Visa Refused.. Again

[AngryParent]

1. Why would you have to leave the other EU country every 90 days? Did you not enter under "exercising your treaty rights" under economic movement (rather than tourists)? If you did, then you can apply for a residence permit?

That rule applies to non-EU nationals, not EU-nationals. I'm from the EU and brought my spouse along on a tourist visa. He didn't have to apply for a tourist visa because he is on the list of good countries and receives the 90 days on arrival. We're also not staying in my native country (mainland Europe, I'm not from the UK).

2. You state one has to be able to show ability to support partner + dependants. Have you got any data as to how much is required e.g. savings etc? Is this evidence only required when trying to go back to the UK? Or is it also to be shown in the other EU country where you initially reside (to be able to remain)?

I'm not sure what the exact amount is, for all I know, "they" judge you on a personal basis. Maybe they take minimum wage into account? I'm sure it differs for the different EU countries. No one has asked for our savings. I had to present my business figures and prove that I had paid social contributions and taxes in their country ( I'm self-employed) to ensure that I can support him and he won't become a drain on the system. They do check this and there is no way around this. What I'm trying to say is that you can't just pop over there, set up as self-employed and have zero or very little income. Your partner will not get a visa.

This has nothing to do with going to the UK, it has to do with getting your spouse a long stay visa and the right to work or set up as self-employed in said country.

Thanks for that!

I could be wrong, but I think the issue is the spouse entering on the tourist visa. If going to a thirdparty EU country i.e. not your EU country of citizenship, then you are entering under your economic treaty rights and your spouse should enter under your wing at the same time. Not as a tourist - because then the "bond" is broken. In such, you have the right to remain but the spouse is treated as a seperate person who got a tourist visa. Now, you are going backwards and trying to keep a tourist in the EU based on your ability to support the spouse.

[beano2274]

To those thinking of using the enter via another country idea, just a few things.

In Germany for example you require an "aufenthaltsgenehmigen" (right to stay), then if you apply for your Thai wife to go to Germany you need letters from the local AMT, then if she can join you to stay okay, but if she is on a tourist Schengen Visa, then she will have to return to Thailand to apply for a UK visa, as it clearly states "what is your permission to stay in the country where you are applying" on the VAF1A and VAF1B forms.

If you have opened a company you will need to show all documentation, plus all tax documents, if your company did not make enough you can also be refused. Also if you then try to use the Settlement Visa way for the UK, the ECO might ask what you will do with your company as this was your means of income.

[ricku]

Im sorry to hear that bro.

I've also heard that the british government prefer muslim immigrants. Especially from bright countries like Somalia and Iraq.

Maybe your GF's family should convert to the religion of hate? Might get lucky then!

Just half kidding of course. I wish you luck. A friend of mine was in the same situation one year ago.

Edited December 3, 2011 by ricku

[7by7]

Some posters have misunderstood the problem; there is, from what Kobrien has posted here and elsewhere, no doubt in the ECO's mind about the relationship. It is the financial side that is the problem.

Being together for 4 years or more does not effect the situation. If living together outside the UK for at least 4 years, then she may qualify for a slightly different visa, ILE rather than a 27 month one, but would still have to satisfy all the settlement criteria.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a qualified right

Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

A signatory country's immigration rules fall under the exception.

Exercising an economic treaty right in another EEA country does mean that his wife could join him there under the EEA regulations (without having to leave every 90 days!) and then after an unspecified time they could use the same EEA regulations to move to the UK. However, he would have to be actually exercising an economic treaty right, not just setting up camp in Calais for a couple of weeks, and show that he and his family have the funds to support themselves while there. Ditto upon moving back to the UK.

Comments about the British government not liking Thais and preferring Muslims are, obviously, utter rubbish. The success rate in Thailand for all categories of visa, including settlement, is consistently above 90%.

Another off topic post has been deleted. Next one gets a warning and a posting holiday.

[7by7]

Kobrien, if the income from your current employment is sufficient to support you and your family then there is no need to take another job; unless you wish to. There is currently no minimum income required, but the courts have ruled that it would be inappropriate for an immigrant couple to have an income of less than the income support level for a British family of the same size (about £115 per week for a couple).

Your problem, as I understand it, is not that you don't have enough income but that you failed to show any proof of your current income. This is what you need to address. Submitting two year old bank statements, as you did with the initial application, does not show the current position. You need at least the last three months, the last 6 would be better.

