Eff1n2ret

Yes, good idea to wait for the letter from the Polish authorities. Then you can see the reasons why you were refused and make sure that your application to France removes these defects. I don't think sending a letter complaining that the Polish decision was wrong will help you very much. You need to be able to say - "I was refused because of a b & c, but these reasons are not valid this time because x, y & z".

Warrenz, where are you at the moment? in Thailand or in Russia?

Wherever you are, you must include good evidence of your future plans to show that you intend to return where you came from - if in Russia, arrangements for your future course and acceptance on it, and evidence of how you pay for it - or, if you're not going back to Russia, evidence that you've got a job or university course to go back to in Thailand.

If all you send is a letter from your sponsor in France and a photocopy of her passport you will be refused.

Great stuff, thanks for the responses.

The catch is that we haven't actually got round to registering the marriage as yet, even though it's been over 2 years. I'm guessing it'll be 4 years from the date we registered for the Indefinite Leave to Enter visa?

Eff1n2ret - will look into doing the KOL test from here, thanks for the advice.

You don't actually have to have been legally married for the four years, you must have formed a partnership and lived together abroad for that length of time.

Taken from the UKBA website here http://www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk/ukresiden...fecivilpartner/

"In some cases, we can give your husband, wife or civil partner permission to live permanently in the United Kingdom as soon as he/she arrives. To qualify for this, you must:

have married or formed a civil partnership four years or more ago;

have spent those four years living together outside the United Kingdom;

now be returning to the United Kingdom to settle here together; and

your spouse/partner must (unless aged 65 or over) have sufficient knowledge of the English language and about life in the United Kingdom."

A bit pedantic, I know, but a "civil partner" is someone whose same-sex relationship has been recognised in a formal ceremony giving the partnership the same status as marriage. In this case the OP's wife is an "unmarried partner", but the same principle applies as set out in Para 295A of the Immigration Rules:

"b(i) the applicant is the unmarried or same-sex partner of a person who has a right of abode in the United Kingdom or indefinite leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom and is on the same occasion seeking admission to the United Kingdom for the purposes of settlement and the parties have been living together outside the United Kingdom in a relationship akin to marriage or civil partnership which has subsisted for 4 years or more;"

Insight, I don't know whether your lady can actually take the KOL test outside the UK, I very much doubt it. But my suggestion was that you seek the course material so that she can mug up for it and take it on a visit.

There's no application that you can make now that would give you any advantage if/when you do decide to settle in the UK. Your sponsorship of several tourist visas for you wife is adequate proof of an enduring and genuine marriage, so your only concerns in applying for settlement would be proof of support and accommodation.

If you have a visit planned in the near future, you might like to look into how/where she could take the "Knowledge of Life in the UK" test, and prepare her for that, which I think you can do online. It would be highly unusual for a visitor to take the KOL test, but I don't see why she shouldn't if she's up to it. A good reason for doing so would be that if you have been married and living together outside the UK for 4 years, she can apply directly for ILR rather than the 2-year probationary period, except that she would still have to take the KOL test after arrival in the UK and apply to have her status upgraded, which would cost several hundred quid extra.

oh good point there paully, yes without the Life in UK test she wont be able to apply. But I think in that case from reading further down in that thread, once she arrived in the UK she could take the test & apply for ILR as soon as she lands.

But I'm sure one of the experts will be along to clarify

Correct. The Entry Clearance Guidance on the UK Visas website actually says this:

"Where an applicant has satisfied all of the requirements for ILE except the KOL requirement, they should be granted 27 months LTE. During this time they can, at any point, satisfy the KOL requirement in the UK and apply for ILR."

So they'll still sting you for the cost of a further application, but you don't have to wait 2 years.

" ...During this period you are expected to marry your fiance/fiancee. After marriage you must apply to the Home Office to regularise your stay....

..Subject to their approval, the Home Office will then place a stamp in your passport, which will enable you to remain in the UK for a further limited period, or indefinitely..."

How is that confusing? They're telling you exactly what happens.

Your return ticket and hotel booking if your sponsors cannot accommodate you, an invitation letter from them and any evidence (letters, photos etc) of your previous relationship with them, bank statement and credit card statements, confirmation from your college of attendance and exams passed, and that you are enrolled for further study there.

