The cruel rule which forced a mum to return to Thailand without her daughter

Mum Wanna I'anson has been forced to leave her six year-old daughter behind in Sevenoaks

Debbie King

 

Torn apart - six year-old Kayla and her mum, Wanna //source: KentLive

 

A six year-old Sevenoaks girl is facing winter without her mum because visa rules mean she was forced to return to Thailand alone.

 

The little girl and her dad, Andrew I'anson say they have been left heartbroken by the regulations which have split the family.

 

The rules, introduced in 2012 and upheld by the Supreme Court this February, mean foreign spouses can only remain in Britain if their partners are earning more £18,600 a year.

 

Full story: http://www.kentlive.news/news/kent-news/cruel-rules-forced-mum-return-633534

 

-- Kent Live 2017-10-20

A particularly one-sided story. Had Mr I'anson put in a modicum of planning this situation would not have arisen. There is no automatic right of residence for foreign spouses of UK citizens.

 

Mr I'anson resided in Thailand for 8 years during his highest earning years. I note any reference to whatever savings and income he lived on during this period has been suspiciously omitted from the one-sided story.

 

Zero planning and resorting to whingeing to the local press about injustice when no such right exists suggests Mr I'anson has yet to admit his own failings.

 

I suggest he stop crying about injustice and formulate a clear plan to rectify the situation. However, in today's Britain, complaining and painting an inaccurate picture often works better than following the rules. Perhaps he knows this.

Fair enough... he doesn't earn enough to provide and will claim State Benefits. He should have thought of that before having kids.

 

edit: BTW  before any bleeding hearts start.. 18,600 is a PITTANCE in the UK and when I left 10 years ago I was on 5 times that

The headline says mum forced to return to Thailand without her daughter  .... Wrong.

Nothing to stop her taking her daughter with her.

Just another  case of trying to blame authorities for parents failings.

Presumably the Mother could have taken her daughter back to Thailand with her, then the kid and Mother could be happy together and the father could work, after all what is so special about a "British education".

 

The rules are there to stop free loaders.

She was on a 6 month 'visitors visa', but had a job?  (she could return to if they let her back in)

 

Quote

"Maybe instead of making life a living hell for my family, why not give us a chance? I had a job, my wife could have her old job back and we could be a happy family. 

 

from the news article

When life gives you lemons, learn to like SomTam.

 

Keep family together and live in Thailand.

 

A sixty-year-old Sevenoaks man is facing winter without his mum because visa rules mean he was forced to return to the UK alone. The man is not the only one.

17 minutes ago, tonray said:

When life gives you lemons, learn to like SomTam.

 

Keep family together and live in Thailand.

 

somtam make flom papaya or mango sir.....

Isn't this similiar to deporting a husband, a falang for immigration reasons that leaves the mother and child fatherless in LOS?

"I have paid tax and put money into the country and I get treated like a third class citizen in my own country. My daughter is British. Does she not have a right to be with her mother?"

 

Of course, she does. But then in Thailand with a much better education. 

i do feel sorry for them and i will be the 1st to bring up how the country reunites families from hell holes in other parts of the world that won't integrate and are a huge burden to the point they've wrecked the place. that little rant over. he's living in the south east he's got to be able to earn more than 18k. that's the kind of salary school leavers get. work another job the weekend? he didn't think it through before he headed back. hope they manage to be reunited. perhaps should have sent the girl back until he could earn the required salary then brought them both back. he messed up there as has to do the school run so how he's going to reunite now. think man!!! jeez

There's numerous examples of UK Gov's heartless treatment of its elderly.  Now I'm 75 it's exactly 10 years since the Gov decided to reward my 39 years of contributions by freezing my pension at 2007 levels.  Despite my paying for my own housing/transport/heating or cooling expenses; despite taking only a state pension and not using Health/Education/Police services.  Then the BKK Embassy charges you over 50 UKP for a standard letter which involves no scrutiny, only typing in your name.

Get a job you bum

59 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

Fair enough... he doesn't earn enough to provide and will claim State Benefits. He should have thought of that before having kids.

 

edit: BTW  before any bleeding hearts start.. 18,600 is a PITTANCE in the UK and when I left 10 years ago I was on 5 times that

9yrs.ago my wife earned double that in the uk.