I am confused over your employment status. You work for your sister; as an employee or on a self employed contract? If an employee she must be giving you regular payslips, so submit them. If self employed then submit whatever documentary evidence you have of the payments you receive from her; those you are keeping for when you complete your SA return.

As has been said to you before, there is no reason why you, or rather your wife, cannot submit another settlement application while waiting for her appeal to be heard. But, as with the appeal, you must address every aspect of her previous settlement refusal or it will only be refused again.

If this second application is successful before the appeal hearing then you simply withdraw the appeal, and vice versa. Remember, though, that if her appeal is heard and successful before the second application is decided and you withdraw that application, you wont get the fee back.

I don't know if you have read Maintenance and accommodation (MAA); you may find it helpful.

[kobrien]

Thank you 7by7,I dont know if you run a business around this subject but if you dont, then you should,I have not got a problem supporting my other half,biggest problem is proving it,because of the stop

start nature of my work in the UK I have gaps and a lack of payslips,my NI contribution im sure does not look good at present but I will change my status with my familes business so its clear what I have earnt

and have a record for the UKBA to check and see.

Im guessing from an official point of view I would be classed as self employed,but as this has been stop and start due to the birth... I have not made it an official status,I shall bring in as

much taxable income for the next three months and then apply for a new settlement.

Thanks again.

[AngryParent]

Some posters have misunderstood the problem; there is, from what Kobrien has posted here and elsewhere, no doubt in the ECO's mind about the relationship. It is the financial side that is the problem.

Being together for 4 years or more does not effect the situation. If living together outside the UK for at least 4 years, then she may qualify for a slightly different visa, ILE rather than a 27 month one, but would still have to satisfy all the settlement criteria.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a qualified right

Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

A signatory country's immigration rules fall under the exception.

Exercising an economic treaty right in another EEA country does mean that his wife could join him there under the EEA regulations (without having to leave every 90 days!) and then after an unspecified time they could use the same EEA regulations to move to the UK. However, he would have to be actually exercising an economic treaty right, not just setting up camp in Calais for a couple of weeks, and show that he and his family have the funds to support themselves while there. Ditto upon moving back to the UK.

Comments about the British government not liking Thais and preferring Muslims are, obviously, utter rubbish. The success rate in Thailand for all categories of visa, including settlement, is consistently above 90%.

Another off topic post has been deleted. Next one gets a warning and a posting holiday.

A very interesting post and if I may pick your brains.

1, Under the EEA treaty right, self-employed or worker is OK. As such, setting up a business camp does satisfy criteria (providing the family moves together and at the same time to Calais). The key legal issue is notification in advance and getting the family permit. If the business was to "fail - but not bankrupt (and even this does not matter)" for any reason within the first month (my example and be a bit creative minded ) Then once that family permit is there for the third party EU country (given before even getting to Calais - the world changes if the EU citizen sets up camp in advance), there is nothing to stop exercising the EEA right to relocate the business (a seperate legal entitiy and treated as a EU individual) and all tied to it (i.e. the UK citizen and the spouse) back to the UK! As per http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/eucitizens/eea-family-permit/ there is no financial criteria to move under the EEA (an example could be a Polish with a 100 Euros in their pocket being able to come and stay).

2. Why quote Article 8? Under humanitarian grounds I would start with the various ECHR Protocols and move backwards and the last thing I would call upon would be Article 8. That has to do with privacy and not really family unity.

[AngryParent]

Kobrien, if the income from your current employment is sufficient to support you and your family then there is no need to take another job; unless you wish to. There is currently no minimum income required, but the courts have ruled that it would be inappropriate for an immigrant couple to have an income of less than the income support level for a British family of the same size (about £115 per week for a couple).

Your problem, as I understand it, is not that you don't have enough income but that you failed to show any proof of your current income. This is what you need to address. Submitting two year old bank statements, as you did with the initial application, does not show the current position. You need at least the last three months, the last 6 would be better.

I am confused over your employment status. You work for your sister; as an employee or on a self employed contract? If an employee she must be giving you regular payslips, so submit them. If self employed then submit whatever documentary evidence you have of the payments you receive from her; those you are keeping for when you complete your SA return.

As has been said to you before, there is no reason why you, or rather your wife, cannot submit another settlement application while waiting for her appeal to be heard. But, as with the appeal, you must address every aspect of her previous settlement refusal or it will only be refused again.