Unfortunately, Moscow is a popular transit point for nationals of many countries, such as China, Afghanistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh, etc seeking to gain entry to and settle in Western Europe, so I suspect that the Polish border official just decided that it was unlikely that you were just seeking entry for a short-term visit and bounced you back - an extremely arbitrary decision given that you actually had a visa. (Possession of a UK visa at least guarantees you the right to appeal before removal).

You should pursue your complaint against the Polish authorities, although I don't know whether you will get very far. But the cancellation will probably make it more difficult for you to get a visa from any other Schengen country. If you want to go to France, you have to present a very strong case, showing a close relationship with the family whose child is being named, and the absolute certainty that you will return to Russia to continue your studies.

Its pretty passe in the US these days, only people still wearing it are the hiphop gangsta wannabees.....

Yes, and in the UK the wearer frequently affects a Jamaican accent. :-

Edit

and, I almost forgot, the "pimp roll" so well described in "Bonfire of the Vanities"

Can somebody please confirm that this is true....(about being able to use time as a visitor and fiance towards the threee years needed).

This would mean that for my wife she will be eligible to apply for citizenship as soon as she has ILR in October (we first came back to UK - her as a visitor - in September 2006 then fiance visa and married in UK in September 2007).

Has anybody else done this?....apply for citizenship as soon as ILR is received? I was under the impression that the time would be counted from when you were married (as it does for ILR) i.e. 3 years in UK as a Spouse of UK citizen?

Many thanks,

B.

It's true. She would be applying under S6(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981, and the time limit requirements are specified as follows:

"Naturalisation as a British citizen under section 6(2)

3. Subject to paragraph 4, the requirements for naturalisation as a British citizen under section 6(2) are, in the case of any person who applies for it—

(a)that he was in the United Kingdom at the beginning of the period of three years ending with the date of the application, and that the number of days on which he was absent from the United Kingdom in that period does not exceed 270; and

(b)that the number of days on which he was absent from the United Kingdom in the period of twelve months so ending does not exceed 90; and

©that on the date of the application he was not subject under the immigration laws to any restriction on the period for which he might remain in the United Kingdom; and

(d)that he was not at any time in the period of three years ending with the date of the application in the United Kingdom in breach of the immigration laws;"

When you say "cracking down on overstays" it is true that about a year ago the Immigration Rules were changed to provide for an automatic ban on applicants who were previous illegal entrants or overstayers for up to 10 years - see Para 320 7B of the Rules

BUT

Given the obvious Human Rights implications, spouse and fiance applications were exempted -see Para 320 7C.

So there is no bar against making a settlement application, and it should be treated on its merits, so if it's sound it should succeed. To attempt to conceal the previous overstay could be fatal, because the application would be refused because of deception, and that would attract a mandatory ban of 10 years, without exemption (Para 320 7(A)

As 'Effin Tourette says, have a look at the client care letter with which the IAS will have issued you. That essentially forms the basis of the contract and states any intial advice given.

I'll bet my bottom dollar that it states that the client was told that the Immigration Rules state that such an application is bound to fail, but that there is nothing preventing an in-country application being made on the basis of exceptional circumstances, although any grant of permission to stay will be solely at the discretion of the Secretary of State. If there is no client care letter, then there's no contract.

Hi

Believe it or not we never received such a letter, and not only did the IAS adviser know we were on a holiday visa (as I pointed it out strongly) As stated before he said we could not apply for a spousal visa, but we could apply for extension of two years, that we had a 99% chance of succeeding, he told me he could see no problem. This is not in any way a racist thing, but the guy dealing with me was west african (I think) and makes me wonder how much he knows about immigration law in the UK.

Every one here keeps saying I did a wrong thing, our intentions not to stay in england origanally were genuine, then when we changed our minds we went to the IAS for advise as to how to stay.

Well, there's something fishy here.

