the scouser

However, the OP's girlfriend's reasons for being a genuine visitor will be particular to her, and can't per se be extrapolated. Therefore to say her success may be of help to others, is a non sequitur.

Perhaps the reason why some no longer give freely of advice is through ennui, although you couldn't possibly have been referring to me!

Scouse.

.... Where did you get this cost from?

I'm involved in the 'industry', so the cost is something that has become known to me through my enquiries. It may vary between £120.00 and £200.00, depending upon the contractor chosen.

Perhaps TV can expect some advertising enquiries soon?

Scouse.

I am fully aware of the guidance published to IOs/ECOs, and am as equally surprised that you do not understand the difference between law and policy.

The nub of the matter is that nowhere in law does it say that one can't visit the UK for more than 6 months in any 12. What you have cited is the UKBA's own policy, which has no legal effect. It is exactly that: guidance and not law.

An ECO cannot refuse a visit visa application simply because the applicant has recently spent a prolonged period of time in the UK. It might be that such an application might be refused on the basis that the ECO doubts the applicant's intention to leave the UK at the end of the proposed trip in view of the fact that they only recently spent X amount of time in the UK, but it is the applicant's circumstances that will decide that, and not simply that they have recently spent x amount of time in the UK.

Therefore, to blithely cite a 6/12 'rule' is not only misleading, but negligent.

As ever: if you want accurate legal advice, see a reputable adviser.

Scouse.

There is no 6-in-12 rule.

If anyone can show me the legislation that sets out such a concept in law, I am more than willing to be enlightened.

Scouse.

It's just another money-making ruse under the auspices of promoting "private enterprise"; i.e. jobs for the boys.

The test is at the lowest level (A1 of CEFR), which would perhaps equate to a farang being able to say, "Sawadee khap. Sabai dee mai? Wan nee ahgaht rawn, noh?" in Thai.

It serves no useful purpose, but will deprive the visa applicant (or the sponsor) of an additional 200 notes.

Scouse.

No one has to pay to change ILE in to ILR anyway: the two are synonymous.

One denotes a status given on entry, and the other within the UK.

Scouse.

What happened to 7x7's earlier post, which seems to have now been wiped from the record?

Scouse.

Q6.9 of form VAF1:-

Do you have any criminal convictions in any country(including traffic offences)?

The question's the same for all application forms.

Scouse.

As has already been stated, there is little the UKBA can do to require her to leave the UK.

If she and her husband divorce after they have been married for at least 3 years, and at least one of which was spent in the UK, she might qualify for retained rights of residence under European law.

Scouse.

Providing that the visit visa remains valid and the holder has not spent more than 6 months in the UK at any one time, their presence is lawful and they cannot be construed to be an overstayer.

There is nothing in law that stipulates a visitor may only spend six months of twelve in the UK.

Scouse.

Your step-son's all OK then, and he will be construed as being permanently resident in the UK from his first arrival. He can go to college, work, or sit on his backside. But he shouldn't spend more than 2 years outside of the UK. He won't realistically be able to register as a British citizen at the same time as your wife applies for her naturalisation, but will have to wait until he has been in the UK for 5 years.

Scouse.

The OP seems to have alluded to another point. He implies that the mother does not possess indefinite leave herself. The child should be granted leave in line with the parent, and if she possesses time-limited conditions, the child's grant of ILE is erroneous.

If this is the case, then as a general principle, one cannot benefit from something that one is no legally entitled to, and the visa endorsement should be rectified.

Scouse.

Within this thread, the OP has had sound advice off three (no less!) ex-employees of the UK Border Agency, yet seems to persevere in the belief that he must be right because their suggestions do not fit what he wants to hear.

In such a circumstance, it can only be suggested that the application is made 'as is', and the end result will be the arbiter.

Scouse.

You don't necesarily need to mention anything, as the facts will speak for themselves.

As a German citizen you have an entitlement to enter the UK for an initial 3 months on the production of your passport or ID card. This entitlement is also extended to your wife, irrespective of her nationality. That 3-month period then gives you the opportunity to establish yourself as a 'qualified person'. Once established, you and your wife can remain in the UK for as long as your qualification exists. After 5 years' lawful presence, you and your wife will be considered to have permanent residence.

This entitlement can only be refused if you or your wife has either a serious medical condition, a serious and continuing criminal record, or otherwise pose an ongoing threat to the fundamental well-being of the UK.

Scouse.

As you will presumably travelling to the UK at the same time as your wife, for the purposes of her family permit application you don't have to show that you are a 'qualified person' as defined by the regulation posted by Eff1in2ret.