If this second application is successful before the appeal hearing then you simply withdraw the appeal, and vice versa. Remember, though, that if her appeal is heard and successful before the second application is decided and you withdraw that application, you wont get the fee back.

I don't know if you have read Maintenance and accommodation (MAA); you may find it helpful.

To consider the point of starting another 800 Pound visa application whist an appeal is running is a bit drastic for a person who claimed there was no savings. Would it not be better to use the 2 months left (till the appeal date) to get additional evidence to satisfy the original criteria? 2 Months to get the sister to register the UK husband/brother under PAYE and organize all documents. If, as you say, it is only 115 per week (and they have a suitable accomodation) then next to ZERO or ZERO payments will need to be made to Inland Revenue. Registration will itself be sufficeint proof regarding ability to support the family.

And in the mean time, submit this additional evidence and qualify for the visa?

[AngryParent]

Some posters have misunderstood the problem; there is, from what Kobrien has posted here and elsewhere, no doubt in the ECO's mind about the relationship. It is the financial side that is the problem.

Being together for 4 years or more does not effect the situation. If living together outside the UK for at least 4 years, then she may qualify for a slightly different visa, ILE rather than a 27 month one, but would still have to satisfy all the settlement criteria.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a qualified right

Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

A signatory country's immigration rules fall under the exception.

Exercising an economic treaty right in another EEA country does mean that his wife could join him there under the EEA regulations (without having to leave every 90 days!) and then after an unspecified time they could use the same EEA regulations to move to the UK. However, he would have to be actually exercising an economic treaty right, not just setting up camp in Calais for a couple of weeks, and show that he and his family have the funds to support themselves while there. Ditto upon moving back to the UK.

Comments about the British government not liking Thais and preferring Muslims are, obviously, utter rubbish. The success rate in Thailand for all categories of visa, including settlement, is consistently above 90%.

Another off topic post has been deleted. Next one gets a warning and a posting holiday.

You mention the ILR route, but state that this is only if all criteria is met. Can I ask you how this is possible, when probably the 2 issues a genuine family could fall on is the English language test and the life in the UK test. However, the life in the UK test is only taught and tested in the UK! Also, the new regulation (as some/many ESL testing centers had problems), is that the non-UK spouse needs to attend a course. Not provided in Thailand! ???

Edited December 3, 2011 by AngryParent

[7by7]

Yes, self employment is exercising an economic treaty right. As is job seeking or setting up a business. My point was that a UK citizen who merely lives in another EEA state with his non EEA family member without actually exercising an economic treaty right cannot then use the EEA regulations to bring their non EEA family to the UK.

Article 8 deals with the right to family life as well as privacy. Which protocol(s) would you quote? Refusal notices in family categories usually say the applicant and sponsor's human rights have been considered but do not apply.

I posted about a second settlement application as the matter was raised by the OP, both in this thread and his previous ones.

Payments to HMRC, whether through PAYE or SA are not an issue; proving his financial position is. Remember that his financial position now will have no effect on his wife's appeal; it is his financial position at the time of the original settlement application that counts. As I explained earlier, the appeal tribunal will consider whether or not the refusal was correct based upon the OP and his wife's circumstances at the time. Any change in those circumstances in the mean time, such as an increase in income, will not be considered by the tribunal.

Indefinite Leave to Enter, not Indefinite Leave to Remain. ILE is issued outside the UK, ILR within. You are correct that the knowledge of life and language in the UK (KOL) requirement can only be satisfied in the UK. But the LitUK test can be taken while someone is in the UK as a visitor, though an ESOL with citizenship course could not as visitors are not allowed to undertake a course of study. If an applicant meets all the criteria for ILE except KOL then they will be issued ILE subject to KOL and can apply for ILR immediately they have satisfied KOL without having to be resident in the UK for 24 months. See Uk Settlement; Spouse Visa Or Ile? Have you been married for 4 years or more? for more on this.

N.B.

That thread is over a year old, the original post 2 years old. Some of the links may now be out of date, as may some of the minor points and information. The main points are still valid, though.

[AngryParent]

Yes, self employment is exercising an economic treaty right. As is job seeking or setting up a business. My point was that a UK citizen who merely lives in another EEA state with his non EEA family member without actually exercising an economic treaty right cannot then use the EEA regulations to bring their non EEA family to the UK.

Article 8 deals with the right to family life as well as privacy. Which protocol(s) would you quote? Refusal notices in family categories usually say the applicant and sponsor's human rights have been considered but do not apply.