If you google OISC, it takes you to the website of the Office of Immigration Services Commissioners, and they say this regarding complaints:-

"If you think your immigration adviser has given you poor advice or an inadequate service, you can complain to the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC). You can complain about any adviser solicitor, barrister, OISC regulated adviser or unregulated person - even if you didn't find them through the OISC. The OISC can accept complaints from anyone whether or not they received the immigration advice or services themselves. We work to make sure that all advisers give good advice and we take all complaints seriously."

If you can get them to uphold your complaint I don't know whether that would enable you to claim compensation or sue IAS, but even if it doesn't, IAS should be called to account.

Good luck

Hi

If you read further down on the OISC website it list what they can not help you with, one of them being getting a refund or compensation.

No, but if they said your complaint was justified it would give you evidence to pursue your own case against IAS

As 'Effin Tourette says, have a look at the client care letter with which the IAS will have issued you. That essentially forms the basis of the contract and states any intial advice given.

I'll bet my bottom dollar that it states that the client was told that the Immigration Rules state that such an application is bound to fail, but that there is nothing preventing an in-country application being made on the basis of exceptional circumstances, although any grant of permission to stay will be solely at the discretion of the Secretary of State. If there is no client care letter, then there's no contract.

Hi

Believe it or not we never received such a letter, and not only did the IAS adviser know we were on a holiday visa (as I pointed it out strongly) As stated before he said we could not apply for a spousal visa, but we could apply for extension of two years, that we had a 99% chance of succeeding, he told me he could see no problem. This is not in any way a racist thing, but the guy dealing with me was west african (I think) and makes me wonder how much he knows about immigration law in the UK.

Every one here keeps saying I did a wrong thing, our intentions not to stay in england origanally were genuine, then when we changed our minds we went to the IAS for advise as to how to stay.

Well, there's something fishy here.

If you google OISC, it takes you to the website of the Office of Immigration Services Commissioners, and they say this regarding complaints:-

"If you think your immigration adviser has given you poor advice or an inadequate service, you can complain to the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC). You can complain about any adviser solicitor, barrister, OISC regulated adviser or unregulated person - even if you didn't find them through the OISC. The OISC can accept complaints from anyone whether or not they received the immigration advice or services themselves. We work to make sure that all advisers give good advice and we take all complaints seriously."

If you can get them to uphold your complaint I don't know whether that would enable you to claim compensation or sue IAS, but even if it doesn't, IAS should be called to account.

Good luck

I see you made it to the Silverlake vineyard. It certainly attracts a lot of visitors, and is a pleasant spot to pass an hour or so, with the Wat KaoCheeChan nearby. But it's disappointing that they don't appear to produce any wine. All you can buy is rather insipid grape juice.

I went there last month to see if they could sell me a vine for my garden, but they didn't have any.

ILR effectively becomes redundant as soon as one acquires British citizenship, because Brit Cits don't require Leave to Remain, Indefinite or otherwise, they have Right of Abode.

There is no endorsement entitling UK residence that UKBA will now put in the foreign passport of anyone who holds a British passport. If they acquire British citizenship they can opt to have a Certificate of Entitlement of Right of Abode in their foreign passport, but that would be cancelled if they were issued with a British passport.

Do you have any written evidence of them advising you that you should put the application in to the BIA? If you have anything written down which has them advising you to go ahead and apply, then you could be on to a winner. If you have strong evidence that you were advised wrongly, I'd saygo over to the small claims court website and make a claim.

My understanding is that IAS have to act like any other legal advisor and issue a "client care" letter before they proceed, detailing what they have been instructed to do, and their fees (if any). The OP should read all the paperwork they gave him, including all the small print, before he takes any action. There appears to have been some failure of communication by IAS or of understanding by the OP, because if he clearly understood that they couldn't make an application for LTR as a spouse, it's not clear on what grounds he thought they were applying for a 2-year "extension". I can't believe that IAS told him they could extend her visit visa by 2 years. Didn't he keep a copy of the application? What does it say?

