Exercising Eea Right To Move Back To The Uk

[AngryParent]

I have given this system much academic thought but have never done it in practice.

OK, the concept is to exercise my EEA right to get the Thai family to an EU country and from there move back to the UK after a few months (or remain in the EU country - depending on jobs etc).

I am a qualified teacher with many years of experience in Thailand. I was thinking of taking a job in either Spain or Poland or Slovakia as an English teacher as these countries need teachers.

I am aware that it is a free visa to get the family to one of those countries as one is a UK citizen, providing one "exercises their EEA treaty rights".

1. Can someone please explain the entire process of getting the CORRECT visa for the Thai family (from Thailand).

2. Can someone please explain what (if any) financial or other requirments are there.

3. Can somebody tell me what is the duration and validity of this visa/system.

4. Can someone please tell me if there are any rules under which this visa can be terminated in the EU country.

5. Can someone please tell me from this EU country, if I want to move back to the UK with the family (under the EEA system), what is the exact procedure and what would be the validity of the UK visa and critieria.

Thanks in advance! Please, no comments on why I do not move directly back to the UK or regarding my teaching qualifications or experience etc - this is only regarding the EEA procedure.

Edited December 5, 2011 by AngryParent

[7by7]

1) Each member state has it's own system. For the UK you would apply for an EEA family permit. For a Schengen member state I believe that your non EEA national family members would apply for a Schengen visa to enter the country and then apply to the relevant authorities for permission to stay. For the exact details, check with the country concerned.

2) You must show that you, the EEA national, are or will be exercising an economic treaty right and can support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds.

3) Essentially for life; although if the holder no longer resides in the state concerned it will lapse and they will need to get a new on if they wish to live there again. They can apply for a residence card, but this is not compulsory. After living in a member state for 5 years they can apply for permanent residence.

4) If their EEA national partner is no longer exercising a treaty right in that country or if the relationship with their EEA national partner ends before they have permanent residence are two that spring to mind. There may be others, I'd have to check. Conviction of a criminal offence would probably do it, too.

5) You would apply to the British embassy in the country concerned for an EEA Family permit. The procedure and requirements are the same as for non EEA family members of any other EEA national.

European Nationals and Schemes (EUN) explains the UK's system. Other states, as said, have their own procedures and you should check with the country concerned, but the regulations are the same for all member states.

[AngryParent]

1) Each member state has it's own system. For the UK you would apply for an EEA family permit. For a Schengen member state I believe that your non EEA national family members would apply for a Schengen visa to enter the country and then apply to the relevant authorities for permission to stay. For the exact details, check with the country concerned.

2) You must show that you, the EEA national, are or will be exercising an economic treaty right and can support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds.

3) Essentially for life; although if the holder no longer resides in the state concerned it will lapse and they will need to get a new on if they wish to live there again. They can apply for a residence card, but this is not compulsory. After living in a member state for 5 years they can apply for permanent residence.

4) If their EEA national partner is no longer exercising a treaty right in that country or if the relationship with their EEA national partner ends before they have permanent residence are two that spring to mind. There may be others, I'd have to check. Conviction of a criminal offence would probably do it, too.

5) You would apply to the British embassy in the country concerned for an EEA Family permit. The procedure and requirements are the same as for non EEA family members of any other EEA national.

European Nationals and Schemes (EUN) explains the UK's system. Other states, as said, have their own procedures and you should check with the country concerned, but the regulations are the same for all member states.

Thanks for the reply.

I have read it before too and in the family permit application there is a section for finances. However, I cannot find any information in the conditons for issuance stating any financial requirements. Nor can I find it in grounds fro refusal.

EUN2.4 What are the requirements for issuing an EEA family permit?

In assessing an application, the ECO should be satisfied that:

1. the applicant is the family member of the EEA national (marriage certificate, birth certificate or other evidence of family link)
2. the EEA national is residing in the UK in accordance with the EEA Regulations (as qualified person if more than 3 months) and the non-EEA national is joining them; or the EEA national intends to travel to the UK within 6 months and will have a right to reside under the Regulations on arrival, and the non-EEA national will be accompanying or joining the EEA national; and
3. if applying as a spouse or civil partner, there are no grounds to consider that the marriage or civil partnership is one of convenience (see Annex ….); and
4. if applying as dependent family members (dependent children 21 and over and dependent relatives) they are dependent on the EEA national or the EEA national's spouse or civil partner; and
5. neither the applicant nor the EEA national should be excluded from the UK on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health.

It is important not to test overall intentions in assessing applications for an EEA family permit. Also, there is an initial right of residence for 3 months, which means that an EEA national does not have to be exercising a treaty right immediately on arrival in the UK.

Can you please show me where it says that one must be able to "support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds"?

