7by7

The reason for wanting the children to join us now aftwer 5 years is that wife's aunt who looks after them is 60+ and her health is failing. Our daughter is nearing a teenager and getting more difficult to control as teenagers are.

The reason for you wanting them to live with you now is, in my opinion, far less important than the reason why they have not come to live with you before now.

Visa officers are fully aware of what applicants often provide in the way of documentation for visas. Had your girlfriend applied for a 3 month visa, and provided a leave letter for 3 months, it would probably have been dismissed as fiction.

Actually to be honest, they are not. Visa officers, as with most civil servant types have very little grasp of what actually happens in the real world. While it's true that you could not take 3 months leave for many jobs, there are many many jobs and companies where you could.

Not in Thailand there aren't, and I know of very few in the UK. When my wife, who lives in the UK, wanted three months leave so she could visit Thailand for family reasons she was told it was not possible and she would have to resign. When she asked if they would reemploy her on her return she was told that 'it depends.' They didn't.

As he stated earlier, VisaPlus used to be a visa officer, albeit for the UK not Australia, and were I he I would find your remarks insulting.

Deanobambino, I know very little of Australian visa regulations etc. but your girlfriend made a definite statement to the Australian authorities, and it appears that she now intends to go back on that statement, if she ever did intend to stay for just one month in the first place! Having appeared to have lied to them once, why should they believe what she says to them next time?

I am only going to say this once as I have no intention of being drawn into yet another useless argument with you.

The current level required is very basic; simple conversational English. If your Thai partner is capable of holding a basic conversation in English along the lines of "Hello, how are you?, What did you do today?" and similar with you then s/he is more than capable of achieving the required level without the need for any course; although some test providers may not let her/him take the test unless s/he sits their course first.

Having said that, the BULATS test is geared towards business users, so s/he may be asked questions about work etc.

does anyone also know the earliest the lituk test can be taken after arriving in the uk?

kind regards

Technically, immediately. Obviously, though, you'll have to book a test and take it when the next one is available.

I take on board the letter being in Thai even tho the manager can speak and write English.

The letter can be in either Thai or English.

However, as said previously, if it is in English and if the ECO wishes to speak ti it's author to confirm the contents, and given the amount of leave she is being given I would not be surprised if they do, then they will expect to speak to the author in English. If the author cannot do so then the ECO will almost certainly believe the letter to be fraudulent.

If it's written in Thai then do include an English translation. The ECO then wont speak to it's author directly but have one of the Thai staff members do so in Thai.

Your choice.

It isn't. General (tourist) visa holders are prohibited from doing any work, paid or unpaid, whilst in the UK.

To be honest, I don't know which type of visa would be suitable; possibly Business visitor: Academic visitor.

The university are presumably used to inviting people from overseas to speak at their seminars, so should be able to advise.

The information is not difficult to find; it's published by the Home Office!

You can follow the links from the UKBA home page (click on 'About Us' and then on 'Statistics') but to save you the trouble, click here.

I read earlier that it is 90% approval for UK spouse visas.

You are no doubt referring to a post of mine where I quoted this figure. Different countries obviously have different acceptance rates; some high, others low. As this is a THAI forum the figure I quoted is obviously for applications made in Thailand.

Question asked and answered, so closed.

The letter doesn't say when they expect her to return; to be any use it should.

Most Thai employees only get two to three weeks holiday a year, so the embassy are sometimes suspicious of letters granting three months. Therefore her boss may be contacted by the embassy to confirm the contents of the letter.

As the letter is written in English they will expect to talk to her boss in English. If they can't, then they may suspect that the letter is a forgery and so refuse the visa. If her boss can't speak English then get them to rewrite the letter in Thai and submit that together with a translation.

Have a read of Settlement; children, paying particular attention to SET7.8 What is sole responsibility?.

Unlike VP and TVE I am not a professional, but in my opinion as mother and children have been separated for 5 years you may have difficulties with sole responsibility.

I would also explain in their applications why you have waited 5 years before applying for them to join their mother.

No changes currently proposed.

Obviously, one should check with the relevant authorities before submitting any application to ensure that one is aware of current requirements, fees etc.

Sometimes changes are retrospective in the way you describe, sometimes they are not. The government's choice.

Question asked and answered; closed.

Some months you may spend more on food, petrol and similar than others; just as you will spend more on gas and/or electricity in the winter than in the summer. You don't have to break it down into an accurate analysis; just put an estimate of your regular monthly outgoings.

Topic title amended to include UK.

I am 99% certain that you are correct. It is the person applying for naturalisation who has to satisfy the residency requirements; not their British spouse.

As you say 'quid' that makes me think that you are asking about a UK application.

Please confirm.

If so, then it is regular outgoings that should be put; rent/mortgage, electric, food, etc.

Some posts and a response to one of them have been deleted.

This topic is too important for those who want to play silly games and childish attempts at point scoring.