I got my e-book reader a month ago. Mine is a rebranded version of the Hanlin V3 purchased from BeBook. If you buy the device direct from the manufacturer (Jinke) there is only one payment option which is direct money transfer through bank accounts. With Bebook they've got a lot more options including Paypal which is what I used. During purchase it auto-detected my currency as AUD and at the time the THB was pretty strong against it so I got the thing cheaper than it would have been if it had auto-detected and set it to EURO. They also sent it out using Fedex International Priority which got the the thing into my hands 3 days after I ordered it online. Fedex delivered right to my door and that's also when I had to pay the import tax which was 600ish baht. So all up the device put a hole in my wallet to the tune of about 11,000 baht. Also at the moment they have a referer program that knocks $25 off the price.

On a technical note though. All e-readers use the same screen. The E-Ink display is a patented tech so all the screens are produced by one single company from one single factory. So it doesn't matter if it's a Kindle, Sony Reader, Hanlin V3, Cybook, Iiliad.... The screen is the same. What is different though between the devices can be the screen controller module which is basically the graphics card in these devices. Some will allow more levels of grayscale. The other differences will also be in the other hardware components such as cpu, internal memory...

And here are now the reasons why I went with the BeBook:

Good price/perfomance ratio.

Open source firmware available (openinkpot).

Takes standard SD cards.

User replaceable battery (It's actually the same battery used in a lot of Nokia phones).

Very good construction (Dropped it a few times already myself).

Very good support of different file formats.

I love the dam_n thing, worth every baht I've spent on it.

As a UK resident anticipating retirement to Thailand around the end of the year, I'm pretty much persuaded that the BeBook is the best buy. As far as I can see the Kindle is no use unless you have a US-based credit card, and while the Sony Reader is an excellent bit of kit, it only allows downloads in the UK from Waterstones, whose website is crap for finding the ebooks you want, and their prices are too high.

Is anybody based in LOS buying downloads for the Sony Reader from anywhere else with a UK-based credit card?

The UKBA, previously UK BIA, previously UKIS, was swamped with money at the end of the comprehensive spending review, started by the Tories in 1997 and concluded in 2000, when the Labour government finally realised that the car accident known as bogus asylum claims had torn a gaping wound in the 1971 Immigration Act and it had to address what other countries had understood years previously i.e.that to do nothing was simply not an option.

The upshot was an exponential increase in staff, budget and investment in technology. Unfortunately, the then management structure, whilst being wise to immigration issues, was unused to management of capital projects and into the vacuum a host of fellow travelling opportunist deadbeat civil servants and ' consultants ' flooded, eager to advance their own careers and agenda which were guaranteed by a Minister, Liam Byrne, so anally retentive that Brown actually thought the prick was talented.

And what has this influx, derived from such august organisations as the DWP, Prison Service and Birmingham City Council, achieved? A simpleton organisation staffed by shiney arsed clerks supervised by superannuated self serving managers chosen out of social need, cronyism and nepotism, rather than anything approximating to talent or experience, who have constructed a bureaucracy in which the only imperative is to ensure ' all the boxes are ticked ', as if anything so complex as immigration law could be

condensed to something as simplistic as that.

Nothing new in this in civil service terms but the extent of corruption, graft and sheer abuse of public funds by a Labour government is.

Never in 30 years of employment as a civil servant in 4 departments have I ever encountered such malfeasance as that perpetrated by this wretched Labour government. What is even more dispiriting is observing the utter rubbish, unemployable practically anywhere else in the world, posing as public servants who are currently benefiting from their patronage.

Shooting one in ten could only be a start.

Absolutely bang on accurate. Unfortunately the one in ten who will get shot, as will undoubtedly happen when the full force of Gordon Brown's profligacy hits government budgets, will be those who actually deal with the public and do the work. If you don't like the waiting times now, you ain't seen nothing yet

The OP hasn't made it clear whether his wife ever travelled to the UK with him, and if so how long ago. It's only within the last couple of years that fingerprints have been taken as part of the application process, so if she had a visa before then and has used a different identity, eg slight change of name, use of maiden name, the Embassy would have no way of knowing about the previous application. I know of a Thai woman who was arrested as an overstayer in the UK, and a fingerprint check showed that she'd previously been fingerprinted in the UK and removed as an illegal entrant in a completely different name - she presented a genuine passport and a good application the second time, and the Embassy had no reason to refuse her, they're not clairvoyant.

