theoldgit

The officer being interviewed actually stated that Asylum Seekers were being prevented from leaving the country whilst their asylum claim was still active.

I understand that if they did actually leave the UK then their claim was withdrawn.

@sharksy I thought I'd take the time to address your concerns along with some of the other comments in your thread.

When you agreed to be a Sponsor for your previous girlfrinends Standard Visit Visa application, you did so only fot financial and initial accomodation resons, the Entry Clearance Officer deciding on the application would have need to be satisfied that it was reasonable for you to do so, and affordable.

The Border Force Officer on her arrival would need to have been satisfied that she was a genuine visitor, with somewhere to stay on her arrival, had sufficient funds for the duaration of her stay  and that, on the balance of probabilities, she would leave the UK at the the conclusion of her her visit, and had the means to do so, a return ticket or the access to funds.

You would not have been responsable for her leaving the UK or anything she got up to during her visit, there are no enforcalbe laws within the various Immigration Acts to make you accountable.

You say that she had a multi entry visa, which the vast majority are, you don't say what the validity was, initial visitors would normally be for six monthe which would allow the holder to travel to the UK Border a number of time during the validity of that visa. Other visas can be issued for twh, five or ten years, and are normally issued to visitors who can demonstrate a genuine need to travel to the UK on a regular basis, but on each entry they will be required to satisfy the Border Force Officer that they remain genuine visitors, and can afford the trip, they may be asked for details of where they intend staying, you as the original sponsor and not being part of her life would't be a deal breaker.

One poster mentioned refusals for a "material change" whilst a material change can lead to a refusal, what you describe is unlikeley to fall into this category.

It's highly unlikely that there would have been any terms applied to her initial visa, so there would be nothing for her to adhere to.

17 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

New figures to be announced. Only affects new arrivals. 

 

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/home-office-climbs-down-on-plans-to-hike-salary-thresholds-for-family-visas/

Don’t count your blessings just yet, let’s not forget that some of those entering on the old route and fail to meet the current threshold could, and l stress could, be switched to the ten year route.

I think we really need to see what the requirements will actually be when they’re eventually published before we jump to any conclusions.

On 12/19/2023 at 12:13 PM, BritManToo said:

I didn't vote for it!

Neither did I, I was referring to the “royal we”

Let’s put this in the correct forum.

I printed of a statement from Kasikorn earlier this year, that was fine.

There numerous agents that will carry out the task, Thai Visa Express can do and your friend can post him his passport and all the forms.

l think 5,000 Baht is the standard fee, plus the fee for the passport.

I believe there are agents in most larger towns.

47 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

My recommendation is, don't use an agent.

 

If  certain details mean application refusal, so be it.

I’d be interested to learn how you reached that conclusion, is it based on personal experience, knowledge of Immigration Law or just hearsay?

In my experience and fully qualified agent fully understands the application process, how to draft a meaningful application and even how to advise an applicant when not to apply.

15 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

A shame this important topic has been hijacked again!

Yes it’s a shame thar despite my earlier concerns such an important topic, that could affect many members, has been hijacked.

The OP’s question has been answered, yes he “did hear it right” so this particular topic can be closed.

There are a few more threads on this topic still running for those members who wish to discuss the progress of these proposed changes and how some of us may be affected.

OK can we reign this in a bit now, this thread was started to ask and comment about the proposed new fees for UK Visas and the NHS Surcharge, and its implications, not religions, so can we stick to that please.

It’s maybe worth noting that the increased NHS Surcharge was actually announced by Sunak when he was Chancellor.

12 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

The figure of  £38,000 seems fine to me when bearing in mind the obscene cost of living in the UK.  

It might seem fine to you but it might not seem fine to the Brit who owns his own home, has a reasonable pension of say £25k, his circumstances have changed and he finds himself on his own.

During has travels he meets and finds happiness with a foreign national, he wouldn’t be able to live with in his home, despite the fact they could live reasonably comfortable and be no burden on the State.

She would need a visa whichever passport she used, the fact that she has an interest in a property in the UK where she intends to spend half of the year will make it difficult to satisfy the decision maker that she’s a genuine visitor.

She will need to satisfy the decision maker that she has compelling ties to her own country, whichever one she calls home.

39 minutes ago, RHCP said:

I've just read on another immigration forum a quote from No. 10 saying that these new requirements will also apply to renewals as well, once implemented next Spring. Obviously not good news for those at the FLR and ILR stages.

