UK visit visa - stay 6 months in what 12 month period?

[Marvo]

The UK 10 yr multi entry Visit Visa rules say that the holder can stay for up to a combined total 6 months in a 12 month period.

 

Is someone on the forum able to clarify how the 12 months is decided. Is it a calendar 12 months Jan - Dec? Or is it ANY 12 month period?

 

The Mrs has already stayed 2 months June/July 2018. She wants to visit 2 months Nov/Dec 2018, and 2 months April/May 2019 (= total 6 months).

 

How does the 12 month window move or when does the clock "reset" allowing her to visit again later in 2019?

Thanks to anyone in advance.

[theoldgit]

Where did your read that "Visit Visa rules say that the holder can stay for up to a combined total 6 months in a 12 month period", what the guidance to Immigration staff actually says is "There is no specified maximum period which an individual can spend in the UK in any period such as ‘6 months in 12 months’. However, if it is clear from an individual’s travel history that they are making the UK their home you should refuse their application'.

 

When considering an application for Entry Clearance the ECO will need to be satisfied that an applicant is not intending to make the UK their home by making frequent and successive visits, at the UK Border the Border Force Officer will also be looking for the same, especially when the visa holder has longer term entry clearance, they will need to be satisfied each time that the traveller is still a genuine visitor.

 

So there is no clock setting, no hard and fast rules, but you do need to satisfy the Officers that you remain a genuine visitor, at least your wife does, the more often she visits, and if for longer. the more likely it is that she is going to be asked about her visits and her ties to her home country.

 

 You might want to have a flick through this Visit-guidance for staff, particularly page 17

[Marvo]

Blimey, thanks for digging that PDF out OG 

Just been looking back at the Visa application guidance info too, and maybe that "6 months in 12" was just my imagination.

That's great news. So it looks like there won't be any problems if we're living in Thailand longer than the UK between visits to the UK.

 

[bobrussell]

In the past it was included in some advisory notes as an example rather than a rule. As stated the real test is whether the visa is being used as a means of circumventing the settlement rules.

The fundamental problem is there is no visa type for those that spend six months in the year in one place, six months in another. A six month stay is 'too long' for a visit but 'too short' for settlement. A bit of a catch 22 situation.

[Marvo]

Yes bob, we looked at the settlement option, but we have to be living "together" in the UK for 21 out of 24 months to qualify it would seem. 

Work here in LOS won't allow me to do that at the present time.

[khundon]

The in-laws have use the 6 month visit visa several times and never had any problem. Most times, they stayed for 6 months, always remembering that the day they fly in and the day they leave are counted as part of the 6 months. 

Min fact, the last time we applied for the 10 year one, to save us the hassles of doing the visa application every visit. 

Edited September 8, 2018 by khundon

[rasg]

16 hours ago, bobrussell said:

In the past it was included in some advisory notes as an example rather than a rule. As stated the real test is whether the visa is being used as a means of circumventing the settlement rules.

The fundamental problem is there is no visa type for those that spend six months in the year in one place, six months in another. A six month stay is 'too long' for a visit but 'too short' for settlement. A bit of a catch 22 situation.

I have read many times that the 180 days is a guideline but I would like to know under which circumstances somebody would be allowed to stay longer without being told that you are circumventing the settlement rules? Nobody has ever been able to answer the question.

 

If you have a longer than six month visit visa and set off from the UK having already spent 180 days in the UK in the previous, say, seven months, there would be no guarantee you would be allowed to enter the UK

[theoldgit]

28 minutes ago, rasg said:

I have read many times that the 180 days is a guideline but I would like to know under which circumstances somebody would be allowed to stay longer without being told that you are circumventing the settlement rules? Nobody has ever been able to answer the question.

I'm not sure that anybody can give a definitive answer, it's up to the Border Force Officer, or at least their line manager on the day to make a decision, and they have to make a judgement call on the information available, which includes answers to questions put to the traveller.
Border Force Officers will have access to the persons travel records, and even though there are no regular embarcation controls when leaving the UK, carriers record this data and pass it onto the UKBA, though I'm not sure how easily accessible this information is to the Officer on the desk at the Border.

