durhamboy

Thanks 7 by 7 - this is the first time I've seen a definitive answer about this issue. However, I still get the feeling that UKBA are making this up as they go along. I went on the BULATS website recently and I quote from it as follows :-

www.bulats.org

Thanks for your replies.

Sorry Jay Santa but there is a lot that is wrong about asking them to retake a test that has already been passed. If they are here using English every day for 2 years then what would be the point? The only point would be where they never came to the UK in the first place as 7by7 said. Actually I suspect that the non-use of the qualification is the reason for the 2 year validity but I have yet to hear back from BULATS.

In any case my OP isn't about the rationale for re-takes it's about the rules concerning FLR and my frustration in finding out what they are. I suspect as 7by7 said that the government simply didn't think of it in their haste to introduce new rules.

7by7 I take your point about going for a B1 qualification now and that would suffice for FLR. However a couple of points about that :-

1. I'm told that she would get a substantial reduction in the course fee if she does it after she has been here 3 years.

2. She is having some tuition at the moment and her English is definitely improving. However B1 is a lot higher standard than A1 and she will be better prepared to reach B1 standard after she has been here a few years i.e. after applying for FLR.

One thing that did occur to me - you said that under the old rules the applicant can apply for ILR after just over 2 years without applying for FLR if they reach the B1 English standard. However, I don't think that everyone will reach that standard and, if so, then there must be some people who are applying for FLR right now with out-of -date certificates. What do you think?

Thanks

Many thanks 7by7 that it very clear. I didn't realise that they went straight to ILR which, as you say, has different criteria for English.

So it will be early 2015 before we know if there are any problems with this. This is very frustrating as it would be good to know now if my wife needs to do another test. I have asked around a lot including colleges teaching ESOL and the Home Office but no one knows.

I suppose the only thing I can do right now is ask Kevin at Vantage in Bangkok the reason why BULATS only has a 2 year validity.

Really looking at it logically it shouldn't be a problem. The applicant passes the test and goes to the UK where they speak English every day for more than 2 years so their English ability is much better than when they passed the test! Unfortunately the Home Office doesn't think logically does it?

Cheers.

Thanks 7by7.

Are you sure that it will be December 2014 before this issue is tested?

As I said in my OP the English test was introduced in November 2010 and I think successful applicants after that date were given 2 years and 3 months initial visas (this being increased to 2 years and 9 months under the new rules for applicants after July 2012).

So, for example, a spouse that passed the English test in December 2010 and, say, got the visa in February 2011, with a 2 year 3 month validity, would be applying for FLR in May of this year with an out-of-date English certificate.

If that is correct then some people may have already encountered this problem. Seeing as no one has posted any problems on the forum then perhaps it is a complete non-issue and the certificates are being accepted. Btw, you may remember that a few people posted previously about problems from the Home Office because the test centre they got their original English certificate from was no longer accredited even though they were accredited when they passed their test! I'm not sue of the outcome of that one.

Your further thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Under the new rules a spouse applies for FLR 33 months after the granting of the initial spouse settlement visa.

However, the English Language Certificates obtained in Thailand from CPA (TOEIC) or Vantage (BULATS) are only valid for 2 years.

When applying for FLR the spouse has to demonstrate the same requirement of understanding English as at the initial stage.

The problem is that when applying for FLR the original English certificate is no longer valid.

The English tests were introduced in November 2010 and, at that time, I believe applicants were given initial visas of 2 years 3 months which means people should have been applying for FLR from February 2013 onwards with expired English qualifications.

Has anyone experienced problems from the Home Office in this regard? I wrote to them but got a very bland non-answer saying that the applicant must be aware of the rules without saying what the rules are!

By the way, I also started a Topic on this about a year or so ago. No one had a definitive answer then and, as time has moved on, there must now be actual FLR applications with this potential problem so I have restarted it.

Many thanks.

Edited to include updated information from Correspondence Unit:

Thank you for your email correspondence of 30 December regarding the English language requirements for leave to remain and settlement applications.

