Chief Inspector of Immigration (UK) - report on fees

[theoldgit]

The Chief Inspector of Immigrations report into charging and fees has now been published, and is worth a read, he pointed out that following his call for evidence there was a significantly higher response than normal.

 

An inspection of the policies and practices of the Home Office Borders Immigration and Citizenship Systems relating to charging and fees

 

During a quick skim through the ninety odd pages I noticed that the Inspector questioned the charges for various levels of Leave to Remain, when there was no change in the applicants circumstances, and made the following recomendation.
"Review the routes to settlement, including assessing the negative effects on individuals and families of requiring repeated applications for leave prior to considering settlement, the option of tapering the fee for second and subsequent applications for leave where the applicant’s circumstances have not changed, and setting shorter timescales for decisions to grant or refuse applications".

 

There was also a comment on the fact that applicants were still required to pay the NHS Surcharge, even though they may be paying income tax and making NI contributions in their own right.

"it was argued that the Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS) was, in reality, part of the “core cost of the visa application” since “the application will be treated as invalid if the IHS is not paid”, that the level of the IHS “bore no relation to the costs of using the NHS”, that those in employment were paying twice since they already paid income tax and national insurance, and that it was unclear that the money was going where it was intended".

 

The costs of seeking advice from the UKVI was questions by one of the Parliamentary responders

“the Home Office just wants to gouge people further for money for immigration. That seems to be a pattern, judging by what comes through my office. … a further example of such gouging is charging £6.25 for a webchat facility or email. It would be good to know exactly the reason for that, and for the £2.50-a-minute phone cost. Will those costs be fixed or capped, or will there be continued rises? My point is that immigration is a very expensive business. The super premium service has not provided anything like super premium responses to the people who come to my office. They come to me chasing answers, which they have not been able to get despite paying considerable sums of money to go through the immigration process.”

 

In skimming through the report I couldn't find any reference to the charging in USD, that doesn't mean it's not there, but he has asked for a further in depth consultation on the subject.

 

Happy reading

 

[scorecard]

What about multiple exit / re-entry stamp in passport 3,800Baht.

 

And for PR holders the same stamp must be put in the PR book, no further processing of any sort, just a duplicate stamp, takes less then 2 minutes to add the written details and the date stamps, 1,900Baht, total 5,700Baht - US$180, a rip off. 

[theoldgit]

28 minutes ago, scorecard said:

What about multiple exit / re-entry stamp in passport 3,800Baht.

 

And for PR holders the same stamp must be put in the PR book, no further processing of any sort, just a duplicate stamp, takes less then 2 minutes to add the written details and the date stamps, 1,900Baht, total 5,700Baht - US$180, a rip off. 

Unfortunately the UK's Chief Inspector of Immigration is not empowered to report on Thailands Immigration procedures and costings.

[scorecard]

58 minutes ago, theoldgit said:

Unfortunately the UK's Chief Inspector of Immigration is not empowered to report on Thailands Immigration procedures and costings.

 I know that, just couldn't ignore the opportunity to vent. Why not?

[sandyf]

That should have been one of the main points.

I have recently paid for another visitors visa. Last year I had £94.85(£89) removed from my account and this year it was £101.23(£93).

The current fee is posted as £93, that is about 9% difference - absolutely scandalous. Priced in GBP, should be paid in GBP.

[Tapster]

I have just applied for a settlement visa for my South African wife.

 

OK, this isn't a 'charge' but the procedure starts with having to show 18,600 GBP as the minimum income before an application for a non-EU spouse can be considered.

This is causing some people very serious hardship, and separating some couples while the UK partner works at earning the required amount, leaving the spouse abroad.

Immigration decisions in the last few years have been unnecessarily harsh and also are not taken on a case-by-case basis; no, if you don't pass the requirement, you don't get in!

 

And now, onto charges:

 

I applied on 27th January and learned to my horror that the NHS surcharge had doubled on 8th January. I had to pay 1,200 GBP for a 30-month (2.5 year) visa.

 

I only learned of the increase during the payment stage. I had not seen it published anywhere.

 

The whole application ended up costing just under 3,000 GBP.     ????

[rasg]

Sorry but how is to possible for anybody to be in a position to afford the five year settlement route for visas with anything less than an £18,600 pa salary? Even then it must be difficult.

 

By the way. The fees for a 2.5 year FLR visa should be £1000. Not £1200. £1200 for a 33 month would be correct the way I understand it as they round the figure up.