Many Thai travellers when returning to BKK now use the automated gates, thus leaving no record of entry back into Thailand. On our return from Europe last month my wife insisted on using the gates and left her fast track pass in her handbag, whilst visiting Singapore a few months ago we were stamped in but were both ushered through the automated gates on exit, so again no record of departure, likewise in South Korea you are no longer stamped in or out. I suppose we should hang onto our boarding passes for return trips, once the points have been recorded I normally dispose of mine.

So I'm sorry I don't have an answer to your question, I'm not sure that there is a definitive one.

[Tony M]

As others have said, there is no definitive answer to your question.  The Entry Clearance Officer or Border Force Officer will make a judgment call. It might be right, or it might be wrong. But remember, there is no right of appeal against his decision, so be wary.

 

A couple of things.  The "6 in 12" rule doesn't exist in the immigration rules, but it does still exist in the mind of ECOs and others. They need something on which to base a decision, and how much time a person spends in the UK in a 12 month period is still the yardstick for most decision-makers. A visitor to any country would not normally spend 6 months or more just visiting every year . ECOs have tried all sorts of ways to refuse visas to people who spend a lot of time in the UK as "visitors". I have seen percentages (you have spent 51% of the previous 12 months in the UK, and I therefore ................").   Nonsense.  What is comes down to now is, is the person living in the UK by using visit visas to do so, by making frequent or successive visits ? The ECO, or the BFO, will take things other than the time spent in the UK into account.  He can check NHS records to see if you have had medical treatment, or visited the doctor. He can check DVLC records to see if you have applied for a driving licence. Either of these might indicate that the person is not actually a "visitor" to the UK. They could be , of course, but the ECO or BFO might not be so satisfied.

 

For me, the yardstick would probably be, do you spend more time in the UK than out of the UK in a 12 month period, and what reasons do you have to leave the UK at the end of your proposed visit ? 

 

[rasg]

6 hours ago, Tony M said:

For me, the yardstick would probably be, do you spend more time in the UK than out of the UK in a 12 month period, and what reasons do you have to leave the UK at the end of your proposed visit ? 

If this is right there is a 6 month rule or guideline!

 

One thing I can tell you is that on my wife's second visit to the UK on a visit visa she was asked a question. After her first visit she was quizzed for 45 minutes before they let her through. On the second she was asked if she realised how long she had spent in the UK on her previous visit and she replied that she did. That was all he asked and let her through. For me he implied that he knew exactly how long she had spent in the UK on her first visit and, for me, it seems to show that he knew exactly how long she had been here. She had stayed 18 weeks. On that basis he had access to that information from the API or somewhere else.

[Tony M]

4 minutes ago, rasg said:

If this is right there is a 6 month rule or guideline!

 

One thing I can tell you is that on my wife's second visit to the UK on a visit visa she was asked a question. After her first visit she was quizzed for 45 minutes before they let her through. On the second she was asked if she realised how long she had spent in the UK on her previous visit and she replied that she did. That was all he asked and let her through. For me he implied that he knew exactly how long she had spent in the UK on her first visit and, for me, it seems to show that he knew exactly how long she had been here. She had stayed 18 weeks. On that basis he had access to that information from the API or somewhere else.

There is no rule or guideline, but an ECO or BFO must have something in mind when he is deciding what to do. As I said, my yardstick would be as stated. Someone else might have a different period in mind.  

[7by7]

On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 8:52 AM, theoldgit said:

You might want to have a flick through this Visit-guidance for staff, particularly page 17

For the benefit of those who can't click on a link, the relevant part is 

Quote

Frequent or successive visits: how to assess if an applicant is making the UK their main home or place of work 
 
See: paragraph V 4.2( b ) of appendix V: visitor rules. 
 
You should check the applicant’s travel history, including how long they are spending in the UK and how frequently they are returning. You must assess if they are, in effect, making the UK their main home. 
 
 You should look at:

• the purpose of the visit and intended length of stay stated
• the number of visits made over the past 12 months, including the length of stay on each occasion, the time elapsed since the last visit, and if this amounts to the individual spending more time in the UK than in their home country
• the purpose of return trips to the visitor’s home country and if this is used only to seek re-entry to the UK
• the links they have with their home country - consider especially any long term commitments and where the applicant is registered for tax purposes
• evidence the UK is their main place of residence, for example: if they have registered with a general practitioner (GP), if they send their children to UK schools
• the history of previous applications, for example if the visitor has previously been refused under the family rules and subsequently wants to enter as a visitor you must assess if they are using the visitor route to avoid the rules in place for family migrants joining British or settled persons in the UK 

 
There is no specified maximum period which an individual can spend in the UK in any period such as ‘6 months in 12 months’. However, if it is clear from an individual’s travel history that they are making the UK their home you should refuse their application.   
 