1 hour ago, LannaGuy said:

Fair enough... he doesn't earn enough to provide and will claim State Benefits. He should have thought of that before having kids.

 

edit: BTW  before any bleeding hearts start.. 18,600 is a PITTANCE in the UK and when I left 10 years ago I was on 5 times that

Sounds like an awful lot of money to me, I never made more than a thousand quid a year over in U.K. !

She would have been OK if an 'asylum seeker' from a perfectly safe African country, she could even have committed a serious crime and still not have been sent home. Asian women are easy targets to show how 'tough' the rules are though.

I am truly shocked.

I understand that there are laws to protect the community, but in this case the humanity appears to be missing.

How can be so wrong for England, a rich country, to give a family  a chance, some help, a part time job, some advice, even a warning, or just a little compassion..

I wish all the best to the young family, i hope they find a way to to solve the problem.

 

44 minutes ago, inThailand said:

Isn't this similiar to deporting a husband, a falang for immigration reasons that leaves the mother and child fatherless in LOS?

Thailand's gorilla immigration law  doesn't let husband get permanent residency like other normal countries.

Just now, golden farang said:

Thailand's gorilla immigration law  doesn't let husband get permanent residency like other normal countries.

yes it does if conditions are met like most other 'normal' countries

12 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I am truly shocked.

I understand that there are laws to protect the community, but in this case the humanity appears to be missing.

How can be so wrong for England, a rich country, to give a family  a chance, some help, a part time job, some advice, even a warning, or just a little compassion..

I wish all the best to the young family, i hope they find a way to to solve the problem.

 

You are only shocked because you are taking the story at face value. The source is the husband who has painted an inaccurate picture.

 

It is important to remember Ms. I'anson applied for a visitor visa for 6 months, received it and then tried to renege on the conditions of the visa. The family is trying to circumvent the rules. A settlement visa is perfectly possible if Mr I'anson can be bothered to fulfil the requirements which are very attainable.

 

I ask again, what has Mr I'anson lived on for the last 8 years in Thailand?

 

There is much injustice in the world and in the UK. This is not remotely an example of it.

1 minute ago, Happy enough said:

yes it does if conditions are met like most other 'normal' countries

Yes, so why they not have same rules elsewhere for thai wifes or husbands then? Have 400000baht in bank account before getting resident permit?

1 minute ago, golden farang said:

Yes, so why they not have same rules elsewhere for thai wifes or husbands then? Have 400000baht in bank account before getting resident permit?

best ask an immigration lawyer mate 555

Hypothetically, if the situation was reversed, would all the comments above support the Thai immigration rules?

 

2 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

best ask an immigration lawyer mate 555

Because Thai immigration law is rotten and racist to farang husband thats why. I been married to a Thai 15years but im still not kissing them a** and try to protect them hideous system.

2 hours ago, webfact said:

The rules, introduced in 2012 and upheld by the Supreme Court this February, mean foreign spouses can only remain in Britain if their partners are earning more £18,600 a year.

what kind of a rule is that ?! what if i am retired and have  a lot of money in the bank ?

Whilst in this case the husband is guilty of poor planning I think TVF members from the UK need to be aware that there is growing hostility in the UK toward returning expats. Probably partly fuelled by fears that, post Brexit, there could be sizeable numbers of older expats returning to the UK from Europe.

I am a member of the Conservative Party and at a recent constituency meeting that I attended we had a government minister as a guest speaker. The topic was immigration and Brexit. There were a lot of comments about returning expats and some discussion about stopping pensions to expats after one year overseas. We were told that NZ and Aus do something similar and its being looked at by DWP.

Certainly there are big shifts in public opinion going on right now.

3 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

what kind of a rule is that ?! what if i am retired and have  a lot of money in the bank ?

If you read the full story it does mention how much savings are required for a marriage visa. 

31 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

yes it does if conditions are met like most other 'normal' countries

Not if you are retired, it's a non starter unless you worked here and paid tax for 3 years

3 minutes ago, HauptmannUK said:

There were a lot of comments about returning expats and some discussion about stopping pensions to expats after one year overseas. We were told that NZ and Aus do something similar and its being looked at by DWP.

That would just lead to loads more ex pats going back, is that what they want?