Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×
Don't just read! Be part of the Community! Join the conversation ×





Substantial increase in income requirements for UK Visas.

theoldgit
 Share

Recommended Posts

superal Platinum Member

superal

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, theoldgit said:


We’ll have to wait until the new plan is published, but currently the figure has to be met on initial application, and again at the FLR and ILR stages when any salary earned by the applicant can be used.

The current guidelines already detail the various scenarios that are acceptable, sponsor already working in the UK, sponsors with job offers, pensioners and those relying on an element of savings, no doubt new rules and guidance will be issued in due course.

The BBC is already claiming that only those who continue to meet the requirements would be allowed to remain and are quoting families who think their plans have been scuppered, it’s all conjecture at this stage.

In the event that a sponsor passes away, there is currently a route for those currently in the UK to immediately apply for ILR, hopefully that option will remain.

 Things are changing daily with the resignation of the UK Immigration minister unable to support the Rwanda bill . No doubt that the J.Cleverly immigration reform bill will be challenged and R.Sunak will lose a vote of confidence to remain as P.M. which will either trigger a general election or another interim replacement  P.M. 

I am sad to say that as a previous Tory voter , they have handled the illegal immigration poorly . The UK has become a laughing stock to other countries in the way it has lost control of its borders and paying out millions to the likes of France , to increase their help in halting the channel hoppers ( but they have not , just took the money ) and to Rwanda to enable provision of settlement to failed / illegal asylum seekers . 

The UK is seen as an easy touch by immigrants . As soon as they set foot on UK soil they are normally given accommodation ,  and also given £ 47.39 per person a day for living expenses plus free health care which includes dental treatment and glasses etc . Other countries have set up detention centers as opposed to using hotels etc for initial housing.  Back to the main topic and the increase in income requirements should not apply to those who were born in the UK or have worked and paid taxes for 30 plus years . The UK immigration has been a sleeping giant that has now woken up . Such a sensitive subject but has to be dealt with now .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
superal Platinum Member

superal

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, MicroB said:

 

The salary requirements do not bear scrutiny when looking at the logic. The previous £18,600 was based on the threshold that most couples would face if applying for any income-related benefit. Completely logical if the applying couple is told that they must be able to support themselves. The threshold seems to have hardly changed.

 

The Home Secretary (using all the powers of his Hospitality degree he earnt from the local tech college) is now using the median salary of a skilled professional as the threshold for being about to support one self. A lot of skilled professionals earn below this. Some have speculated on the savings threshold, which seems to be generating ludicrous sums. And any spouse on such a visa is already forbidden from accessing any benefits.

 

Home Office modeling apparently indicates this will knock a few tens of thousands of family related visa application. It appears this will all be eliminate spousal visa applications, which would be counted as a success, given currently about 30,000 are awarded each year (90% approval rate).

 

Write to your MP, as I will. Mine will basically do my bidding, as I take a very logical and factual approach with him, which has born fruit, such as getting me in contact with ministers, and actually raising questions on my behalf in the House. I'm lucky as he is one of these very Brexity type MPs, but old school tory, rather than a thug in a suit. He's lost my vote though, but its nothing personal, and he'll be ok as he has the family firm to fall back on.

 

I suspect the HoL will kill this. But the government will invoke the Parliament Act, and manufacture some constitutional crisis, and force a confidence vote or a General Election based around a single issue. Based on his previous role, I don't think Cleverly has the appetite to fight this in the courts. He's more worried about keeping his seat.

Thanks for interesting info . Not wanting to digress from the main topic but the UK Universal Benefits system is not that easy to navigate ( I have been told ) . However in light of events over the last 24 hours there will be some political storms that I hope will shake up the management of the UK because it has been going down the pan for a number of years . If it means leaving the EHCR , so be it .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
superal Platinum Member

superal

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, CartagenaWarlock said:

"indigenous" a clever way of saying whities? 

Not really . I used the "indigenous " word to highlight those who were born in the UK which separates them from economic immigrants who could have come from Europe , Asia  Africa etc . Skin colour is irrelevant .

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MicroB Advanced Member

MicroB

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, superal said:

Not really . I used the "indigenous " word to highlight those who were born in the UK which separates them from economic immigrants who could have come from Europe , Asia  Africa etc . Skin colour is irrelevant .

 

Given your definition differs from the dictionary definition, how was anybody supposed to know that? If colour has nothng to do with your thinking, why did you even use the word?

 

Boris Johnson; not born in the UK, so is he an immigrant?

 

Foreign wives are only coming to the UK because of money? Apparently not, because before they were only coming to face living on 18k a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stuandjulie Senior Member

stuandjulie

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, superal said:

 Things are changing daily with the resignation of the UK Immigration minister unable to support the Rwanda bill . No doubt that the J.Cleverly immigration reform bill will be challenged and R.Sunak will lose a vote of confidence to remain as P.M. which will either trigger a general election or another interim replacement  P.M. 