Yes and that’s what the media are reporting, we need to keep in mind that whilst the new figures are more than the average wage in the UK, for FLR and ILR applications both the applicants and sponsors salaries can be combined to meet the threshold, along with any savings they may have.

I suspect most couples will make the cut, but sadly not all.

49 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Why on Earth did the pick Rwanda? They should have picked somewhere like the Ascension Islands, they own it?

The Ascension Islands were apparently considered at one stage but not picked due to other concerns.

3 hours ago, Will B Good said:

It is not often referred to.....and I don't know the details (too lazy to find out) ......but saving can be taken into account......I think I read as little as £16k held for six months.....????

These are the current guidelines 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1187167/1.7+-+Financial+requirement.pdf

5 hours ago, superal said:

Assumption is that to meet the new rules a UK returning retiree sponsor would have to show proof of pension / income / taxes paid etc . Therefore any non retired new applicants can only show a letter of a job offer and salary offered ? Would the applicant have to keep that job indefinitely to comply with the new rules ? Would the loss of employment or change of job to a lower salary mean deportation ? If a retiree died after only a short amount of time after returning to the UK , would that mean his lady would have to leave the UK ? 

So many ifs & buts and I can see complications arising and possibly fraud and fake applications . However the burden on the benefits system would be lightened as the applicant will be in receipt of reasonable wages . 

I can envisage amendments when the bill is debated in the house of commons / lords .

We’ll have to wait until the new plan is published, but currently the figure has to be met on initial application, and again at the FLR and ILR stages when any salary earned by the applicant can be used.

The current guidelines already detail the various scenarios that are acceptable, sponsor already working in the UK, sponsors with job offers, pensioners and those relying on an element of savings, no doubt new rules and guidance will be issued in due course.

The BBC is already claiming that only those who continue to meet the requirements would be allowed to remain and are quoting families who think their plans have been scuppered, it’s all conjecture at this stage.

In the event that a sponsor passes away, there is currently a route for those currently in the UK to immediately apply for ILR, hopefully that option will remain.

14 minutes ago, MarkyM3 said:

Median salary in UK is just under £35k. If you are doing a Family Visa then surely a retiree + spouse earnings should be able to meet the new qualifying figure of £38k with comfort? Bear in mind a FT minimum wage job is not far off £25k annualised.

Only the salary/income/capital of the UK spouse/sponsor can be used for the initial application, for subsequent applications, at the FLR and ILR stages, the applicants income can be used to meet the financial requirement.

4 hours ago, HauptmannUK said:

It will also be popular with low and averagely paid workers in the UK who have for years been undercut by immigrant workers.

My “immigrant tax” comment was really directed at the NHS Surcharge which is still paid by those who are in employment and liable for income tax and NI in their own right.

You are of course correct in saying that the measures may well be popular with the low and averagely paid workers in the UK, though it’s worth remembering that the lower requirements were brought in because many UK residents were not interested in this type of work. 

7 hours ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Any word (if it's true that Settlement visas are affected, not just 'skilled work visas') on whether the savings requirement is also increasing (currently £62,500)?

The UK media, BBC, Telegraph and Mail at least, are specifically reporting that it will apply to Family/Settlement applications from March next, what isn’t clear yet is whether the new figure would apply for those, already in the UK and would be applying for FLR and ILR after the increase, though of course if the applicant is in employment, their salaries can be included in the to meet the figure.

i don’t think that an increase was unexpected or unreasonable, but this is a massive increase and is in excess of the average wage in the UK, £32,750 as reported by the ONS.

I the savings figure hasn’t been clarified yet, but no doubt it will be increased.

It’s probably worth noting that the NHS Surcharge is still payable by those settling or coming to work in the UK and are making National Insurance and paying Income Tax in addition.

it’s basically an “immigration Tax” which will be popular with Daily Mail readers.

The Uk Government has announced that the salary levels for visas for skilled workers has risen to £38,700, from  little over £26,000.

The BBC have added that the salary levels for Family Visas will require the same income level, it’s currently £18,600, to “ensure people can only bring dependents they can support financially “.

Its not clear if the increase in income requirements include those returning to the UK with their spouses, but the BBC are indeed quoting an increase of £20,000, so it would seem so.

I’m not aware of any policy papers yet, just the report from the BBC.

Let’s try this in the Thailand visa forum

Let’s try this in the correct forum.