I am sorry about the conflicting and incorrect information you have received regarding the expiry of English language tests. Our email of 16 December was incorrect. I can confirm that an expired A1 English language certificate can be provided for further leave to remain (LTR) in the UK as a spouse but not for LTR under the points based system.

An expired A1 or B1 certificate can also be provided for settlement and naturalisation applications. All certificates must be originals and issued by a valid provider as given on our list of providers which is subject to change.

I wrote to the UKBA and explained the anomaly of the timing of FLR applications versus the validity of the English Language Test Certificates obtained in Thailand.

The good news is that I got a reply within 9 days the bad news is that they failed to answer the question - mostly the reply just briefly trotted out the requirement to pass an English test before a spouse visa is granted for entry clearance - yes we all know that, that's how she got here in the first place!

The only paragraph that had some possible usefulness was :-

"However, you are advised to check the validity, date of expiry, and level of English test before you submit a FLR(M) application in the UK as these can change by the test providers."

So does this mean that everyone who obtained an English Language Cert in Thailand will be rejected for FLR in the future? Assuming they don't get further qualifications whilst in the UK.

My wife will not be applying for FLR until September 2015 and who knows how many times the regulations will have changed by then. I am therefore reluctant to go back to the Home Office until nearer the time of her FLR application. There will be many more in the queue before her who may discover they have a problem.

Interesting case with the right result in the end although they shouldn't have had to go through all the hassle and worry.

Someone posted recently in another topic that there was to be a worldwide review of English language testing centres by UKBA/Home Office and therefore if some existing test centres are "struck off" then this situation could happen again.

If possible it would be helpful if Malct could give us the names or reference of the case as it that would be useful for anyone caught up in this situation in the future i.e. it could be quoted back to UKBA.

Is it possible for a UK citizen (of Thai descent) to bring their Thai grandchild to the UK for settlement assuming that the grandparent entirely supports the grandchild even though the grandchild is over 18 years old and the grandchild has no other financial support?

Personally I think this is not possible and only children (not grandchildren) under 18 can be brought to the UK for settlement and Thai grandparents in some circumstances.

A visit visa I think would be possible for a max. of 6 months.

Sorry to ask a question where I think I know the answer but I would like to make sure.

Thanks.

So could this mean that if one of the current test providers in Thailand were "struck off" then anyone applying for FLR after April 2014 with a pass from that test provider then they will have to redo their English test?

Actually I think this happened before when one or more test providers in Pattaya were "struck off" and I believe someone in this forum on a fiancée visa had a lot of trouble trying to get Leave to Remain with a test pass from one of the Pattaya test providers.

Am I right in thinking that this problem has not yet surfaced because of the new FLR rules and that it will be about 2 years before this possible problem becomes apparent?

That's right - some of them don't have expiry dates but the ones obtained in Thailand (BULATS and CPA) both have 2 year validity. I don't know why the test providers in Thailand stipulate 2 years - maybe they are just guaranteeing them for that time. I think the relevant question is would the Home Office accept them for FLR purposes?

Thanks 7x7 - so it would seem that they do not allow email enquiries as there is no email address given.

Stanaris - yes it's a good idea to do English courses and LITUK and things may change in the future. However, I would like to know how things are now and what UKBA have to say about the anomaly between the validity of the test pass (2 years) and the applying for FLR after at least 2 1/2 years.

A couple of months ago I started a thread regarding the English Language requirement for FLR. Basically the query was that English Language Test Certificates (for spouse UK settlement) obtained in Thailand are valid for 2 years but the application for FLR is after 2 1/2 years so in fact the original test certificate is out of date when applying for FLR and, as such, would it still be accepted by the Home Office?

No one in this forum was able to give a definitive answer to this query and someone advised me to ask the Home Office directly. Looking through their website there doesn't seem to be an email address for these kinds of queries - anyone know if they have one?

Thanks.

