durhamboy

Clerks at airline check ins are not EU officials! They work for the airline.

It is up to each individual airline whether or not they will carry a passenger; visa or no visa.

If you have the necessary visa or right to enter the country of destination and you are refused due to mistake on the part of the airline ground staff I would say that's breach of contract.

Yes Goatfarmer I would agree with you. I really do think people should at least try to assert their rights to visa free travel to the EU. By all means check with the carrier first by sending them an email. They should reply that they agree that no visa is required and then take that along to check-in. Also get a similar confirmation from the relevant embassy. A lot less hassle then getting a visa - free or otherwise.

I started a topic about the TOEIC English Test a few months ago. If you can search that there is quite a lot of info and advice there. Bottom line is I recommend the BULATS test run by Vantage in Bangkok. Contact Kevin Cullen.

Yes Kiggs it is right - 8 weeks = 40 days i.e. 5 working days in a week x 8 = 40 - see my previous post #886 above.

Interesting figures - more than twice as many decisions than September up from 20 to 41.

1 visa was granted within 2 weeks and a total of 38 within their target of 12 weeks (60 days) and 3 were between 12 weeks and 18 weeks.

I think this is not a valid English test as there is no APPROVED test centre in Pattaya - only Bangkok (CPA, Pearsons and Vantage) also one in Chang Mai but definitely not Pattaya. The tests were introduced in 2010 so I cannot therefore understand that she got a fiancee visa and I suspect it might have been just a visitor visa but then you cannot switch directly to a settlement visa without going back to Thailand first. Something doesnt add up here.

Our application has been with the embassy for about 1 month now. When I track it on the VFS site it just says that the application has been forwarded to the embassy. Do you get any other kinds of messages e.g. an ECO is looking at your application or is it just the same message until a decision is reached?

Thanks

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you.

The exceptions are clearly laid out in paragraph 2 of article 8.

Exclusion of a terrorist or other criminal from a signatory country would come under the 'national security,' 'public safety' or 'prevention of disorder or crime' exceptions, not the 'economic well being' one.

When they first published the proposals the government made it clear that they had considered the human rights situation and their opinion, or more likely the opinion of their lawyers, was that the new proposals did not breach article 8.

As you say, though, whether or not that opinion is correct will only be determined when, and if, a case comes before the courts.

I take your point about 'economic well being' but again I somehow doubt that the intention of the article's exception is to prevent someone claiming social security benefits. Surely it is within a signatory government's power to enact legislation to exclude certain people (e.g. foreign spouses without ILR) from claiming benefits thereby preserving their human rights. IMO I think that the intent of 'economic well being' is to prevent, say, someone who has previous convictions for major credit card fraud from rights under Article 8.

See recent topic about Schengen Visas - apparently under an EU directive Thai spouses of UK citizens dont need to have visas for Schengen countries but its not easy because of all the ignorance about it - please see the posts.

HK & Macau are obviously both part of China now albeit as Special Regions. Back in 1997 after the HK handover there was one weekend when thousands of Brits went over to Macau to get an extra year on their visas - Macau didnt go back to China until 1999. 2 suggestions :-

1. Just take one person over a few days before and see what happens.

2. Couldnt instead of going to Macau just go up to the Shenzen border and do the same thing?

7x7

2.There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

The government argue that the new rules, and the financial requirements in particular, fall under the exception I have highlighted.

This, as you say, may be the government's interpretation of the exceptions but they would say that wouldn't they? As far as I know it has never been tested at the ECHR and may never be because the procedure as you explained is so onerous. However, if it were tested then I am sure that the INTENTION of the exceptions was not to prevent the possibility of someone claiming social security benefits more to prevent extreme (or extremist) cases e.g. a terrorist marrying a UK citizen and claiming the right to live in the UK.

Saudi Sid - I cannot understand your post - are you happy that these procedures are so onerous for Joe Public?

Sorry to hear about your predicament - yet another example of how these new rules are causing unnecessary distress. 2 small things come to mind for you :-

1. You say you have 5k in savings - I believe there is a formula to reduce the 18,600 pa based on the amount of savings you have although this might be avove 16000 only - worth checking. Also you may have a small bit of interest on your savings (probably only 150 quid pa at best but that would also reduce the 18600). Just might make all the difference.