I am sad to say that as a previous Tory voter , they have handled the illegal immigration poorly . The UK has become a laughing stock to other countries in the way it has lost control of its borders and paying out millions to the likes of France , to increase their help in halting the channel hoppers ( but they have not , just took the money ) and to Rwanda to enable provision of settlement to failed / illegal asylum seekers . 

The UK is seen as an easy touch by immigrants . As soon as they set foot on UK soil they are normally given accommodation ,  and also given £ 47.39 per person a day for living expenses plus free health care which includes dental treatment and glasses etc . Other countries have set up detention centers as opposed to using hotels etc for initial housing.  Back to the main topic and the increase in income requirements should not apply to those who were born in the UK or have worked and paid taxes for 30 plus years . The UK immigration has been a sleeping giant that has now woken up . Such a sensitive subject but has to be dealt with now .

Only partially true, legal refugees can claim assistance however the 'channel Hopper's' do not. Social security benefits. If you are not an EEA national and you do not have a right of residence or immigration leave in the UK you are defined as a 'person subject to immigration control' (see below) and are therefore not entitled to claim most benefits unless you come within one of the very limited exceptions.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
superal Platinum Member

superal

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, stuandjulie said:

Only partially true, legal refugees can claim assistance however the 'channel Hopper's' do not. Social security benefits. If you are not an EEA national and you do not have a right of residence or immigration leave in the UK you are defined as a 'person subject to immigration control' (see below) and are therefore not entitled to claim most benefits unless you come within one of the very limited exceptions.

Until they are processed illegal immigrants can access support in the form of housing and general living expenses , via the UK Home Office . They are unable to access the main stream benefits until their asylum application has been approved which is currently taking over 6 months . That is costing the benefit system outrageous sums of money . The success rate of asylum applications is running at 75% and that leads to a total access to benefits claims . Since 2021 on average there has been over 1 million immigrants entering the UK . It is out of control . 

             It has been stated that there is a correlation with immigration levels ,  crime , housing crisis , the NHS and doctor/dentist accessibility . Finally there are over 500,000 people emigrating / leaving the UK every year ( and who can blame them ? ) . In order to emigrate from the UK to a developed country normally requires an applicant to have a required skill or professional background . So there is little doubt that the UK is suffering a brain drain and quite evident within the NHS as an example .  20% of the UK population were not born in the UK . UK governments have encourage multi cultural societies but it clearly does not work . Very little integration , with many immigrants of the same nationality / culture residing within their own communities . Apologies about digressing from the main topic .

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
UKresonant Silver Member

UKresonant

Posted
Posted
On 12/5/2023 at 11:28 PM, theoldgit said:

Only the salary/income/capital of the UK spouse/sponsor can be used for the initial application, for subsequent applications, at the FLR and ILR stages, the applicants income can be used to meet the financial requirement.

 

I have to admit I thought it was combined income / savings of husband and wife.

So they would ignore her income (when pension equiv.) and savings.

Very Angry now! (up from just Angry, that it is excessive over indexation and Local Average earnings)  Even though it's unlikely that I could convince her she should come to the UK for a full year (especially with the probably hostile tax environment). 

So hypothetically she would have to SWIFT me the difference, savings/2.5,  six months in advance to meet the criteria, (but then they would probably want to tax it).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
theoldgit Star Member

theoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
17 hours ago, youreavinalaff said:

New figures to be announced. Only affects new arrivals. 

 

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/home-office-climbs-down-on-plans-to-hike-salary-thresholds-for-family-visas/


Don’t count your blessings just yet, let’s not forget that some of those entering on the old route and fail to meet the current threshold could, and l stress could, be switched to the ten year route.

 

I think we really need to see what the requirements will actually be when they’re eventually published before we jump to any conclusions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
youreavinalaff Platinum Member

youreavinalaff

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, theoldgit said:


Don’t count your blessings just yet, let’s not forget that some of those entering on the old route and fail to meet the current threshold could, and l stress could, be switched to the ten year route.

 

I think we really need to see what the requirements will actually be when they’re eventually published before we jump to any conclusions.

I did say "to be announced".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
theoldgit Star Member

theoldgit

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

Have the numbers been clarified, notably the amount of savings required if you cannot meet the income criteria.


I haven’t seen an update from the UKVI yet, but this is in the House of Commons Library, and seems to clarify some of the concerns.

 

 https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9920/#:~:text=The minimum income normally required,overseas graduates of British universities.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
TroyC Apprentice Member

TroyC

Posted
Posted (edited)

So yesterday the home office published the timeline for the implementation of the new income requirements for UK visas. One of the main changes I can see compared to the original plan is that if your partner is already on the 5 year route then extensions made after April 2024 will still be assessed against the current £18600.

My constituent will be extending their spouse/partner visa on or after 11 April – will the £29,000 threshold apply to them, or only to first-time visa applicants?

Only to first-time applicants. A Government spokesperson initially said the higher threshold would apply to visa extensions, but the Home Office announced on 21 December that it would not: “Those who already have a family visa within the five-year partner route, or who apply before the minimum income threshold is raised, will continue to have their applications assessed against the current income requirement and will not be required to meet the increased threshold”.

 

 

Edited by TroyC
Punctuation
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.