Warnings and long posting holidays will be given to anyone who attempts to hijack this thread the way others have been recently.

As this topic has deteriorated beyond the point of giving any useful information to anyone about anything; closed.

As for my UK citizenship idea, what did I mention in a post before, if the UK family becomes stable, the wife can happily leave the UK for a month and apply for ILE, then as no time restrictions apply, we are as per my 3 year statement! And you are wrong again.

Apart from the fact that the ILE application will have to be paid for, which negates the whole foundation of your argument, to qualify for ILE the couple must have been living together outside the UK for a continuous period of at least 4 years (Immigration rules, para 281(i)( b )(i) and 282( b )). You are wrong again.

They could apply for ILE in whichever EEA state they have temporarily moved to; but if they qualify for ILE better to apply for it in Thailand and save the expense of a move to one EEA state quickly followed by a move to the UK!

As for the pub idea..........You might not be able to make it work

Apart from the fact that the pub was very successful, you haven't read it all yet again! Either that, or you don't understand what the word assistant means!

That one pub from Greene King may be free of such ties; most are not. Obvious, really, otherwise Greene King would not have highlighted such freedom as a selling point in their ad.

You obviously don't understand the difference between supplying some support, which may or may not be needed, and living with and being totally dependent upon.

This is not the first time you have shown such non understanding of English, e.g. not knowing the meaning of the word 'assistant' in my previous. Is English your first language?

I said before that I couldn't be bothered with this anymore; this time I mean it. If you wish to continue with your fantasies; I will no longer be participating.

I couldn't go the UKBA route anyway, so saving money not relevant.

Partner owns nothing in Thailand and would have no reason to return.

I own nothing in the UK, and have no living relatives.

You don't need a reason to return if you're settling in the UK, you won't be returning!

Indeed, bifftastic.

Don't see how not owning anything in the UK would stop you applying for, and obtaining, a settlement visa for your wife but not stop you moving with her to another EEA state. Maybe, ludditeman, you own a property in another EEA state and so intend to move there and live in it?

I'm sorry to hear that you have no living relatives; but again fail to see how that is relevant to this topic or a UK settlement visa application by your wife.

Thanks for telling us the UK spouse visa route costs a whopping £2660! That is a big sum and assumes one gets the visa first time (or costs go up). What about non-British children (if the family has such)? That already doubles that to well over £5000! What about bringing the extended family? £10,000 so far? Under the EEA route wife, non-UK children and the extended family are FREE!

However, do not forget that the concept needs employment, and thus cost of living in the EEA country are recovered i.e. the EEA route could almost result in ZERO use of savings!

So, using your logic, those who enter the UK directly will never have any employment and be living entirely off their savings!

In the real world, for most people; if moving directly to the UK, the settlement costs will be covered by income; if moving first to another EEA state the subsequent cost of relocating to the UK will be covered by income. As the cost of relocating from one EEA state to another will be at least double the entire cost of settlement, the direct to the UK way is obviously cheaper.

Extended family members do not automatically qualify for entry under the EEA regulations. They can be refused and probably would be unless they were previously living with the EEA national outside the EEA and dependent upon him.

Now for the bombshell! You claim that the non-EEA spouse needs to wait for 5+ years to get permanant residence. Actually, in 3 years she/he gets UK citizenship!!! http://www.ukba.home...rtnerofcitizen/ in case you are sceptical, the EU system UK residence card = UK residence (and the family has right to remain for 5 years under the UK family permit i.e. nothing can prevent UK citizenship)!

You really must learn to read the links you post in their entirety. Using a link to prove your point when in fact it does the opposite only shows you to be lazy and foolish.

Read the above link all the way through and you will see that in order to apply for naturalisation one must have no time restrictions on their stay in the UK. Not the right to remain for 5 years but no time restrictions at all.

Entering using the EEA regulations means that this will not happen until one has been living in the UK for 5 years and has PR. That one is the spouse or civil partner of a British citizen does not change this. One cannot apply for ILR after 2 years because ILR is a UK immigration category and one will not be in the UK under the immigration rules.There are several dual Irish/British nationals who are members of this forum and who used their Irish nationality to obtain EEA family permits for their spouses to live in the UK who can confirm this is so.

You also obviously have no idea about running a pub. I was once the assistant manager of a pub, and do.The costs are not minimal. As well as buying the tenancy you will have to pay the rent decided by the brewery, with regular increases, business rates, insurance, wages, employers NI contributions etc. In addition, with most tenancies you must buy all your stock from the brewery at the price they choose. Even nipping down to the local cash and carry because you've run out of crisps would mean you were in breach of your agreement and you'd be out on your ear if the brewery found out. Plus, how many customers would you retain if all your staff were your Thai spouse's family who could not speak much, if any, English!