You have an initial right of residence for 3 months in which to become a 'qualified person'.

13.—(1) An EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom for a period not exceeding three months beginning on the date on which he is admitted to the United Kingdom provided that he holds a valid national identity card or passport issued by an EEA State.

(2) A family member of an EEA national residing in the United Kingdom under paragraph (1) who is not himself an EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom provided that he holds a valid passport.

(3) But—

(a)this regulation is subject to regulation 19(3)(; and.

(b)an EEA national or his family member who becomes an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the United Kingdom shall cease to have the right to reside under this regulation.

Scouse.

I have just retired after 40 years in the UK Immigration Service

Hello Tony, Gatwick North seems such a long time ago now....

Scouse.

Although it's been nearly 4 years since Noel's death, time has not eroded the friendship we forged in that sort space of time we actually met.

I still think of him often, and I'm happy to hear that Wan and Noel's family are well.

Scouse.

There are plenty of approved schools in Liverpool, but I don't think that's the sort of place you're on about.

It's not the method or content of teaching that is approved, but the test itself. How one learns the language is (will be) secondary to obtaining the pass certificate from an accredited body.

Scouse.

When issued, the ID card is accompanied by a notice that informs the recipient that s/he should immediately check the card and report any mistake within a certain timeframe. Any alterations after that date will incur further cost.

That said, it's evidently only a spelling mistake and, by itself, does not detract from your wife's permission to be in the UK. I can't see the UKBA being able to justify refusing your wife entry simply because her place of birth is spelt "Bankok", rather than "Bangkok". Such a mistake reflects more adversely upon the UKBA staff than your wife.

If you wish to be mischievious, I suppose you could ask for a replacement ID card on the basis that your wife's place of birth is "Krungthep Mahanakhon..........", and they wouldn't be able to fit it all in.

I wouldn't worry about it.

Scouse.

The original question was whether the children need to obtain an English language qualification post-29/11.

From what I've read on this thread, the answer has not yet been provided, although some replies are more witting than others.

I'd also like to know the answer.

Scouse.

Just to clarify, the Immigration Rules do not require that the visa applicant demonstrates an intention to return to the home country, but that s/he intends to leave the UK at the end of the proposed visit.

There is a difference, albeit subtle.

Scouse.

Surely the OISC-registered sponsor of this forum should be in a position to answer this question?

I'm sure the OP can look forward to a response in due course. One that is well-measured and which reflects the nuances of current immigration law and policy.

Scouse.

She has to be either joining you or accompanying you, so if she travels in advance, she could be refused entry.

Scouse.

Just to add a little spice to the mixture, I recently attended an OISC meeting in the UK during which it was stated that the Commissioner takes a rather dim view of those who register and then promptly clear off abroad to practise whilst continuing to flaunt their OISC credentials.

Food for thought, perhaps?

Scouse.

I would ask that you bear in mind that the law prohibits those under 21 from seeking spousal settlement visas, but it doesn't prevent you and your girlfriend from marrying, if that is what you wish to do.

Notwithstanding the above, there is no requirement in law that you and your girlfriend be separated for her to benefit from the provisions regarding rights of access to a child resident in the UK. Indeed, such would beg the question of how you could be separated when you've never been married to each other. The Immigration Rules state:-

246. The requirements to be met by a person seeking leave to enter the United Kingdom to exercise access rights to a child resident in the United Kingdom are that:

(i) the applicant is the parent of a child who is resident in the United Kingdom; and

(ii) the parent or carer with whom the child permanently resides is resident in the United Kingdom; and

(iii) the applicant produces evidence that he has access rights to the child in the form of:

(a) a Residence Order or a Contact Order granted by a Court in the United Kingdom; or

( a certificate issued by a district judge confirming the applicant's intention to maintain contact with the child; and

(iv) the applicant intends to take an active role in the child's upbringing; and

(v) the child is under the age of 18; and

(vi) there will be adequate accommodation for the applicant and any dependants without recourse to public funds in accommodation which the applicant owns or occupies exclusively; and

(vii) the applicant will be able to maintain himself and any dependants adequately without recourse to public funds; and

(viii) the applicant holds a valid United Kingdom entry clearance for entry in this capacity.

Focussing on sub-section (iii), your girlfriend would need only to obtain either a residence order, contact order, or a district judge's certificate. Perhaps speak to your local county court about how such is obtained. Once your girlfriend has one of these documents, and on the assumption that the other requirements of the Rules are met, she can return to Thailand and seek a visa to enter in this capacity.

In addition, I do not see why, anyway, an in-country application based on your having lived together for in excess of 2 years would not succeed. This could include human rights grounds.

Scouse.