Actually I had another look at my wife's BULATS certs and there is no reference on them regarding the 2 year validity so maybe it's a non-issue after all although I still think they guarantee the level achieved for 2 years - confusing!

If the UKBA were a commercial company they would have gone bust years ago!

We pay about 900 quid for a visa application and they can't make a decision within 3 months! Unbelievable!

Part of the problem is that legally they owe no "duty of care" to either the applicant or the sponsor. So who are they really accountable to? Only an Inspectors' Audit and I believe that is internal.

The new rules should have made it easier for ECOs to make a decision as it really has just become a tick box exercise and I think a lot of applications can be assessed in an hour (and I think that's being generous).

I really wonder how they organise themselves. For example they should look at applications on a First In First Out basis but you can tell from their published figures that they dont.

Another thing is that the TB certificate is only valid for 6 months and applicants are supposed to have 3 months in order to arrange their affairs before going to the UK. As the TB cert must be gotten before the application then there is a danger that it may have to be retaken and paid again.

Bottom line is that UKBA dont really care and it is yet another example of their disdain for applicants. They wont even discuss their problems by having meetings with the visa companies whereas I believe their counterparts at the Australian Embassy do have such meetings.

1) Neither BULATS nor TOEIC insist on candidates taking reading and writing as well as speaking and listening. That CPA and Vantage do so is their decision.

2) You are being to parochial; this test is not just required in Thailand, remember.

There is a big difference between running a specific test which can be taken only in the UK and running a worldwide test.

If the government (and it's the last Labour government who decided this, not the UKBA) had designed a test which was conducted by UKBA staff and therefore could only be taken in a British embassy there would no doubt be many complaints about having to travel to the embassy to take the test and the delay in visa processing which would result from the UKBA staff within the embassy conducting English tests instead of processing visa applications.

7by7,

Re 1):

No, there are two TOEIC modules: Listening and Reading and Speaking and Writing. Test centres have no choice in the selection of which modules a condidate can sit.

The same is true for BULATS, but they offer the Standard Test or three independent modules.

More curiously to me is why IELTS is still not on the list as being acceptable for the settlement route, whereas it is fine for different visa classes.

7x7 seems you are wrong!

Also why do you think I am being parochial? I think settlement applicants are experiencing these sort of problems worldwide.

Finally, I didnt say that the UKBA should conduct the tests only that they should design one which could be run by the test providers such as Vantage and CPA.

Seems to me that you, for some reason, do not want to accept any criticism of the UKBA.

Thanks for that. I just tried to email them in the "Enquires When Applying in the UK" section (because the query really relates to this section) but as I'm in Thailand at the moment I seem to have been denied access so I guess I'll have to wait till I'm back in Blighty.

Surely this query is going to be raised more and more as people go for FLR under the new rules.

Thank you EFF1n2ret for that useful history.

I would just take slight issue on 2 points :-

1. The test companies here CPA and Vantage run tests that are not their own. They run TOEIC and BULATS respectfully so I think they have very little control over the actual content of the tests. If TOEIC and BULATS say reading and writing have to be taken then CPA and Vantage have to go along with this. Also these tests are being run for a number of different reasons not just UKBA so really why should they mess around with their test formats?

2. You say the UKBA doesnt possess the skills or infrastructure to construct their own tests but this seems to have been accomplished with the Life in the UK tests. Surely if they had wanted to do it properly then they could have commissioned a company of language test specialists to design the test and then roll it out to test companies worldwide. In my opiniion they chose the cheaper option to save costs because they really couldnt give a dam_n about the problems the current system causes applicants.

Thanks for the replies. The language passes here in Thailand (TOEIC & BULATS) do have a 2 year validity but that is probably to guarantee the achieved standard for use in Thailand e.g. you could apply for UK settlement visa anytime up to 2 years after passing.

If the candidate has already come to the UK then presumably the original pass is valid indefinitely. Still seems to be a bit of an anomaly though!

I will say, though, that the requirement is only speaking and listening and that many (all?) test providers in the UK will allow candidates to sit just speaking and listening tests which do not involve any reading at all, as evidenced by an earlier post in this topic.