You'd save the cost of the initial settlement visa, £810, plus the cost of ILR, £972 by post or £1350 in person. Plus the cost of satisfying KOL; which if done via a course would not be more than £500 (probably a lost less, this college charges £250).

So you'd save approximately a maximum of £2660.

Obviously the cost of relocating from Thailand to another EEA state would be about the same as to the UK. However, you would then have to pay the cost of relocating from that state to the UK.

I'm willing to be proven wrong by someone producing actual quotes, but I doubt that it could be done for less than £5000.

So following AP's suggestion would actually be more expensive than applying via the UK's immigration rules and coming directly to the UK.

AP may now say that the cost of relocation would be minimal as the family could pitch a tent somewhere and live on hand outs from passers-by while in the other EEA state, claiming when returning to the UK that they were setting up a business whilst there!

^^^^^^^ Sorry, no.

See EUN2.14 Can family members of British citizens qualify for an EEA family permit? ('Surinder Singh' cases)

Example: A British national is exercising an economic Treaty right in Germany and living with his non-EEA national spouse and children. On the British national's return to the UK, his non-EEA national family members can apply for an EEA family permit to join him under EC law.

The Surinder Singh judgement is incorporated into the EEA Regulations in Regulation 9. Family members of British nationals who meet the requirements of Regulation 9 are treated as family members of EEA nationals for the purposes of the EEA Regulations.

Applications for EEA family permits must meet the following criteria:

• The British citizen is residing in an EEA Member State as a worker or self-employed person or was doing so before returning to the UK.
• If the family member of the British citizen is their spouse or civil partner, they are living together in the EEA country or they entered into the marriage or civil partnership and were living together in that EEA country before returning to the UK.

With respect, Paul, since the abolition of Certificates of Approval, is it not the case that visitors with a General Visit Visa can now marry in the UK; but have to give notice at a designated registry office? (Can you get married or register a civil partnership in the UK?)

What they cannot do is then apply for settlement in the UK; they have to return home to do that.

From the Royal Thai Embassy, London

Nationals of the United Kingdom and over 40 other countries are eligible to travel to Thailand, for tourism purpose, with the exemption of visa and are permitted to stay in Thailand for a period of not exceeding 30 days. Therefore, you do not need a visa.

However, please make sure that you are in possession of a passport valid for at least 6 months, a round-trip air ticket, and adequate finances equivalent to at least 10,000 Baht (150 pounds) per person or 20,000 Baht (300 pounds) per family. Otherwise, you maybe inconvenienced upon entry into the country.

Furthermore, foreigners who enter Thailand under this Tourist Visa Exemption Scheme may re-enter and stay in Thailand for a cumulative duration of stay of not exceeding 90 days within any 6-month period from the date of first entry.

The list of the 41 countries could be found at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand’s website (www.mfa.go.th ) or (www.thaiembassyuk.org.uk)

You'll need to click on question 1 to see the above.

Yes, Thai nationals need a visa for the UAE, see here.

However, most countries require visa applications to be made in the applicant's country of residence; so she may not be able to apply in the UK if she is only there as a visitor. You should check with consulate section at the UAE embassy using the contact details in the above link.

Gentlemen,

Would you not agree that it is neither the UKBA nor the MoJ who are responsible for the introduction of these fees, the change in procedures and the possible withdrawal of Family Visit appeals but the government? Furthermore, it is not the government who will decide whether or not costs will be awarded in successful appeals?

I have only ever been what the UKBA these days choose to call a 'customer,' but you have both at some time worked for them, or their predecessor the IND. Therefore you obviously have far more experience in their procedures etc. than I. Would you say that your frustrations in dealing with their complex procedures and petty rules were and are caused by your then civil service masters or by their political ones?

From reading various appeal judgments and the experiences of appellants on boards such as this, my impression is that the majority of successful appeals are successful because the appellant has submitted extra evidence which the original ECO was not privy to. From your experiences, would you agree?

If my impression is correct, then making sure that one's application is complete will, hopefully, negate the need for an appeal as the application will be successful. Although there will always be cases where the refusal is due to ECO error, of course.

Whenever this subject arises I am reminded of one refusal I read about, I can't remember if it was on this forum or another. The sponsor had not included some vital financial evidence "because it was obvious." Not to the ECO it wasn't!

Having said that, one would expect that most appeals where new evidence has been submitted would never get to a hearing and be overturned by the ECM review; one wonders why they haven't been. Bloody mindedness by ECMs, late submission of the new evidence by the appellant or some other reason?

Of course, if the ECM review is somehow done away with, all cases will go to, and pay for, a full hearing. A procedural change by the UKBA or a decision by the government to make even more money out of immigrants?

Whilst your comments are perfectly valid, see Boo's warnings, I'm not sure why you felt the need to revive a 9 month old thread to make them.

As you have not actually asked a question or for any advice, before those with too much time on their hands start to make inappropriate comments again, I'm closing this.

Please feel free to start a new topic if you have any further questions.