Similar guidance is used by Border Force Officers at UK ports of entry, who, as said, can refuse entry to someone who they believe is using frequent and regular visits to live in the UK, even if that person has a valid visit visa or whose nationality means they don't need one (EEA nationals excepted, at least until Brexit).

 

Note that it says

Quote

the number of visits made over the past 12 months, including the length of stay on each occasion, the time elapsed since the last visit, and if this amounts to the individual spending more time in the UK than in their home country

My personal opinion, and it is only my opinion, is that when judging this, ECOs or BFOs count back the 12 months from the current visa application or arrival at a UK port of entry.

 

So, for example, arrive at UK immigration with a 10 year visit visa today, 9th September 2018, then they will check to see how long one has spent in the UK as a visitor since the 10th September 2017. 

 

BTW, paragraph V 4.2( b ) of appendix V: visitor rules

Quote

Genuine intention to visit

1. V 4.2 The applicant must satisfy the decision maker that they are a genuine visitor. This means that the applicant:
   1.  
   2. ( b ) will not live in the UK for extended periods through frequent or successive visits, or make the UK their main home

The burden of proof lies, as always, with the applicant/person seeking UK entry.

[7by7]

On ‎9‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 10:33 AM, bobrussell said:

The fundamental problem is there is no visa type for those that spend six months in the year in one place, six months in another

I disagree.

 

A 10 year visit visa suits this purpose fine; 6 months in Thailand, 6 months in the UK each year; no problem.

 

Even if, for some reason, the holder needs to spend longer than 6 months in a particular year in the UK, family illness for example, they would not be breaking any rule provided they spent less than 6 months in the UK per visit and were not making the UK their actual home.

 

Of course, whether they could convince Border Force of this when they next attempted to enter the UK is another matter.

Edited September 9, 2018 by 7by7

[rasg]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Of course, whether they could convince Border Force of this when they next attempted to enter the UK is another matter.

And there's the rub! Flying all the way from Bangkok and being turned away would be pretty galling...

[sandyf]

"the number of visits made over the past 12 months, including the length of stay on each occasion, the time elapsed since the last visit, and if this amounts to the individual spending more time in the UK than in their home country"

 

Twelve months is fairly definitive, more than 6 months definitively means more time in the UK than out. Little wonder it is interpreted as 6 months in 12.

Had it said "over the past 24 months", bearing in mind the reference is to a 10 year visa, then a different perspective altogether. Guidance seems to be a bit inappropriate for this length of visa.

[Marvo]

11 hours ago, sandyf said:

"the number of visits made over the past 12 months, including the length of stay on each occasion, the time elapsed since the last visit, and if this amounts to the individual spending more time in the UK than in their home country"

 

Twelve months is fairly definitive, more than 6 months definitively means more time in the UK than out. Little wonder it is interpreted as 6 months in 12.

Had it said "over the past 24 months", bearing in mind the reference is to a 10 year visa, then a different perspective altogether. Guidance seems to be a bit inappropriate for this length of visa.

Thank you sandyf, guess I wasn't completely mad having "6 months in 12" in my head after all!
As pointed out in comments above, arriving at the UK border, travelling from Bangkok, after previously spending 6 months out of the last 12 in the UK, would surely induce more than a little twitching of the nether regions. Who can tell what the officer would allow. I did read somewhere in those immigration guidelines that being allowing to stay for a shorter period than that requested could be an option to the officer. Would certainly seem fairer than being bundled onto the next flight home.

[darren1971]

20 hours ago, Marvo said:

Thank you sandyf, guess I wasn't completely mad having "6 months in 12" in my head after all!
As pointed out in comments above, arriving at the UK border, travelling from Bangkok, after previously spending 6 months out of the last 12 in the UK, would surely induce more than a little twitching of the nether regions. Who can tell what the officer would allow. I did read somewhere in those immigration guidelines that being allowing to stay for a shorter period than that requested could be an option to the officer. Would certainly seem fairer than being bundled onto the next flight home.

Don't make the mistake of assuming fairness, assume a hostile environment.