2. I think the TB cert is only valid for 6 months so if she re-enters UK after expiry she may need another one.

Apparently, there is a Judicial Review hearing in the Upper Tribunal of the Appeal court next week. It is a challenge to the new requirements, along the lines of :

The legal challenge on 7 November 2012

The Court is asked to do the following

1 Declare that appendix FM and HC 194 of the immigration rules are not sufficient to satisfy the requirements of article 8 ECHR.

2 Do not have the effect of primary legislation

3 Must be read down so as to defer to the case law on Article 8 by ECHR and the obligations of the tribunal under primary legislation.

In addition, the government has just had a setback in the IAT on the "scope and meaning" of Article 8 private and family life in the rules introduced in July. The relevant determination is MF (Article 8 – new rules) Nigeria[2012] UKUT 00393 (IAC).

Hopefully the JR hearing next week will produce a similar result.

VisaPlus - do you know what happened at the Judicial Revue?

Thanks

Justiceft96 - for what it's worth I used to be a commercial lawyer and about 10 years ago I sued the Home Office over a spouse visa issue. I personally took them to the County Court and lost and had to pay costs. The judge said that whilst she sympathised with my case the Home Office did not owe a "duty of care" either to me or my then wife. Therefore it seems that the Home Office can do what the hell it likes and you have no recourse in the UK courts.

It would seem that the only way to get justice is the European Court of Human Rights - I think Article 8 is the relevant one about the right to family life. In my opinion I think on the face of it you may have a case as you are being prevented from living as a family in your own country (which is obviously within Europe). However, that is only my opinion and others may differ with me (as above). Going to Europe I'm sure would not be easy and it may be that you would have to sue in the UK courts first to establish a legal refusal by the UK Government. It probably is a minefield and may be very costly (especially if you lose). I really wish someone sometime actually does it and kicks the UK Government from here to eternity.

I wish you the best of luck.

"I don't know what further explanation can be given beyond what I said in posts #52 and #75, and VisaPlus' very detailed exposition in post #76 of why the airlines will not carry passengers who are not properly documented. If you think it's worth trying otherwise, go ahead, let us know how it works out."

It will probably be at least 2 years before I even think about a trip to Europe but when I do I will try to get responses from the carrier and embassy about the fact there is no need for a visa. It strikes me that as this directive has been around for 8 years it is because people have not been asserting their rights that there is so much ignorance about this issue. There must be thousands (probably into the tens of thousands) of trips to Europe where a visa is not required. Let you know in 2 years!

I'm still rather confused by this. 7x7 (a very respected member) here says a spouse does not need a visa. Is that 100% true? If so, is everyone just getting these visas for the sake of protecting their travel arrangements to prevent being held up or refused at borders? If so, then surely a couple of emails (one to the carrier one to the respective consulate) would be worth trying first.......maybe I've missed the point somewhere.

Latest figures on settlement visa processing times from UKBA for applications in Thailand for month of September 2012 are

Within 40 days = 5%

Within 60 days = 100%

Total Decisions made = 20

Remarkably few decisions - anyone have any idea why there were so few applications? Is it the new rule changes and everyone rushed to get applications in before 9th July so now there are very few?

When they say days I think they mean a working day i.e. 5 = 1 week so 40 days is 8 weeks lapsed time.

It would seem from the figures that the "average" wait time for a decision was about 50 days or 10 weeks. Maximum wait time was 60 days or 12 weeks.

Correct - Listening is 60 out of 495 and Speaking is 50 out of 200 which means that Speaking is harder to pass.

I heard somewhere that UKBA will accept genuine scorecards. In our case my wife also got a certificate from BULATS so I submitted that plus the scorecards.

She shouldnt need the test in the UK. Even though the TB Cert is only valid for 6 months it would have been valid when you entered the UK. Probably the UK hospital is unaware of the TB requirements now in force for UK settlement. Previously there was no requirements and tests were done in the UK (usually at Heathrow) but I dont know when this changed.

It's worth remembering that strictly speaking, if she is traveling with or to join you, she actually doesn't need a visa at all!

The European Commission sitesays

Arriving at the border without an entry visa

It's always best for your non-EU family members to be well informed in advance and have all the necessary documents before starting their journey.

However, if they arrive at the border without an entry visa, the border authorities should give them the opportunity to prove by any means that they are your family members. If they manage to prove it, they should be issued with an entry visa on the spot.

Some countries may fail to apply EU law correctly, and your family members may be denied their rights. If your family members are having difficulties getting a visa, you can contact our assistance services.

