I know as PAYE your salary needs to be over £18,600 which it is in my case, what if you work for your mother who is director of the private limited company you work for though?

 

Do I still meet the financial requirement?

 

 

Yes.

Yes that's fine so long as you are PAYE and the six months bank statements show the corresponding payments to your pay slips.

I think the answer is no, unless there are more than 5 other shareholders. It appears to be a sole or limited family partnership. This is what you need to know :

 

5.5.13. Where a person is either a director or employee of a limited company in the UK, or both and receives a salary from that company, that salaried income can be counted under Category A or Category B, provided that the limited company is not of a type specified in paragraph 9(a) of Appendix FM-SE (i.e. it is not in sole or limited family ownership). Evidence of the type of company must be provided, which can include the latest Annual Return filed at Companies House. A fee paid to a person appointed as a non-executive director of a company (and this is not a limited company in the UK of the type specified in paragraph 9(a) of Appendix FM-SE) instead of a salary may be treated and evidenced as though it were a salary paid for employment in that capacity

 

5.5.14. Paragraph 9(a) of Appendix FM-SE states that the specified type of limited company is one in which:

(i) the person is either a director or employee of the company, or both, or of another company within the same group; and

(ii) shares are held (directly or indirectly) by the person, their partner or the following family members of the person or their partner: parent, grandparent, child, stepchild, grandchild, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece or first cousin; and

(iii) any remaining shares are held (directly or indirectly) by fewer than five other persons.

 

5.5.15. Where a person receives a salary from employment as a director or employee (or both) of a limited company in the UK of the type specified in paragraph 9(a), that salaried income can only be counted under Category F or Category G, as appropriate. See section 9 of this guidance.

thank you for your help, my thoughts were it shouldn't do, but it looks to me like it might as well... i have forwarded the question onto a visa agent, thank you!

the answer turns out to be yes, many thanks everyone for your help... i checked it over with a visa agent

On 2/8/2018 at 2:34 PM, Tony M said:

I think the answer is no, unless there are more than 5 other shareholders. It appears to be a sole or limited family partnership.

I don't follow how someone employed as a PAYE employee would be expected to apply under the self employed category?

On 2/13/2018 at 7:15 AM, jamesmacleod said:

the answer turns out to be yes, many thanks everyone for your help... i checked it over with a visa agent

 

Thanks for the info, but it does seem to go against the guidance ?  Let us know how it turns out, please.

On 2/13/2018 at 11:54 PM, Fish Head Soup said:

I don't follow how someone employed as a PAYE employee would be expected to apply under the self employed category?

 

Me too, but the guidance does say that.

Out of interest, if someone is satisfying the financial requirement as a PAYE employee, how much information are they required to give about their employer? Would an ECO require details of company ownership or company directors? If not, then I doubt an ECO with limited time to make a decision would pay any attention, unless an alarm bell rings because the company bears the applicant's (or in this case applicant's spouse's) surname?   

On 2/15/2018 at 6:47 PM, TCA said:

Out of interest, if someone is satisfying the financial requirement as a PAYE employee, how much information are they required to give about their employer? Would an ECO require details of company ownership or company directors? If not, then I doubt an ECO with limited time to make a decision would pay any attention, unless an alarm bell rings because the company bears the applicant's (or in this case applicant's spouse's) surname?   

It'a a good question, and the answer must be, who knows.

 

The current wording was introduced just last year, in April 2017. It was kind of hidden in Command Paper 1078 (my emphahsis below) :

 

THE STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN IMMIGRATION RULES PRESENTED TO PARLIAMENT ON 16 MARCH 2017 (HC 1078)

 

Changes to Appendix FM-SE

 

FM-SE1. In paragraph 9, for sub-paragraph (a)(i), substitute:

 

“(i) the person is either a director or employee of the company, or both, or of another company within the same group; and”.

 

FM-SE2. In paragraph 9(c), for “Where the person is listed as a director of the company”, substitute “Where the person is either listed as a director of the company, or is an employee of the company, or both,”.

 

FM-SE3. In paragraph 9(c)(ii), after “as a director” insert “or employee of the company (or both)”.

 

FM-SE4. In paragraph 9(e), for “as a director of the company”, in the first place it occurs, substitute “as a director or other employee of the company,”.

 

FM-SE5. In paragraph 9(e), for “as a director of the company”, in the second place it occurs, substitute “as a director or employee of the company (or both)”.

 

7.36. The following changes and clarifications are being made to the Immigration Rules relating to family and private life:

• To clarify that a person who wishes to enter the UK as a fiancé(e) or proposed civil partner to enable them to marry or form a civil partnership here must be free to marry or form a civil partnership at the date of application.

• To add Police Injury Pension, alongside the Armed Forces equivalents, to the list of specified benefits received by the sponsor which mean that an applicant is exempt from the requirement to meet the minimum income threshold.

• To ensure that limited leave to remain granted to a child in line with the leave granted to their parent is subject to the same condition as to recourse to public funds.

• To clarify that a person who is not a director, but is an employee, of a specified limited company must meet the specified evidential requirements in respect of income from such a company.

• To clarify that payment for travel time (e.g. for a care worker travelling between appointments) can be accepted as employment income.

• To confirm that, for the purposes of the family Immigration Rules, a marriage in the UK must be recognised under marriage law in the relevant part of the UK.

• To make other minor changes and clarifications.

 

So, although the OP has obtained guidance from a visa agency, I still think that the answer is that he cannot qualify under Category A or B. Perhaps the agency was not aware of the changes. I certainly wasn't.  I guess that the reason for the additional requirements must be because it would be easy for a company to "employ" (for just 6 months) a family member in order to meet the requirement ?