UK Settlement Visa Refusal

[hotandsticky]

A friend's Thai partner has had her Fiancee Visa application declined.

 

This appears to be solely on the basis of not enough supporting paperwork being supplied to support the sponsor (him) financial requirements.

 

He has asked what he needs to do next in terms of supplying the full information - and does this need to be done as part of an appeal ?

 

Eligibility Financial Requirement You do not meet the eligibility financial requirement of paragraphs E-ECP.3.1 to 3.4 because: You have stated in your Visa Application Form that you meet the financial requirement through CAT A/B etc. I am not able to take into account any potential employment you have available to you in the UK or any offers of financial support from third parties. In order to meet the financial requirements of Appendix FM your sponsor needs a gross income of at least £18,600 per annum. You state that your sponsor is employed by XXX and earns an annual income of £26,250. As evidence of your sponsor’s employment you have submitted an employment letter, 4 weeks of payslips and a bank statement covering the dates of 29/12/2020 - 15/01/2021.

 

The Immigration Rules state that in respect of salaried employment in the UK, all of the following evidence must be provided (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/a ppendix-fmse/): (a) Payslips covering: (i) a period of 6 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for at least 6 months (and where paragraph 13(b) of this Appendix does not apply); or (ii) any period of salaried employment in the period of 12 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for less than 6 months (or at least 6 months but the person does not rely on paragraph 13(a) of this Appendix), or in the financial year(s) relied upon by a self-employed person. (b) A letter from the employer(s) who issued the payslips at paragraph 2(a) confirming: (i) the person's employment and gross annual salary; (ii) the length of their employment; (iii) the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application; and (iv) the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency). (c) Personal bank statements corresponding to the same period(s) as the payslips at paragraph 2(a), showing that the salary has been paid into an account in the name of the person or in the name of the person and their partner jointly. You have not provided payslips covering a period of 6 months prior to the date of application and personal bank statements corresponding to the same period. You have therefore failed to provide the required documents relating to your sponsor’s employment. These documents are specified in the Immigration Rules in Appendix FM-SE and must be provided. I therefore refuse your application under paragraph EC-P.1.1(d) of Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules. (E-ECP.3.1)

 

[Tony M]

This seems very simple. You have quoted the requirements ( 6 months wage slips, etc), and he (as the financial sponsor) only provided 4 weeks of evidence. Therefore the application was refused.
 

The applicant does have a right of appeal, but that cannot, and will not, be successful, as the specified requirements of the immigration rules were not met.  They should submit a new application, with all of the required evidence.

[bigyin]

On the information you have supplied they had no choice but to reject the application. Supplying only 4 weeks of payslips was asking for trouble and would make UKVI doubt that the income threshold was reached. If another application is made then it must satisfy all the requirements. There can be no shortcuts.

[theoldgit]

@hotandstickydid your friend say why he didn’t supply the required evidence?

It certainly seems a tad strange if he does meet the requirements that he didn’t supply the evidence required, without that evidence the Entry Clearance Officer had no option but to refuse the application.

As Tony M rightly says, an appeal would fail, and she would need to reapply, a very costly mistake. 

[RichardColeman]

Sad that you just lost a grand , but at least you know where you went wrong now

[Surelynot]

Is there still such a thing as a fiancé visa.......I thought there was just a type C visitors visa now? Just asking.

[hotandsticky]

3 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

Sad that you just lost a grand , but at least you know where you went wrong now

 

 

Yep.... that mistake won't be made again!... ????

[hotandsticky]

4 hours ago, theoldgit said:

@hotandstickydid your friend say why he didn’t supply the required evidence?

It certainly seems a tad strange if he does meet the requirements that he didn’t supply the evidence required, without that evidence the Entry Clearance Officer had no option but to refuse the application.

As Tony M rightly says, an appeal would fail, and she would need to reapply, a very costly mistake. 

 

 

I haven 't asked. He spoke of the need to provide evidence to support the required income criteria and I know his earnings are over £25,000. I think a significant pay rise only happened recently but I am pretty sure he was earning in excess of £18,600 prior to that.

I think it was ignorance of the 'specific' requirement that Tony M referred to regarding 6 months' documentation. I can't help thinking that it would have been rather nice for UKVI to come back and say something like "You have provided x number of payslips and bank statements evidencing compliance with the financial requirements but we require 6 months etc...... You have 14 days to provide this full information or we will have to refuse your application"....... but, then again, I am firmly on the side of the applicant.