That test providers in Thailand have decided for their own, no doubt commercial, reasons to combine the reading and speaking elements into one test and the listening and writing elements into another so that candidates are forced into taking and paying for tests which are not required is not the fault of the UKBA.

Durhamboy, your argument is with the test providers in Thailand; not with the UKBA nor the government.

You may ask why the UKBA don't find other test providers in Thailand who will allow candidates to just take speaking and listening. If you can find such a provider, I'm sure they will be happy to hear from you.

My argument is with the UKBA. The test providers here in Thailand have been running these tests long before the UKBA requirements and, as I stated earlier, provide these tests for a number of reasons e.g. multinational companies use them to assess employees. The UKBA/HMG could suddenly decide to remove the English Language requirement so you cannot expect the test providers to change their testing methods just to suit UKBA requirements.

If the UKBA designed their own test then I'm sure that the test providers would be happy to run them. Btw, haven't HMG designed the Life in the UK test so why not a language test?

Anyway, as I understand it, your husband's refusal was not on the grounds of jeopardising the economic well-being of the UK (which was a spurious argument anyway) but that there was nothing to prevent you from continuing to live in Thailand after having been there for 7 years.

He was not refused because Ms Harper had lived in Thailand for the previous 7 years and could continue to do so.

Although Ms Harper has not told us the full details of her husbands refusal notice, from what she has said elsewhere he was refused for not meeting the new financial criteria. Something she knew would happen even before the application was submitted.

Read the early part of this topic and you will see a post of hers where she quotes the final part of the refusal notice; which says that the application has been considered under Article 8 and does not fall under this due to her living in Thailand for 7 years and there being no reason why she cannot continue to do so. She chose to move back to the UK, for understandable reasons; she wasn't forced to.

They do have a point.

Article 8 does not mean that anyone can live in any signatory country with their family regardless of any other considerations. It is a qualified right.

Basically, unless their are other factors such as a threat to personal safety hence seeking asylum, a signatory country's immigration law overrides Article 8.

Unless that immigration law is itself deemed to be in breach of Article 8.

The government's lawyers say these new financial requirements aren't.

Ms Harper's lawyers, and many others, say that they are.

The courts will decide who is correct; but as said before, I can see this going all the way to the ECHR; a lengthy and expensive process.

Sorry 7x7 but surely the essence of this case is that he was refused because they could continue to live in Thailand. I have looked back at the previous posts by Kate and the refusal notice stated

" With regards to Article 8, I note that your sponsor has resided with you in Thailand for a number of years and that your sponsor has chosen to return to the United Kingdom for the birth of your child. I note that there is no impediment to you and your sponsor continuing to reside as a family unit in Thailand. Your representatives state that your sponsor now wishes to start her own family in the United Kingdom as she will be supported by her immediate family and friends. I am therefore not satisfied that you have demonstrated that there would be a breach of Article 8 of the ECHR."

Ok this wasnt the full notice and granted the refusal was also on the grounds of failure to meet the financial requirement. As you say Kate and her husband knew that was going to happen so they brought the human rights aspect into play from the outset and were refused on these grounds also. The reason for the refusal on human rights grounds is that they could still live in Thailand - the UKBA seemingly failing to acknowledge that the goalposts have changed with the imminent birth.

In my opinion it is the new financial requirements and not allowing third party support that are preventing Kate and her family from exercising their right to a family life under Article 8.

Lets get one thing straight 7x7 - this is the second time you have said Kevin Cullen is my mate - he isn't. I've met him once and spoke on the phone to him twice. I also have no connection with his company Vantage so please stop calling him my mate.

Of course the UKBA have "piggy-backed" on existing tests. When you say "....they have used recognized tests which meet an international standard....." then what the hell do you think they are doing?

