clarity for applicants and for UK Border Agency caseworkers as to the

requirements in respect of family and private life applicable to all applications

decided from 13 December 2012.

It is the shop/office on the right hand side of the VAC. It has no sign, but i think it is a visa agent.

I will send a complaint to the British Embassy.

Thanks again.

Yes, I had heard that the visa company that was next to the VAC, when they were upstairs until a couple of weeks ago, has moved downstairs too. That is an amazing coincidence. There are many stories about this visa company, and I am not surprised if they have "managed" to open up next door to VFS again.

Please complain to the Embassy, or the situation will never change.

So, i did use the correct form. They did not make me fill out another application, but they did not want to accept the VAF 1B. They told me inlaws do not count as family. I feel like i have been scammed.

I dont understand request a refund of what money? The intermet and printing costs?

Also, outside the VAC there is a notice showing the picture requirements. It states they should be on a white background. The UKBA PHOTOGRAPH GUIDANCE states: taken against a light grey or cream background.

Thanks for your time and advice.

Yes, I think you should be refunded by VFS for the internet printing charges. VFS are contracted by the Embassy, so the Embassy should not only oversee their service, but ensure that customers( you) are not ripped off. I think you are right, and I believe it is a scam. It has been going on for a long time.

What/who is in the office where you did the printing, etc ? Is it a print shop, an office, or a visa company ?

VFS had no right to make you fill out another form. Your application meets the Family Visit requirements. Many people have been made to do this by VFS, and VFS, even having been told not to do it by the Embassy, continue to do so. I believe it is a just a money-making exercise for them. This is an extract from an email from the Embassy to me on the subject :

"I am writing in response to your email dated 20^th August.

I am disappointed to hear that you have cause to complain about ...xxxxxx....experience at the VFS visa application centre and I would like to offer my apologies for the embarrassment which this caused your client.

As you are aware there have been some recent changes to the Family visitor rules and staff at VFS have obviously misunderstood some of these changes. We are speaking to the Staff at VFS and will provide some refresher training on this area.

To clarify the changes in the rules and how they affect the community in Thailand, should a Thai national be travelling with her British husband (or Unmarried partner where the couple have been in a relationship akin to marriage or civil partnership for at least the 2 years before the day the application is made and the relationship is genuine and subsisting) then they can apply as a family visitor.

We have provided instructions to the visa application centre to accept applications even if the applicant does not qualify as a family visitor and we will amend to the general visitor category once the application reaches the visa section at the British Embassy if it is clear that the applicant does not meet the family visitor criteria."

You should now complain immediately to the Embassy in Bangkok ( copy it to VFS). Request a refund of the money you had to pay to VFS.

Feel free to use the extract above, and inform the Embassy that it is taken from an email from the Entry Clearance Manager to Visas Plus in August this year.

I asked the same question last year. I was informed that you must still do the 90 day report as you were in the country for 90 days. Not doing it could lean to the 2,000 THB fine.

You can report up to 15 days early, of course.

I did online visa earlier this year. It cost $20 plus $5 for service charge. As lopburi3 says, you can get a van run to the border, but check that the visa cost is included. When I did my trip the van company stopped at a visa office just this side of the border, and was charging $40 for the visa. People weren't happy, but had no choice but to pay.

Due to the fact that there are several public holidays this month, then it is likely that processing times will slip a little. I would say between 10 -15 days. But, assuming that the applicant has visited UK in the last 5 years, then she can use the priority service, which should produce a decision within 3 working days. And only costs 3,000 THB !

^ Thanks for the reply. Although sadly it seems my chances of ever getting my getting my son and wife back to the UK are virtually non-existent. Hopefully this will eventually be challenged and defeated in the European courts.

Out of curiosity, if I had savings of GBP62,500 would I still need to satisfy any requirements relating to accommodation in the UK?

Yes, you do. But accommodation can be provided by a third party ( parents, for instance), if you don't have accommodation of your own.

I am one of the lucky ones because my savings level is well above the limit so this piece of the new rules actually work for me as I know exactly where I stand.