Thanks in advance.

[Eff1n2ret]

Can you please show me where it says that one must be able to "support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds"?

Thanks in advance.

Have a trawl through the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006, which is the UK's implementation of the European Directive. :-

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/ecis/annexa.pdf?view=Binary

If you look at the definitions in Para 4, you will see that if someone exercises their Treaty Rights as a 'self-sufficient person' or as a student, they should be able to provide for their family members without recourse to benefits. As you would presumably be exercising your rights as a "jobseeker", "worker", or "self-employed person", those provisions would not apply to you. However,turn to Para 13 - Initial Right of Residence:-

13.—(1) An EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom for a period not exceeding

three months beginning on the date on which he is admitted to the United Kingdom provided that

he holds a valid national identity card or passport issued by an EEA State.

(2) A family member of an EEA national residing in the United Kingdom under paragraph (1)

who is not himself an EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom provided that he

holds a valid passport.

(3) But—

(a) this regulation is subject to regulation 19(3)B; and

b -an EEA national or his family member who becomes an unreasonable burden on the

social assistance system of the United Kingdom shall cease to have the right to reside

under this regulation

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

[garrfeild]

This process looks as long winded as applying for a visa from the UK directly. Besides can a UK citizen use the EEA method to return to his own country? Surely this is meant for EU Nationals setting up business or looking for work with in the UK or other EU country other than their home country.

It is Obvious you would only go this route, having been refused a visa! Rather than working towards actually fulfilling the requirements, Your looking at other methods of entry. But as your wife is not an EU National, don't be surprised if the requirement are the same if not tougher.

Your wife would be better of claiming political asylum!

[7by7]

Besides can a UK citizen use the EEA method to return to his own country? Surely this is meant for EU Nationals setting up business or looking for work with in the UK or other EU country other than their home country.

EUN2.14 Can family members of British citizens qualify for an EEA family permit? ('Surinder Singh' cases)

As a general rule, family members of British citizens do not qualify for an EEA family permit. Article 3 of the Directive essentially says that an EEA national cannot be considered as exercising freedom of movement in their own State -

This Directive shall apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 who accompany or join them.

However, where an EEA national has exercised a treaty right in another Member State as a worker or self-employed and they wish to return to their own State having exercised that right, certain provisions may apply in order for their non-EEA family members to qualify under the EEA Regulations.

A British national and his / her non-EEA national family members can only benefit from free movement rights if they meet the criteria established in the ECJ case of Surinder Singh. The case stated that nationals of a Member State who are exercising an economic Treaty right (that is, as a worker or self-employed person) in another Member State will, on return to their home state, be entitled to bring their non-EEA family members to join them under EC law.

Example: A British national is exercising an economic Treaty right in Germany and living with his non-EEA national spouse and children. On the British national's return to the UK, his non-EEA national family members can apply for an EEA family permit to join him under EC law.

The Surinder Singh judgement is incorporated into the EEA Regulations in Regulation 9. Family members of British nationals who meet the requirements of Regulation 9 are treated as family members of EEA nationals for the purposes of the EEA Regulations.

Applications for EEA family permits must meet the following criteria:

• The British citizen is residing in an EEA Member State as a worker or self-employed person or was doing so before returning to the UK.
• If the family member of the British citizen is their spouse or civil partner, they are living together in the EEA country or they entered into the marriage or civil partnership and were living together in that EEA country before returning to the UK.

Because EEA nationals have an initial three months right of residence in the UK, there is no requirement for the British national to be a qualified person on arrival. Therefore, an EEA family permit can be issued to the non-EEA national family member of a British national even if they are only visiting the UK with the British national before returning to the Member State where they are resident.

It does not matter if the only reason the British national went to another Member State was to exercise an economic Treaty right was so that he / she could come back to the UK with his / her family members under EC law.

The ECO should seek advice from ECCCAT where unsure about the decision to be taken in applying the Surinder Singh judgement

Note the emphasis on worker or self-employed. The British national must have been one or the other in another member state, and their spouse or civil partner must have been living with them in that state. There is, however, no minimum time laid down in the regulations that they must have been doing so.

Your wife would be better of claiming political asylum!

Apart from having to actually be in the UK in order to do so, her chances of success depend upon a number of circumstances; not least the situation in her homeland and whether or not she would be persecuted, or worse, there for her political, religious or other beliefs. If she is Thai, this is highly unlikely!

Asylum is not as simple and easy to obtain as the Mail and Express would have the gullible believe!

[7by7]

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

Any idea how rigorously, or otherwise, other EEA states apply this?

[AngryParent]

This process looks as long winded as applying for a visa from the UK directly. Besides can a UK citizen use the EEA method to return to his own country? Surely this is meant for EU Nationals setting up business or looking for work with in the UK or other EU country other than their home country.