You dont seem to understand that these test companies are not regulated by the UKBA only approved by UKBA. In making that approval they would have looked at the tests provided and deemed that that are good enough for the need of the UK Government to have English Tests. In doing so they have decided that if candidates aldo have to take reading and writing (and have to read questions to pass speaking) then so what? Therefore they are responsible for this shambles not the companies offering the tests. I repeat - it is a shambles.

I ask you again why hasnt HMG/UKBA designed their own standard, universal test that is fair to all and does not involve the candidates having to read? You cant answer that can you?

My goodness when are you going to get it? Non-EU spouse's CAN NOT CLAIM benefits!!! As the sponsor who you are all still discussing too, you don't know me, so don't claim too know why I came back. As a man you just don't understand, ever been pregnant? No, so you don't understand at all. I came back for my family and friends. Even if I agree the health care and education are much better, so what? I am British, doesn't even matter! I should gave the right to it and living here with whomever I happened to have fallen in love with!

Kate you are quite right. The Settlement Visa stamp in an applicant's passport actually states "No recourse to public funds". Anyway, as I understand it, your husband's refusal was not on the grounds of jeopardising the economic well-being of the UK (which was a spurious argument anyway) but that there was nothing to prevent you from continuing to live in Thailand after having been there for 7 years. I think this thread should concentrate on that issue and not get carried away with costs and benefits etc.

In your case the big difference between now and the last 7 years is that you are pregnant. I believe you therefore have a very good reason for wanting/having to live in the UK. The UK Government are often heard trotting out the phrase "The well being of the child is paramount" so hopefully you can take them to task over this. As I posted before, Thailand has well over twice the child mortality rate of the UK so if the child's welfare really is paramount then that alone may be enough to win your case.

Finally to all you other guys that think that Kate is somehow playing the system then you should be ashamed of yourselves. She wants to bring her child up in the UK (for which she has every right to do) and she wants to bring the husband/father to the UK to provide a proper family unit. The only reason she is prevented from the latter wish is that it is impossible for them to meet an arbitrary financial requirement (which is crazy anyway because it doesnt consider costs) and she is not entitled to rely on any financial support from her UK family. Seems to me that it is HMG that is playing the system not Kate

Mmmmmmm 105 views so far and no responses! Does this mean that no one knows the answers? I'm sure you do.

My main concern is that the English Language Test certificate that my wife got is valid for 2 years but she would be seeking FLR after nearly 3 years from the test. Seems to be an anomaly.

7x7 - I have described it properly - it is you that misunderstood what I posted by confusing it with the reading test. Tigger01's girlfriend took the test in the UK and it may well be that particular version of the test contains no reading. Part of the problem about this shambles is that there are so many versions of the test. Here in Thailand there are 3 available - TOEIC, BULATS and Pearsons - TOEIC and BULATS Speaking tests contain questions that the candidates have to READ. I dont know about Pearsons.

It is UKBA/HMG that have introduced these tests and it is they that made the decision to "piggy back" on existing tests rather than design a version of the test that solely fits their requirements. Frankly I think this is yet another example of the UK Government treating applicants for settlement with disdain. Companies here in Thailand are not doing these tests solely for UK settlement. They have many candidates doing these tests for other reasons so you cannot expect them to reorganise their own tests just to appease UKBA. By the way 7x7 you dont seem to want to criticise UKBA over this issue so why don't you ask them why they haven't designed their own tests.

I don't know what test your wife took but maybe it was easier and didnt contain any reading. She also had the advantage of being in England for a while which is the best way to pick up a language.

Yes many people pass. Eventually my wife did also (A2 btw) but a lot fail and have to do retakes. I never actually said that the test was difficult I actually said that it isn't easy (especially for Thais because of the script problem) and the system is a shambles. You on the other hand intimated that the test was easy hence my disagreeing with you because you are giving people a misguided assessment.

May I make a suggestion to the moderators of this forum instead of having me and 7x7 arguing over this why not pull the original thread I started about 6 months ago (it contained a lot of very useful contributions from people) and put it in the Basics Section of this forum. This will save members asking the same questions over and over again.