7by7

If she is his girlfriend, then it is a general visit visa, form VAF1A.

However, if they have been living together in a relationship akin to marriage for at least the last two years (and can prove it) then she is his unmarried partner, and the purpose of the trip is to visit his family, then it would be a family visit visa, form VAF1B.

The difference being that a refusal of a family visit visa can be appealed, where a general visit visa can't.

As she will be visiting the UK for 6 months or less, she does not need a TB test or certificate.

Applications are submitted to the UK visa application centre.

It is valid for life.

You obviously misunderstand the function of forums such as this one.

People on this, and similar, forums offer advice based upon their own experiences and/or their reading and interpretation of the rules, official guidance and other publications. When someone asks for advice it is highly unlikely, although possible, that they will receive a reply from someone who has been in exactly the same situation within "very recent times."

Whilst at least two members here are UK qualified professionals, the rest of us are amateurs. Often people post conflicting advice.

From the forum rules

We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message.

All this should be borne in mind when seeking advice here; and it is up to the person seeking advice to decide which, if any, to follow.

If unhappy with the advice received here, you do not have to follow it; you can always seek the advice of a professional. You would, of course, have to pay for that, whilst advice here is free.

As has been said to you before; mother and child have been living together for the child's entire life, so sole responsibility should not be an issue. Therefore no need for a KP14.

If you look at SET7.8 What is sole responsibility? you will see that most of the questions begin "If the sponsoring parent and child are separated" or "If the sponsoring parent migrated to the UK."

In the 8+ years I've been involved in forums such as this one, I have never heard of a child applicant being refused on sole responsibility grounds when parent and child have been living together and are applying together.

Whilst I, too, like to adopt a belt and braces approach and feel it's better to have something that's not required rather than risk leaving out something that is; I do feel that you are worrying unnecessarily over this point.

All the best.

Sorry, I could have worded it better.

What I meant was that the fee given to you by the online sytem is wrong; it was the fee when you started the process, but the fee has changed since then.

The actual fee due is that displayed in Visa Application Fees on the day you submit the application. Today, that is 32200 baht; but check again on the actual day.

No problem; but I am not a qualified adviser.

I'm also on my lunch break and about to go back to work, so wont be able to look at it until this evening. (UK time)

If you don't want to post publicly, you can always use the PM facility.

Or see the OISC Adviser Finder.

Did you start the online process before or after 9th June, when the exchange rate used in calculating the fee in baht was revised?

We started before.

Thanks.

So it seems that if the consular rate, and so the fee in baht, changes whilst one is in the middle of completing an online application, one will be given the old fee, not the new one.

So, always check the actual fee on the website.

It is true that the supporting document checklist for a visit merely asks for a copy of the sponsor's passport (if there is a sponsor), but my belt and braces philosophy means I would always self certify it anyway.

I did say "usually" and you say that such passengers would pass through US immigration.

Trust the Septics to make life difficult!

Did you start the online process before or after 9th June, when the exchange rate used in calculating the fee in baht was revised?

Usually one does not need a transit visa if merely changing planes and remaining airside; it is only if leaving the airport and so actually passing through immigration and entering the country, e.g. for an overnight stopover in a hotel, that a transit, or other, visa may be required.

If not sure, check with the IATA database linked to above, or with your airline.

From Please Read This Before Posting

please try and keep everything in one topic, rather than starting a new one every time you think of another question. This will help avoid confusion and unnecessary repetition.

As you already have a topic regarding the copy of your passport, I'm closing this one.

You asked who can certify the copies, and three people have told you that self certification is ok.

Your choice whether to accept or follow that advice, but there is no need for comments such as the above.

Friendly warning; this time.

The paper forms do not have the fee on them; don't know about the online system as I have never used it. However, if it does show the fee then from my experience with other government online systems it will be the fee when one started the process, not that when one printed the form out.

Whichever, the moral is, as said before, check the fee before purchasing the draft and visiting the VAC; preferably on the same day.

Stament actually asked

What do they actually do during the appointment. Is it just to check who the applicant says they are and check the relevant documents are there, i.e. application form, TB certificate, biometrics, passport and associated papers? Or do they actually ask questions? I'm assuming it's just the former.