I posted about a second settlement application as the matter was raised by the OP, both in this thread and his previous ones.

Payments to HMRC, whether through PAYE or SA are not an issue; proving his financial position is. Remember that his financial position now will have no effect on his wife's appeal; it is his financial position at the time of the original settlement application that counts. As I explained earlier, the appeal tribunal will consider whether or not the refusal was correct based upon the OP and his wife's circumstances at the time. Any change in those circumstances in the mean time, such as an increase in income, will not be considered by the tribunal.

Indefinite Leave to Enter, not Indefinite Leave to Remain. ILE is issued outside the UK, ILR within. You are correct that the knowledge of life and language in the UK (KOL) requirement can only be satisfied in the UK. But the LitUK test can be taken while someone is in the UK as a visitor, though an ESOL with citizenship course could not as visitors are not allowed to undertake a course of study. If an applicant meets all the criteria for ILE except KOL then they will be issued ILE subject to KOL and can apply for ILR immediately they have satisfied KOL without having to be resident in the UK for 24 months. See Uk Settlement; Spouse Visa Or Ile? Have you been married for 4 years or more? for more on this.

N.B.

That thread is over a year old, the original post 2 years old. Some of the links may now be out of date, as may some of the minor points and information. The main points are still valid, though.

Hi again!

Thanks for your replies.

As you mention Article 8 is valid. I would personally start by using protocol 2 "Article 2 provides for the right not to be denied an education and the right for parents to have their children educated in accordance with their religious and other views." By failing to grant entry to the UK, the child's education suffers and parents views are not respected). The formative years (that includes the child's surroundings) have a big impact on the future success (much evidence exists). By failing to grant entry, the ECO is in breach of this!

Then I would use Protocol 1 where the family is not allowed to enjoy one's possessions in the UK as one is not allowed entry. This case would be made out that as it is a family unit, by failing to grant 1 or more members entry, the family unit is unable to enjoy the possessions. Such possessions also include public property e.g. parks, schools, community centeres etc! Although, it generally is private property - there is a good case in support of public property esp. in the UK.

Then I would use Article 12 and Article 8 but make a valid case.

I have posted on the other thread - look forward to your reply!

[AngryParent]

Article 8 deals with the right to family life as well as privacy. Which protocol(s) would you quote? Refusal notices in family categories usually say the applicant and sponsor's human rights have been considered but do not apply.

Payments to HMRC, whether through PAYE or SA are not an issue; proving his financial position is. Remember that his financial position now will have no effect on his wife's appeal; it is his financial position at the time of the original settlement application that counts. As I explained earlier, the appeal tribunal will consider whether or not the refusal was correct based upon the OP and his wife's circumstances at the time. Any change in those circumstances in the mean time, such as an increase in income, will not be considered by the tribunal.

Yes, HR case are probably frequently denied as evidence is often not supplied in a format that initially conforms to the HR case law and the Convention. Often, those who really do bother to take it to appeal and an initial HR judicial hearing find that the initial refusal was wrong.

The OP claimed he was working when he made the initial spouse visa (from my memory)? In which case, the proof can include his sister not being knowledgeable in employment law and giving a late registration for PAYE or SA. This is the "retrospective" proof that shows income i.e. financial position! Such evidence can be brought under the appeal.

If after all this, it does not work, then wow! HR law, income proof, housing proof, go to Calais as a "jobseeker or self-employed for a month but notify treaty rights in advance", then I guess it is the end for all UK citizens with Thai spouses?

[AngryParent]

Article 8 deals with the right to family life as well as privacy. Which protocol(s) would you quote? Refusal notices in family categories usually say the applicant and sponsor's human rights have been considered but do not apply.

Payments to HMRC, whether through PAYE or SA are not an issue; proving his financial position is. Remember that his financial position now will have no effect on his wife's appeal; it is his financial position at the time of the original settlement application that counts. As I explained earlier, the appeal tribunal will consider whether or not the refusal was correct based upon the OP and his wife's circumstances at the time. Any change in those circumstances in the mean time, such as an increase in income, will not be considered by the tribunal.

Yes, HR case are probably frequently denied as evidence is often not supplied in a format that initially conforms to the HR case law and the Convention. Often, those who really do bother to take it to appeal and an initial HR judicial hearing find that the initial refusal was wrong.