[robblok]

22 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

I haven 't asked. He spoke of the need to provide evidence to support the required income criteria and I know his earnings are over £25,000. I think a significant pay rise only happened recently but I am pretty sure he was earning in excess of £18,600 prior to that.

I think it was ignorance of the 'specific' requirement that Tony M referred to regarding 6 months' documentation. I can't help thinking that it would have been rather nice for UKVI to come back and say something like "You have provided x number of payslips and bank statements evidencing compliance with the financial requirements but we require 6 months etc...... You have 14 days to provide this full information or we will have to refuse your application"....... but, then again, I am firmly on the side of the applicant.

Just imagine the work if you had to correct all wrong applications and after each wrong time ask for more data. It would be a never ending story. I get it i work with data too. Each time asking a client new data waiting for it starting processing it again takes extra time.

Maybe those that are not bright enough to do it themselves should hire someone who can do it for them. (im not in that business). But on the other hand they are asking a 1000 pounds so maybe one mistake should be ok and asked for more data before invalidating the whole process. Though it would take a whole new work system and so on. Now its either good or not no record needs to be kept. Then they need a record of things in the mail ect ect.

[kingdong]

You,ll probably find your next application will be gone over with a fine tooth comb.

[theoldgit]

13 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

I haven 't asked. He spoke of the need to provide evidence to support the required income criteria and I know his earnings are over £25,000. I think a significant pay rise only happened recently but I am pretty sure he was earning in excess of £18,600 prior to that.

I think it was ignorance of the 'specific' requirement that Tony M referred to regarding 6 months' documentation. I can't help thinking that it would have been rather nice for UKVI to come back and say something like "You have provided x number of payslips and bank statements evidencing compliance with the financial requirements but we require 6 months etc...... You have 14 days to provide this full information or we will have to refuse your application"....... but, then again, I am firmly on the side of the applicant.

So your friend was fully aware of the requirement to prove that he met the the income criteria, but chose not to do so?
The criteria has been shared numerous times on this forum, and it would seem that your friend was fully aware of it.
The ECO can use "evidential flexibility" in certain circumstances, but I'm not sure that your friends error really falls into this category.
Yes of course it would have been nice for the ECO to get back to the applicant and advise her that she's failed to meet the published requirements, but where do they draw the line regarding an incomplete application.
Sadly a lesson learned, and an expensive one.
 

 

 

 

[theoldgit]

Off topic troll post removed.

[theoldgit]

Post in breach of forum rules removed.

[hotandsticky]

On 3/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, theoldgit said:

So your friend was fully aware of the requirement to prove that he met the the income criteria, but chose not to do so?
The criteria has been shared numerous times on this forum, and it would seem that your friend was fully aware of it.
The ECO can use "evidential flexibility" in certain circumstances, but I'm not sure that your friends error really falls into this category.
Yes of course it would have been nice for the ECO to get back to the applicant and advise her that she's failed to meet the published requirements, but where do they draw the line regarding an incomplete application.
Sadly a lesson learned, and an expensive one.
 

 

 

 

 

My friend said he was aware of the need to evidence compliance with the financial requirement of the minimum income  level of £18,600 per annum.

 

The mistake was in thinking that he had achieved that by submitting a P60 to April 2020, employers letter, 4 x weekly payslips and 2 months bank statements. He meets the financial requirement but the necessary supporting documentation was not supplied. 

 

It is obvious that he meets the criteria and an ECO would realise that. His mistake in not reading the instructions has proved costly and the only gripe is that he wasn't given the opportunity to supply the additional documentation. In this situation it was a case that he had overlooked (rather than ignored) the need to supply 6 months worth of supporting evidence. The 2020 P60, employers letter, recent payslips and bank statements showing receipt of his wages clearly evidence compliance and the rejection was harsh judgement on his error.

 

He would like to appeal on the basis that the decision was harsh for a "technical" shortcoming. I think that would be pointless and I agree with previous posters who have said that the ECO was within his rights to decline the application. I maintain that there should be some degree of flexibility to allow minor transgressions like this to be corrected. 

 

 

[Surelynot]

1 minute ago, hotandsticky said:

I maintain that there should be some degree of flexibility to allow minor transgressions like this to be corrected. 

I agree....but the directive seems to be....search for a reason to deny.................not, let's be a little flexible and help.

As an aside........ I applied for a 5 year visitors visa for my wife (after three successful 2 year visas)......I paid (I think) £750........received a letter saying they were fully satisfied I complied with all the requirements of the application, but they felt it better to stick with a 2 year visa........Please note...you have no grounds for an appeal and your fee will not be refund.