It is Obvious you would only go this route, having been refused a visa! Rather than working towards actually fulfilling the requirements, Your looking at other methods of entry. But as your wife is not an EU National, don't be surprised if the requirement are the same if not tougher.

Your wife would be better of claiming political asylum!

Actually, I have not been refused a visa (nor have I tried) - just don't want to lose a few thousand pounds on visa fees, spend ages and money trying to get the wife to pass English tests (at A1 or maybe the very hard B1 level in the near future - if it is changed). And I really can do without the temporary nature of spouse or ILE (pending KOL tests). Nor do I really want to wait months for the visa to be considered and appealed etc.

From my reading so far, moving to Spain or Poland for a few months (in a job) might be an interesting experience and takes less time and costs less than the spouse process in Thailand!

Under this EEA route, if my life takes a turn for the worse, the family could also claim benefits in the UK - the same as the Polish do now!

It seems to be a win win situation!

Unless?

[garrfeild]

Besides can a UK citizen use the EEA method to return to his own country? Surely this is meant for EU Nationals setting up business or looking for work with in the UK or other EU country other than their home country.

EUN2.14 Can family members of British citizens qualify for an EEA family permit? ('Surinder Singh' cases)

As a general rule, family members of British citizens do not qualify for an EEA family permit. Article 3 of the Directive essentially says that an EEA national cannot be considered as exercising freedom of movement in their own State -

This Directive shall apply to all Union citizens who move to or reside in a Member State other than that of which they are a national, and to their family members as defined in point 2 of Article 2 who accompany or join them.

However, where an EEA national has exercised a treaty right in another Member State as a worker or self-employed and they wish to return to their own State having exercised that right, certain provisions may apply in order for their non-EEA family members to qualify under the EEA Regulations.

A British national and his / her non-EEA national family members can only benefit from free movement rights if they meet the criteria established in the ECJ case of Surinder Singh. The case stated that nationals of a Member State who are exercising an economic Treaty right (that is, as a worker or self-employed person) in another Member State will, on return to their home state, be entitled to bring their non-EEA family members to join them under EC law.

Example: A British national is exercising an economic Treaty right in Germany and living with his non-EEA national spouse and children. On the British national's return to the UK, his non-EEA national family members can apply for an EEA family permit to join him under EC law.

The Surinder Singh judgement is incorporated into the EEA Regulations in Regulation 9. Family members of British nationals who meet the requirements of Regulation 9 are treated as family members of EEA nationals for the purposes of the EEA Regulations.

Applications for EEA family permits must meet the following criteria:

• The British citizen is residing in an EEA Member State as a worker or self-employed person or was doing so before returning to the UK.
• If the family member of the British citizen is their spouse or civil partner, they are living together in the EEA country or they entered into the marriage or civil partnership and were living together in that EEA country before returning to the UK.

Because EEA nationals have an initial three months right of residence in the UK, there is no requirement for the British national to be a qualified person on arrival. Therefore, an EEA family permit can be issued to the non-EEA national family member of a British national even if they are only visiting the UK with the British national before returning to the Member State where they are resident.

It does not matter if the only reason the British national went to another Member State was to exercise an economic Treaty right was so that he / she could come back to the UK with his / her family members under EC law.

The ECO should seek advice from ECCCAT where unsure about the decision to be taken in applying the Surinder Singh judgement

Note the emphasis on worker or self-employed. The British national must have been one or the other in another member state, and their spouse or civil partner must have been living with them in that state. There is, however, no minimum time laid down in the regulations that they must have been doing so.

Your wife would be better of claiming political asylum!

Apart from having to actually be in the UK in order to do so, her chances of success depend upon a number of circumstances; not least the situation in her homeland and whether or not she would be persecuted, or worse, there for her political, religious or other beliefs. If she is Thai, this is highly unlikely!

Asylum is not as simple and easy to obtain as the Mail and Express would have the gullible believe!

I wasn't being serious about applying for political asylum, but given the situation here in Thailand one wonders if and when!

But if a non EU family member did enter the UK using the EEA rights, they can only stay for up to 3 months? So this may be OK for a long holiday, but surely your wife would have to leave after 3 months or she would have to apply for a family visa in the UK?

So at that point your back to square one, having to prove financial worth? If this were a loop hole method how long before they finesse the rules to stop it?

[AngryParent]

Can you please show me where it says that one must be able to "support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds"?

Thanks in advance.