It is the former. They check the documents, take the fee, take biometrics and forward everything to the embassy.

As this is a duplicate of a topic you started in General and as that one actually has some useful replies, I'm closing this one.

In future, please do not post the same topic in more than one forum.

Last application I was involved in (sister-in-laws visit last year) my wife and I self certified the copies of our passports; no problems.

Simply write on each copy "I (full name) certify that this is a true copy of (document)" and sign and date it.

The actual fee for a settlement visa is £644; payable in local currency.

As foreign exchange rates fluctuate hourly, or even more frequently, if embassies used the current commercial rate they would have to check it and possibly charge a different fee for every applicant. At best the fee in local currency would change every day. So they use what is called the consular rate. Embassies use this rate for all their fees, not just visa applications.

The rate is reviewed regularly and adjusted if necessary, however it does usually seem to be slightly above the commercial rate; in Bangkok anyway.

As catch245uk says, the current consular rate in Bangkok is 50 baht to £1 and this was changed on 9th June.

I assume, Mercury, that the information you refer to showing the old fee in baht must have been issued before the change; they are usually fairly efficient in updating this.

The moral of this is that one should always check the current fee in baht as close as possible to purchasing the cashiers cheque/bank draft and submitting the application; same day if at all possible.

I stand corrected.:jap:

If you are her current partner then your details go in 4.11 and her ex husband's in part 9.

She is the applicant, so 'Your Family' means her family.

See the VAF guidance notes

4.11 Full name of spouse/partner (If single go to 4.16)

Please provide your spouse's/partner's given and family names as they appear in their passport. If widowed, divorced or separated please provide the full name (given and family names) of your former or deceased spouse/partner. If you have more than one spouse or partner please provide details in Part 9 - Additional Information.

A kor por 14 may be useful as evidence of sole responsibility when parent and child have been living apart; though not by itself, other evidence would be needed too.

However, as your wife and her son have always lived together sole responsibility should be taken as read. It wouldn't hurt to get one, though.

I believe that it has to be obtained from your wife's local ampur, but other than that do not know the procedure.

Moved to Visas and migration to other countries.

I'm confused, if the op's ex wife wants to apply for a visa to visit her son and wants to work. She's not allowed to work until she gets a visa but might need a job to prove she can keep herself and thus obtain said visa, surely if anybody offers her a job then they are breaking the law as at the time of her applying for said job she isn't allowed to work, no?

Brigante7,

Do not be confused by ExpatArchie's musings.

This application would be under Para 246 of the immigration rules, which does not prohibit employment.

The visa endorsement would be Code 1, which does not prohibit employment.

Scouse, who is a highly qualified OISC adviser, has confirmed that an application under Para 246 does not prohibit employment; and that saying she intends to seek employment once in the UK may 'add value' to the application; also that any firm offer of employment will help the application.

The OP has seen confirmation from UK visas that employment is permitted.

Obviously the applicant would be unable to take up any offer of employment until she has her visa and is in the UK, and any such job offer would implicitly be conditional on this happening. Therefore the potential employer would not be breaking any law.

ExpatArchie,

You are correct in one thing. Clearly Para 246(v) did prohibit employment. But, as you say, at some point since 1994 this clause was removed; and to be frank I cannot be bothered to search the archives to find out when. The situation now is what is important, not what it was at some point in the past!

Nonetheless ECOs still have the apparent right to refuse on grounds of intent to seek work.

That the wording for a refusal on employment grounds is still in the Entry Clearance Guidance does not mean that they have any such right. The ECGs are merely guidance; the Immigration Rules are a statement of the law and so override anything in the ECGs.

As I have already said, looking at Wording for refusals: Sections 31-35 it appears that much of the refusal wording is out of date and does not reflect the current rules. Why this has not been updated, I do not know; but as it is no longer possible to refuse in this category on employment grounds this refusal wording is clearly now redundant.

I will keep the topic open for now so that anyone who wishes to post may do so; unless it starts to go round in circles again.