 

[theoldgit]

5 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

He would like to appeal on the basis that the decision was harsh for a "technical" shortcoming. I think that would be pointless and I agree with previous posters who have said that the ECO was within his rights to decline the application. I maintain that there should be some degree of flexibility to allow minor transgressions like this to be corrected. 

I'm not sure that the UKVI would accept your friends argument that the decision was based on a "technical short coming", you have mentioned that your friends salary increased prior to the application and that he submitted a P60 for the tax year 2019/2020, considerably well before the application date.

You added that your friend submitted 4 x weekly payslips and 2 months bank statements, rather than the six months required for both, and thus he meets the financial requirement, I'm sorry that simply doesn't add up, it certainly doesn't prove that the requirement has been met.

You can argue your friends case and I can listen, but he needs to satisfy whoever hears his appeal that the decision to refuse the appeal was flawed, not you and I, I personally think he'll face an uphill battle to get the decision overturned, I nevertheless wish him every success.  

[hotandsticky]

9 minutes ago, theoldgit said:

I'm not sure that the UKVI would accept your friends argument that the decision was based on a "technical short coming", you have mentioned that your friends salary increased prior to the application and that he submitted a P60 for the tax year 2019/2020, considerably well before the application date.

You added that your friend submitted 4 x weekly payslips and 2 months bank statements, rather than the six months required for both, and thus he meets the financial requirement, I'm sorry that simply doesn't add up, it certainly doesn't prove that the requirement has been met.

You can argue your friends case and I can listen, but he needs to satisfy whoever hears his appeal that the decision to refuse the appeal was flawed, not you and I, I personally think he'll face an uphill battle to get the decision overturned, I nevertheless wish him every success.  

 

I agree with you 100%.

 

The fact that he meets the financial requirement is not in doubt; If he met the criteria with 2020 P60, and the subsequent employers letter evidences £26k then the income level is satisfied..... it is the shortcomings in the provision of supporting documentation.

 

It is just my opinion that a second bite at supplying full evidence (without paying£1,500) would be fair.

 

However, I am suggesting to him that does not give sufficient grounds for an appeal.

[7by7]

5 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

The mistake was in thinking that he had achieved that by submitting a P60 to April 2020, employers letter, 4 x weekly payslips and 2 months bank statements.

With respect, the mistake was in not reading the guidance properly! All the guidance leads applicants and sponsors to the financial requirement appendix which clearly lists the evidence required.

There is some room for evidential flexibility: see from page 13. I am not qualified to say whether he's covered by that, so he may want to seek professional advice from an OISC registered advisor.

[hotandsticky]

3 hours ago, 7by7 said:

With respect, the mistake was in not reading the guidance properly! All the guidance leads applicants and sponsors to the financial requirement appendix which clearly lists the evidence required.

There is some room for evidential flexibility: see from page 13. I am not qualified to say whether he's covered by that, so he may want to seek professional advice from an OISC registered advisor.

 

Agree entirely regarding the mistake.

 

Interesting to hear that there is evidential flexibility. I am not sure though if it is worth an appeal on those grounds. Presumably there are costs associated with an appeal. I guess it might be worth considering before expending another £1,500 on a resubmission.

 

[7by7]

19 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

Interesting to hear that there is evidential flexibility. I am not sure though if it is worth an appeal on those grounds. Presumably there are costs associated with an appeal. I guess it might be worth considering before expending another £1,500 on a resubmission.

I would certainly seek the advice of an OISC registered advisor before embarking down that road.

On 3/13/2021 at 1:45 PM, Tony M said:

The applicant does have a right of appeal, but that cannot, and will not, be successful, as the specified requirements of the immigration rules were not met. 

After all, it was not just a few documents out of a sequence that were missing, but most of the required ones!

[Pmbkk]

It does say:

If the applicant has submitted:

a sequence of documents and some of the documents in the sequence have
been omitted (for example, if one bank statement from a series is missing)
• a document in the wrong format (for example, if a letter is not on letterhead
paper as specified)
• a document that is a copy and not an original document
• a document which does not contain all of the specified information
• has not submitted a specified document

the decision-maker may contact the applicant or his representative in writing or
otherwise, and request the document(s) or the correct version(s). The material
requested must be received at the address specified in the request within a
reasonable timescale specified in the request. 

Are you sure all the contact details you submitted are still correct.

You could mention the above if you contacted them. 