[globalThailand]

Just did a sanity check for FLR(m) as I was worried myself that you had to pay for 3 full years (thought it was rounded up)

 

Turns out it is £1000

 

https://www.immigration-health-surcharge.service.gov.uk/checker/type

 

 

 

[globalThailand]

Also - quick question on charging in USD.   Presumably that's for applications made outside the UK right? 

 

The terrible exchange rate meant paying well over £100 more for the initial visa-- certainly hope to be paying in sterling for the FLR!  

[magicroundabout]

Yes it's in sterling for flr. 

[darren1971]

It is fairly obvious to me that the UK government want to exclude certain people from migrating to the UK, they have worked out that the easiest way to exclude this group is by increasing prices. They don't want to be seen as openly prejudiced so this is their tactic. Once BREXIT is completed we will see a minimum salary of £30,000. 

[Jip99]

1 hour ago, darren1971 said:

It is fairly obvious to me that the UK government want to exclude certain people from migrating to the UK, they have worked out that the easiest way to exclude this group is by increasing prices. They don't want to be seen as openly prejudiced so this is their tactic. Once BREXIT is completed we will see a minimum salary of £30,000. 

 

You credit the U.K. government with greater abilities than they actually possess.

 

Not a chance of going to £30k - that is plain, unsubstantiated, scare-mongering. 

[darren1971]

6 hours ago, Jip99 said:

 

You credit the U.K. government with greater abilities than they actually possess.

 

Not a chance of going to £30k - that is plain, unsubstantiated, scare-mongering. 

It's not scare mongering it is fact, read the new immigration white paper. They are proposing immigrants coming for work will need a salary of £30k so I very much doubt spouse visas will remain at the £18.6 threshold. May has been quite clear in her parties desire to create "a hostile environment". 

 

"Senior NHS figures have warned the Prime Minister's post-Brexit immigration policy would have a damning effect on Britain's hospitals, it has been revealed today. 

Executives have voiced fears over the Government's immigration white paper, which outlines stringent plans for a £30,000 salary threshold on workers moving to the UK.  

Officials claim the 'appalling' threshold could spell the 'most destructive policy proposal for NHS recruitment' and force some hospitals to close 25 per cent of services, according to documents seen by The Daily Telegraph.

"

[globalThailand]

8 hours ago, darren1971 said:

It's not scare mongering it is fact, read the new immigration white paper.

Government White Paper Link

 

6.19 - The white paper proposes maintaining the current minimum salary threshold at 30k while slightly lowering the skill requirements needed to apply.  

 

As for the minimum requirement for spouse visas the paper gives an example on page 66 and clearly puts the figure at £18,600 in 8.7

 

Don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail...  

 

 

  

 

[darren1971]

what about the chief inspector of immigration report on fees, don't believe that also?

 

and what about the findings that they are charging way more than it costs to process visas, dont believe that also?

 

and what about the Government openly stating they want to create "a hostile environment"...

 

nah.... just ignore any facts that don't align with your beliefs, smart!

 

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by darren1971

[darren1971]

you couldn't make this up...

 

“We were devastated when we were going through it. Immigration officials said there were problems but would not say what they were. This guy said: ‘Just because she is born here doesn’t mean she has a right to be here. You need to sort it out,” Kriel told the Guardian.

“A stamp was put in the passport, saying she [the baby] has six months to be here as long as she does not engage in work."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/20/uk-born-baby-of-parents-with-right-to-remain-given-six-month-tourist-stamp

[globalThailand]

13 hours ago, darren1971 said:

you couldn't make this up...

 

“We were devastated when we were going through it. Immigration officials said there were problems but would not say what they were. This guy said: ‘Just because she is born here doesn’t mean she has a right to be here. You need to sort it out,” Kriel told the Guardian.

“A stamp was put in the passport, saying she [the baby] has six months to be here as long as she does not engage in work."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/20/uk-born-baby-of-parents-with-right-to-remain-given-six-month-tourist-stamp

 

Not sure what your point is for posting this...  if the kid was born to parents with ILR then she's a UK citizen.  If the parents decide to travel without her UK passport (presumably using her US passport having just come back from Florida) then you can't really blame the Immigration officer for giving her a 6 month visa as per the rules for US nationals.  Whoever 'this guy' was that said the parents need to 'sort it out' was quite right in that it's the parents responsibility to ensure the child is travelling with the correct documentation.