The OP claimed he was working when he made the initial spouse visa (from my memory)? In which case, the proof can include his sister not being knowledgeable in employment law and giving a late registration for PAYE or SA. This is the "retrospective" proof that shows income i.e. financial position! Such evidence can be brought under the appeal.

If after all this, it does not work, then wow! HR law, income proof, housing proof, go to Calais as a "jobseeker or self-employed for a month but notify treaty rights in advance", then I guess it is the end for all UK citizens with Thai spouses?

I forgot to mention to the OP (and this is serious).

If all this employment etc is just a fabrication to get the wife in that is conveneintly supported by 3 monthly payments of 1500 a month that gets taken out and put back in again etc. I strongly advise the OP to abandon the appeal and work towards a real application in a real job in the near future! From 7b7, 115 a week is enough, I think even a part-time tesco job should satisfy that.

By pursuing with the appeal and "stirring up a hornets nest" there is the chance of fraud, jail and you and your wife never being able to live together in the UK (without many legal battles in court over a long period of time).

My comments and ideas are for those who are genuine or can create a genuine situation that is not fraud.

[gamini]

I really can't understand what is going on. Surely anyone has the right to bring his wife back to his own country for good. Times must have changed!. Ive been married 4 times and never had a problem taking any of them to the UK. I have no home or income there either. My present wife is Thai. We have been to the UK many times and never had the slightest problem getting her a visa. The last time was 5 years ago, so I guess things must have changed. Is it perhaps that many Brits marry bar girls then bring them to the UK

where they promptly leave thier husbands and seek work of a dubious kind?

[AngryParent]

I really can't understand what is going on. Surely anyone has the right to bring his wife back to his own country for good.

That right that you mention is a very nice concept and I really wish it was such in all countries. In Thailand that right is not provided - you can live temporarily and only if many conditions are met (more stringent than the UK's conditions). In the UK you can live temporarily and/or get permanant right to live as a family providing a few basic conditions are met (nothing mysterious or impossible). In the Middle-East, spouses of UAE citizens can live without any financial requirements (strange how the places that many may consider as evil actually do provide the ideal). India gives a 15 year (unconditional) right to live together (with easy renewal or citizenship in a few years). Canada gives unconditional entry and right to remain for spouses and dependants.

Edited December 4, 2011 by AngryParent

[Arkady]

It seems bizarre for a man to start a family in a far off foreign land with no means of supporting them and no means of either partner getting work or a permanent visa in the other's country. The only thing to do is to find a decent job, put the nose to the grindstone for a year or two, keeping in touch via Skype, email etc and then apply again. Fortunately they are quite forgiving and once you qualify, your past recklessness will not be held against you. Your Thai wife should be able to understand because it is normal for Thai workers to go abroad for 5-10 years without a trip back to Thailand, so that their families will have better lives through their sacrifice. She was also party to the decision to start a family with some one who with no visible means of support and will have to wait until this is corrected.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Arkady

[Swiss1960]

I though wife has visa automatically?i mean wife must follow husband. When you get married you say for the best and worse, if you divorce I would ask government to pay me back.

sent from tapatalk :-)

Sorry but where do you get your ideas from?

Wife does not automatically get a visa, that is why they applied for one.

Get married and try taking your THAI wife to Switzerland, then you will see how difficult it is.

This is not true about Switzerland. The problems you have are only within the area of getting your marriage recognized by the Swiss authorities. Swiss authorities can hassle you for months about paperwork, proving the financial ability to support your family or just claim that the marriage is only about circumventing immigration laws...

Once the marriage is legally recognized by the Swiss Civil Registy Office (paperwork can be filed through the Swiss Embassies), then your partner automatically - in line with par. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights - gets a resicence permit for Switzerland. This is even true for a foreigner living in Switzerland on a valid resicency permit who wants his foreign wife to join him in Switzerland. This is all about the right for Family Reunification in par. 8 of the EHRC (EMRK in German abbreviation).

So - without knowing the details - I assume the OP has the main problem to have his marriage recognized under UK law, after that, he could sue any VISA refusal for his wife as violation of EHRC which the UK also recognizes.

[asdecas]

To the original poster: by posting on this forum you have opened yourself up to all sorts of smart <deleted>, flamers and Brits with nothing better to do than trawl a thread such as this looking for clever things to say. Very little of what has been written here will be of much use to you, and may well confuse you further. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that, your wife having been refused a visa twice on account of your financial situation, you need to spend however long it takes putting that aspect in order. It may be that the British embassy will give you guidance on that - you can but ask. It appears to me that this may take time, but from the tone of your posting it is worth it to you. As for trying other, more 'exotic' routes for a visa as mentioned above, I'd say forget it, your chances of success with those are slim to non-existent.