Maybe just say you'd missed them from the pile, but have them to hand now.

 

It seems somewhat harsh to reject without any contact to provide the missing documentation. 

 

[hotandsticky]

Update.

 

 

Having corrected the deficiencies in the financial paperwork, my friends second application was successful.

 

 

 

[theoldgit]

Totally unnecessary troll post removed, along with a couple of measured responses.

 

@hotandstickyI'm glad to hear that your friends issue has been resolved, sadly an expensive mistake.

[hotandsticky]

1 hour ago, theoldgit said:

Totally unnecessary troll post removed, along with a couple of measured responses.

 

@hotandstickyI'm glad to hear that your friends issue has been resolved, sadly an expensive mistake.

 

 

Thanks to this forum,a mistake that will not be made at the FLR stage.

[Steps]

On 6/12/2021 at 10:09 PM, hotandsticky said:

Update.

 

 

Having corrected the deficiencies in the financial paperwork, my friends second application was successful.

 

 

 

So you are saying he got the application accepted on less than 6 moths salary slips?

[hotandsticky]

2 hours ago, Steps said:

So you are saying he got the application accepted on less than 6 moths salary slips?

 

 

No.

[Steps]

22 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

No.

Damn, this could be an issue for me as i would need to find employment first, then gather the 6 months salary slips. So my wife and mother to my 2 children would need to stay in Thailand until then, however long that takes!!

[hotandsticky]

3 minutes ago, Steps said:

Damn, this could be an issue for me as i would need to find employment first, then gather the 6 months salary slips. So my wife and mother to my 2 children would need to stay in Thailand until then, however long that takes!!

 

 

The Immigration Rules state that in respect of salaried employment in the UK, all of the following evidence must be provided (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/a ppendix-fmse/): (a) Payslips covering: (i) a period of 6 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for at least 6 months (and where paragraph 13(b) of this Appendix does not apply); or (ii) any period of salaried employment in the period of 12 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for less than 6 months (or at least 6 months but the person does not rely on paragraph 13(a) of this Appendix), or in the financial year(s) relied upon by a self-employed person. (b) A letter from the employer(s) who issued the payslips at paragraph 2(a) confirming: (i) the person's employment and gross annual salary; (ii) the length of their employment; (iii) the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application; and (iv) the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency). (c) Personal bank statements corresponding to the same period(s) as the payslips at paragraph 2(a), showing that the salary has been paid into an account in the name of the person or in the name of the person and their partner jointly. You have not provided payslips covering a period of 6 months prior to the date of application and personal bank statements corresponding to the same period. You have therefore failed to provide the required documents relating to your sponsor’s employment. These documents are specified in the Immigration Rules in Appendix FM-SE and must be provided. I therefore refuse your application under paragraph EC-P.1.1(d) of Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules. (E-ECP.3.1)

[Steps]

1 minute ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

The Immigration Rules state that in respect of salaried employment in the UK, all of the following evidence must be provided (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/policyandlaw/immigrationlaw/immigrationrules/a ppendix-fmse/): (a) Payslips covering: (i) a period of 6 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for at least 6 months (and where paragraph 13(b) of this Appendix does not apply); or (ii) any period of salaried employment in the period of 12 months prior to the date of application if the person has been employed by their current employer for less than 6 months (or at least 6 months but the person does not rely on paragraph 13(a) of this Appendix), or in the financial year(s) relied upon by a self-employed person. (b) A letter from the employer(s) who issued the payslips at paragraph 2(a) confirming: (i) the person's employment and gross annual salary; (ii) the length of their employment; (iii) the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application; and (iv) the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency). (c) Personal bank statements corresponding to the same period(s) as the payslips at paragraph 2(a), showing that the salary has been paid into an account in the name of the person or in the name of the person and their partner jointly. You have not provided payslips covering a period of 6 months prior to the date of application and personal bank statements corresponding to the same period. You have therefore failed to provide the required documents relating to your sponsor’s employment. These documents are specified in the Immigration Rules in Appendix FM-SE and must be provided. I therefore refuse your application under paragraph EC-P.1.1(d) of Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules. (E-ECP.3.1)

Would she be able to do a tourist visa and come back with me, then i get employment and provide the necessary documentation after the 6 month period?

[Surelynot]

On 3/13/2021 at 6:45 AM, Tony M said:

The applicant does have a right of appeal,

Not disputing this....but is it definitely true?.....I have had visas refused, the fees kept and letter sent to me informing me I have no right of appeal or a right to even ask for an explanation for the refusal.