If the OP's wife didn't declare any previous travel or the fact that she's still married she has arguably gained the visa by deception - whether or not the deception is material to the application is for the Embassy to judge. They're not there to make moral judgements or assuage hurt feelings. The OP should report what he knows and leave it at that.

The UK has so-called "Airline Liaison Officers" stationed at various major airports throughout the world. They are usually Chief Immigration Officers specialised in document examination and they are there to advise airlines on any passengers whose status or passports appear unusual, thus filtering out some of the inadmissible or fraudulent traffic to the UK. They have no powers, their function is purely advisory, but the airlines normally take their advice.

Doubtless other countries have similar arrangements, and the people encountered by the OP were probably contracted to assist the airline concerned.

You actually have the right to cancel her visa and she can be removed fronm the country.

It's very worrying that an OISC-registered advisor can express himself in such a cavalier fashion as to give a totally false impression. The OP has no right to cancel anything. He has no right to demand that she be removed from the UK. If he informs UKBA that the marriage no longer subsists, they may decide to curtail her visa, but with only 8 months to go they may decide not to, as she would have the right of appeal. If she applies in time for FLR and is refused, she again has the right of appeal, so either way she could remain legally in the UK for quite a while longer. If she does nothing and remains after her visa has expired she could be arrested, served with papers as an overstayer, and removed. This would be at public expense, and there would be no call on the OP. His only responsibility as far as her immigration status is concerned is to inform UKBA if/when the marriage has broken down and he no longer considers himself her sponsor. He has no other duties or rights.

The advice given by Guesthouse and 7by7 is sound and relevant, and should be taken to heart by the OP. He needs to watch his back.

(BTW, the IAS is an independant charity; it is not connected to any government department.)

IAS may operate as an independent charity, but its money comes from the taxpayer via Legal Aid Contracts in England and Wales and direct government funding in Scotland. (Look up their published accounts). In some cases they make a charge where the applicant does not qualify for legal aid.

Regular visitors to Thailand can minimise charges by opening a simple passbook account + ATM card with a Thai Bank and transferring whatever amount they need via an internet bank such as Moneybookers. It's free to upload to Moneybookers online from your UK bank, and the charge to send on to your Thai bank is only about 3 quid per £1000. It goes through in 4 - 5 days. Then you can withdraw daily if you want at 10baht a time (Bangkok Bank) if you're not using the branch where you hold the account.

I've been doing it this way for over 3 years. Obviously you have to have the dosh up front, unless you want to make further transfers while you're on holiday, and you can't transfer the money back out the same way.

Does anyone have an update to this?

Coming into Ter 1 from Dublin and have exactly 2 hours until departure from Ter 3...

Thanks!

Have travelled out of Terminal 3 several times the last few years, most recently on the 1st of this month. We come to LHR by coach, grab a trolly and walk through the tunnel from the Central Bus Station to Terminal 3. It takes less than 10 minutes, is well-signposted and shouldn't take much more from Tn1.

We've not found long check-in queues at either Thai or Eva, and after the first nightmare going through security 2-3 years ago when they first introduced the current regs about no liquids etc, it's only 15 minutes or so to get through. In total, from disembarking at the Central Bus station to sitting down in the Departure Lounge, we only take about 40 minutes.

On a slightly-related topic, I've noticed in the last year or so that after going through security, and then showing passports at the UKBA desk, just as you debouch into the Departure Lounge, there's another security set-up. I haven't the foggiest idea what it's for, as we just walk round the side and nobody's ever challenged us. But most passengers meekly present themselves and stick their bags through the x-ray and generally get messed about again. Looks totally superfluous to me.

No, it's not something she has to apply for as a separate item. The card is being issued to certain categories of foreign applicants for LTR, starting last November with spouses and students, and recently to other categories. The stated intention is to have over 90% of foreign residents holding i/d cards over the next few years, instead of the sticker in their passports.

Therefore if she's applying for ILR next year and they've started issuing cards to ILR applicants by then, she will get one, otherwise, it'll be another sticker in her passport.

I think they'll probably continue with this programme, as it's already under way, but the intention to make all us Brits have one looks doomed, thank God.