[rotary]

I though wife has visa automatically?i mean wife must follow husband. When you get married you say for the best and worse, if you divorce I would ask government to pay me back.

sent from tapatalk :-)

That helps sometimes.....and makes it harder to get a visa many times.

[jayceenik]

I sympathize with the UK settlement visa problem faced by the OP.

Many years ago I was refused a simple tourist visa to Belgium for a short holiday for my then TGF. I was then working in Indonesia on a 2/1 schedule.

I had put down on the form that she was my fiancée and they said that I should have applied for another type of visa (marriage ?).

But just about everyday I read in the MailOnline about non-EU illegal immigrants and criminals who have committed serious crimes in the UK who cannot be deported after claiming protection under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act of 1998 because they have some family ties in that country.

Couldn't the OP get his wife under a tourist visa in the UK and than use the HRA to get permanent settlement authorisation later ?

[kobrien]

To the original poster: by posting on this forum you have opened yourself up to all sorts of smart <deleted>, flamers and Brits with nothing better to do than trawl a thread such as this looking for clever things to say. Very little of what has been written here will be of much use to you, and may well confuse you further. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that, your wife having been refused a visa twice on account of your financial situation, you need to spend however long it takes putting that aspect in order. It may be that the British embassy will give you guidance on that - you can but ask. It appears to me that this may take time, but from the tone of your posting it is worth it to you. As for trying other, more 'exotic' routes for a visa as mentioned above, I'd say forget it, your chances of success with those are slim to non-existent.

Thank you for this response,I kind of knew there would be a high level rubbish coming my way,but at the time of finding out about the refusal I needed answers and options.

The informative responses cover around 10% of this thread,so its just a case of wading through the rubbish to find the good stuff,which is normally worth it.

A lot of people seem keen to second guess my story,I had a good job with decent savings which allowed me to live comfortably out in Thailand for 9 months.

I presumed I would never have a problem getting a visa for my wife, because of that,but because I did not wish to be apart from my new family I have a job which

at the moment has gaps,I could come and go all year round as this job would always be there,but this does not help with me proving my financial support to the UKBA as the work is via my families business.

So I will stay in the UK from now on,as much as I wanna go out there again to see them I know I will only be starting the sequence all over again,I just hope three months worth of recent

payslips will be enough to satisfy the UKBA,waiting any longer than 3 months will drive myself and my wife insane

[kobrien]

Couldn't the OP get his wife under a tourist visa in the UK and than use the HRA to get permanent settlement authorisation later ?

They will not issue a tourist visa because I have applied for settlement,they (UKBA) say there is a high chance she wont return as our baby has a British passport and she has no ties to Thailand.

[NanLaew]

Fantasists have hijacked this thread... human rights? <deleted>? The OP just needs to get his head out of his arse, spend some time grafting and saving after goofing off doing a whole 9 months of 'paternity leave'. The next thing we will have namby pamby new fathers saying they can't possibly work because the whole first 3 years of an infants life are the most formative and he needs to be there! Sheesh!

This whole 'working for my sister' sounds so dodgy; I doubt there's any taxable income being declared by either party. That in itself isn't a hurdle to immigration in this instance but it will be an issue in the future. It's not just about terrorist and asylum seekers now. There's a whole new world of fiscal transparency coming down the road. The most acceptable form of any proof of income is a tax return. All the foreigners that set up dodgy Thai companies with proxy Thai shareholders so they can 'own' land now have to present these Thai shareholders tax returns annually.

BTW. For all the wingeing Brits who hate all foreigners (but live over here), the largest contingent of foreigners on UK shores are students. Go figure!

[7by7]

As you mention Article 8 is valid. I would personally start by using protocol 2 "Article 2 provides for the right not to be denied an education and the right for parents to have their children educated in accordance with their religious and other views." By failing to grant entry to the UK, the child's education suffers and parents views are not respected). The formative years (that includes the child's surroundings) have a big impact on the future success (much evidence exists). By failing to grant entry, the ECO is in breach of this!