Could somebody let me know what the 'savings level' is? If I returned to the UK I wouldn't have a job lined up. In order to obtain a 2-year settlement visa for my wife, would I need to show GBP37,200 (i.e 18,600 x 2)?

If you don't have any income, and you want to rely on savings, then the required amount is 62,500 GBP - 16,000 plus (18,600 x 2.5).

Some interesting stats just released. Dependant visa issued are down by 21%. This is the full link, with just brief details below.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research-statistics/immigration-asylum-research/immigration-q3-2012/before-entry-q3-2012

Key facts

Excluding visitor and transit visas, there were 508,488 visas issued in the year ending September 2012, the lowest 12-monthly total recorded using comparable data available from 2005. This was 14% lower than the previous 12 months (593,978).

In the year ending September 2012, work and family-related visas issued fell 4% and 15% respectively (to 145,604 and 42,213, the lowest levels recorded using comparable data). Over the same period study visas issued (excluding student visitors) fell 26% to 210,921. The recent falls for work and study are likely to be partly due to policy changes, which came into effect from 2011 for these reasons for entry to the UK.

By contrast, there was a 12% increase in student visit visas issued to 66,569 in the year ending September 2012. Student visit visas are for short-term study (typically for six months) and cannot be extended.

Although im probably not as informed as the above posters.

If you come up against the wrong person who is looking at your application, a long standing overdraft could be classed as not being able to financially look after your wife.

To be honest i wouldnt like to apply with a bank account in the red.

You might find this quote, in an email to me, from the British Embassy Bangkok useful :

"The £18,600 income threshold is the amount above which couple’s generally (although not in all cases) cease to be able to access income related benefits. How they choose to spend their income is up to them as they are responsible for supporting themselves without reliance on the state."

The child might qualify for an EEA Family Permit. If the mother ( a Thai national) is married to an EEA national ( a Maltese national),and they live in the UK, then the child should qualify as a close family member.

20(d) Equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

Now, whether the savings are "savings", or still regarded as having been equity, could be a debating point. I think the intention of the rule is that you can't say " my house is worth a million, so I have a million", but the rule, taken literally, could be a problem.

Ah yes but this would be released equity IE cash savings. Equity in a property is of course, generally, not savings. And as the size of a mortgage isn't a deciding factor, then releasing equity and exptended a mortgage period could work.

And of course, they may not even be a mortgage so, the homeowner raised 60k on a property via a new mortgage. I just did that to buy a condo in BKK.

That said, I have four buy to let houses each worth about 180k and each with a 100k mortgage so 320k unrealeased equity. It would be intesting how these are viewed also as they are investments though - I guess - not under my control.

If I released 60k equity to satisfy the requirements of a settlemen visa, is it any of their business where the cash comes from?

Firstly, I think there are many reasons why the government wants to know where the money has come from, including tax evasions and illegal sources . There are plans to share financial "information" with HMRC ( and maybe other government agencies) in the future.

Secondly, you can use the rental income from owned property to meet the financial requirement, but not the equity or investment value.

Thanks for that, VP.

Could you clarify something for me, though.

Take the OP's situation as an example. He hasn't worked for the last 3 months but, presumably, was working for the 9 months prior to that.

So, must he have earned at least the equivalent of £18,600 in total during the 9 months he did work out of the last year, or will it be calculated on his lowest monthly income during that 9 months multiplied by 12?

And what about oil workers working just 6 months a year? Paid for 6 only but the salary is many times over the minimum req

The way I read the new rules is that the sponsor ( in this case) must have earned at least 18,600 over the previous 12 months. It looks like, in this case, he can use para 2(b ) and 13(b ). If he relies on 2(a ) and 13(a ) then it will be the lowest month of the previous 6 months x 12 ( which will be nil).

Oil workers will qualify under the example you give, for the reasons I have given. I think this may be one of the reasons why the rules have been changed, as people such as oil workers were unable to qualify even when they were earning half a million a year or more.