So arriving at an EU entry point with you, your passport and your marriage certificate and they should let her in.

However, to avoid possible delays while immigration staff check I would advise getting a visa beforehand.

Note that the freedom of movement regulations, and therefore the above, does not apply if entering the country of which the EU/EEA national is a citizen; except in certain circumstances such as the Surinder Singh ruling.

I have been reading this thread with great interest. It seems that many people dont know that they can travel freely around Europe with their Thai/Foreign spouses and families. This must be happening thousands of times a year and people are applying for and paying for unnecessary visas plus putting up with the admin nightmare.

The first problem is whether the carrier (airline/boat co.) would accept a Thai passenger without a visa.

May I make a sugestion. Could someone send an email to some of the major carriers and destinations e.g. :-

BA to Barcelona

Air France to Paris

Lufthansa to Frankfurt

Alitalia to Rome

KLM to Amsterdam

Eurostar to Brussels

Norfolkline to Dunkirk (from Dover)

and say something on the lines of "I would like to take my Thai wife on a vacation to ................. on your carrier. I understand from the EU Directive issued in 2004 (Quote exact reference) that she is entitled to travel to said destination without a visa. Could you please confirm that if I were to purchase tickets that you would not deny her boarding your carrier for reasons of not having a visa. We will of course be bringing along a copy of our marriage certificate as proof of our relationship"

See what they come back with. Then if any of them say that a visa is required then send a follow up email saying that they would be in breach of European Law and make themselves likely to be sued for denying someone's right to free movement in the EU. Again see what they say.

When positive replies have been obtained from the carriers then send an email to the embassies/consulates of the countries concerned posing the same question.

Anyone up for doing that? I would do it myself but I am in Thailand right now and just applied for the UK spouse visa.

Many thanks TVE. I will keep the photocopies separately filed.

You say that VFS remove copy of marriage cert - do you mean photocopy of marriage cert or original?

You also say that they remove passport copy - presumably that is my UK passport photocopy rather than my Thai wife's passport?

Thanks again.

Sorry guys but could you please help me with another naff questions. When my wife goes to VFS to present all her documents in a nice neat folder should all the photocopies be in a separate section on their own or with each relevant original or does it matter?

My inclination is that for clarity to put each copy with the relevant original but I seem to recall reading somewhere that VFS insist they be in a separate section on their own.

Sorry to ask such a basic question but I really dont want her to get there and have to re-sort out all the photocopies from originals especially as I understand that I cannot go into the VFS offices with her.

Thanks a lot!

Ok did the online application and got an appointment for submission at VFS.

They directed me back to the UKBA for the Appendix 2 regarding the financial requirement etc. I printed off the form "Appendix 2 (VAF 4A August 2012)". Am I right that my wife should complete this form manually and submit it rather than some sort of online process?

Many thanks in advance.

Thanks TVE - saves a bit of photocopying blank pages.

Yes my funds are in my name and under my control for +6 months in an instant access account.

Many thanks to all posters - here goes!!!!!!!

Thanks O.G.

Fortunately I qualify with savings over 62,500 so no need to show employment status.

Btw, TVE what do you do about copies of UK passports for your clients - do you submit copies of all the blank pages?

Cheers!

Just got married to my Thai fiancee last Friday and sometime this month I will make the UK Spouse Settlement Visa application to VAF - noting that the price has gone up yet again because of the exchange rate!

Anyway, I have a few queries regarding the required documents :-

1. Is it really necessary to submit my and my wife's birth certificates? I would have thought that as birth dates are in our passports then that is sufficient.

2. We are both divorced and will submit original divorce certificates. We do not have the marriage certificates relating to those divorces. Anyone see that as a problem?

3. It says on the UKBA website that I need to submit a full copy of my passport. I presume that is the bio data page and the stamped pages but does it also include the blank pages?

4. I read in a previous post here that all the documents (of which there are many!) can be submitted in a folder and VAF must accept this, Can someone confirm this please?

Many thanks.

Is PTE Pearsons?

BULATS has more business like questions than TOEIC but one of the main BULATS selling points is that the questions are computer adaptive which means as the candidate progressively gets answers wrong the questions get progressively easier until the candidates ability level matches the questions. Also with regard to Speaking for some reason the A1 pass with Bulats is only about 10% whereas with TOEIC it is 25% - just shows what a shambles this whole thing is really!

Bulats is slightly more expensive but worth it in my opinion - I believe most visa agents recommend Bulats to their clients.