Then I would use Protocol 1 where the family is not allowed to enjoy one's possessions in the UK as one is not allowed entry. This case would be made out that as it is a family unit, by failing to grant 1 or more members entry, the family unit is unable to enjoy the possessions. Such possessions also include public property e.g. parks, schools, community centeres etc! Although, it generally is private property - there is a good case in support of public property esp. in the UK.

Then I would use Article 12 and Article 8 but make a valid case.

I see your point. However, the fact is that human rights are not a consideration here, (whatever may be the case in Switzerland, Swiss1960!)

To be honest, I cannot be bothered to do the large amount of research necessary, but I am sure that the human rights argument has been used to challenge a UK visa refusal in the past all the way up to the European court, and failed. If it had succeeded we would not be having this discussion!

[7by7]

A nonsense post and responses to it have been deleted.

Final warning; if you have nothing to say, say nothing!

If I have to delete or edit out any more rubbish the poster concerned will face a long posting holiday.

[7by7]

So - without knowing the details - I assume the OP has the main problem to have his marriage recognized under UK law, after that, he could sue any VISA refusal for his wife as violation of EHRC which the UK also recognizes.

His marriage is recognised under UK law. The Foreign Marriages Act of 1892 (yes 1892) says that any marriage which is recognised as legal in the country where it took place is also recognised as legal in the UK.

You say "without knowing the details." I suggest that you read through the topic, especially Kobrien's posts, properly. Doing so will show you that the problem is a financial one; nothing to do with the validity of his marriage in the UK.

[Swiss1960]

So - without knowing the details - I assume the OP has the main problem to have his marriage recognized under UK law, after that, he could sue any VISA refusal for his wife as violation of EHRC which the UK also recognizes.

His marriage is recognised under UK law. The Foreign Marriages Act of 1892 (yes 1892) says that any marriage which is recognised as legal in the country where it took place is also recognised as legal in the UK.

You say "without knowing the details." I suggest that you read through the topic, especially Kobrien's posts, properly. Doing so will show you that the problem is a financial one; nothing to do with the validity of his marriage in the UK.

Well, dear 7by7, I was writing this, because the Swiss law about legal foreign marriages says the same... but with a nice amendment that the paperwork must be entered through the Embassy (with proper translations and certifications) and any paperwork missing under Swiss law must first be added to the stack of paper... and finanlly it states that the Swiss Civil Registry department CAN decide not to recognize the marriage if the financial situation does not look proper of if the Civil Registry department thinks that the marriage is only to circumvent the Immigration VISA regulations... but once the marriage is recognized, the VISA for the spouse MUST be given independent of the then financial situation, their are sufficent such judgments from the Swiss Federal Court.

[Swiss1960]

And, 7by7, sorry if I missed some of the posts, but please look back and take note that I replied to ths posts of swisstouristpattaya and beano2274 who wrote "Get married and try taking your THAI wife to Switzerland, then you will see how difficult it is."

[7by7]

I had a good job with decent savings which allowed me to live comfortably out in Thailand for 9 months.

I presumed I would never have a problem getting a visa for my wife, because of that,

As explained to you before; the problem is that you had a good job with decent savings. The ECO when considering the initial application was not (and the tribunal when considering the appeal will not be) interested in what you had before, but what you financial position was at the time of the application. You may very well have had a good job with decent savings before going to Thailand, but if that job had gone and all your savings been used while staying in Thailand; how would you support your family once in the UK? This is the question the ECO had to consider (and what the tribunal will consider).

From what you have posted before, both here and in your other topics, it appears that you may very well have had sufficient finances to meet the maintenance requirement, but failed to show that you did.

In one of your other topics you were asked if you could post a copy of the refusal notice (deleting all names and other identifying information, of course), which you have not done. To be honest, without knowing exactly what the refusal notice says and the exact reasons given by the ECO for the refusal all anyone here can do is give you general advice; advice which may not be specific to your actual situation.

[7by7]

Well, dear 7by7, I was writing this, because the Swiss law about legal foreign marriages says the same...

And, 7by7, sorry if I missed some of the posts, but please look back and take note that I replied to ths posts of swisstouristpattaya and beano2274 who wrote "Get married and try taking your THAI wife to Switzerland, then you will see how difficult it is."

Read my post again. It was made in response to you saying "I assume the OP has the main problem to have his marriage recognized under UK law.....". I thought this was obvious as that is the only part of your post that I quoted; obviously I was wrong!

I should point out that Swiss immigration law etc. is completely irrelevant here. The OP wants his wife to join him in the UK; not Switzerland!