Have a trawl through the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006, which is the UK's implementation of the European Directive. :-

http://www.ukba.home...pdf?view=Binary

If you look at the definitions in Para 4, you will see that if someone exercises their Treaty Rights as a 'self-sufficient person' or as a student, they should be able to provide for their family members without recourse to benefits. As you would presumably be exercising your rights as a "jobseeker", "worker", or "self-employed person", those provisions would not apply to you. However,turn to Para 13 - Initial Right of Residence:-

13.—(1) An EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom for a period not exceeding

three months beginning on the date on which he is admitted to the United Kingdom provided that

he holds a valid national identity card or passport issued by an EEA State.

(2) A family member of an EEA national residing in the United Kingdom under paragraph (1)

who is not himself an EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom provided that he

holds a valid passport.

(3) But—

(a) this regulation is subject to regulation 19(3)B; and

b -an EEA national or his family member who becomes an unreasonable burden on the

social assistance system of the United Kingdom shall cease to have the right to reside

under this regulation

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

13-(3b) is only for those who become an unreasonable burden. And as per the law it really is unreasonable i.e. massive claims to public funds!

Also, the point is not that appropriate for entry into the UK as what you have quoted is only for those who are in the UK!

I still cannot see any evidence that says one can be prohibited from entry based on lack of funds or job etc.

[AngryParent]

I wasn't being serious about applying for political asylum, but given the situation here in Thailand one wonders if and when!

But if a non EU family member did enter the UK using the EEA rights, they can only stay for up to 3 months? So this may be OK for a long holiday, but surely your wife would have to leave after 3 months or she would have to apply for a family visa in the UK?

So at that point your back to square one, having to prove financial worth? If this were a loop hole method how long before they finesse the rules to stop it?

No! Under EEA it is a 5 year permit providing it is applied for before going to the UK!

Much better than a spouse visa! And the EEA permit is FREE!

Edited December 6, 2011 by AngryParent

[garrfeild]

This process looks as long winded as applying for a visa from the UK directly. Besides can a UK citizen use the EEA method to return to his own country? Surely this is meant for EU Nationals setting up business or looking for work with in the UK or other EU country other than their home country.

It is Obvious you would only go this route, having been refused a visa! Rather than working towards actually fulfilling the requirements, Your looking at other methods of entry. But as your wife is not an EU National, don't be surprised if the requirement are the same if not tougher.

Your wife would be better of claiming political asylum!

Actually, I have not been refused a visa (nor have I tried) - just don't want to lose a few thousand pounds on visa fees, spend ages and money trying to get the wife to pass English tests (at A1 or maybe the very hard B1 level in the near future - if it is changed). And I really can do without the temporary nature of spouse or ILE (pending KOL tests). Nor do I really want to wait months for the visa to be considered and appealed etc.

From my reading so far, moving to Spain or Poland for a few months (in a job) might be an interesting experience and takes less time and costs less than the spouse process in Thailand!

Under this EEA route, if my life takes a turn for the worse, the family could also claim benefits in the UK - the same as the Polish do now!

It seems to be a win win situation!

Unless?

I was thinking more of the guy who's wife had her visa refused due to lack of funds and proof of income on the husbands part, I think you know which Post I mean?

[AngryParent]

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

Any idea how rigorously, or otherwise, other EEA states apply this?

Intersting thing from the Polish Embassy (following EU law)

It will be possible to expel a Union citizen or his/her family members from the territory of the RP only in the event of need to protect public order and security, or in the event of threat to state security and defense.

And the best of the best (from the UK confirming it):

http://www.bia.homeo...pdf?view=Binary

Can only be deported if entry was based on fraud etc. CANNOT be deported for claiming benefits or having no money or job!!!

Check out this for the 100% comprehensive list of all laws and policies and practices of the UK reagarding EU and EEA treaty on coming to the UK!!! http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/ecis/

Looks like the EU route should be the main route!

Edited December 6, 2011 by AngryParent

[AngryParent]

To all:

Please forgive me for this post, but I really do believe that this EEA entry system for spouses and dependants of British citizens to go to an EU state and then move back to the UK has much potential. At present I believe it is better than going directly to the UK (from Thailand) on a spouse visa or even an ILE (minus KOL).

I really want an intelligent crititicism of this system - I may have overlooked something.

[RAZZELL]

To all:

Please forgive me for this post, but I really do believe that this EEA entry system for spouses and dependants of British citizens to go to an EU state and then move back to the UK has much potential. At present I believe it is better than going directly to the UK (from Thailand) on a spouse visa or even an ILE (minus KOL).

I really want an intelligent crititicism of this system - I may have overlooked something.

Apart from the cost of accommodation and travel to said EU country, proof residency for a good few months, proof of employment, no ILR after 2 years, no passport after 3, yeah great idea

UKBA also states "continuous period of 5 years" for residency. (Not sure how many days out of the country?)

My now wife came here on a fiancee visa. Her Thai friend is married to a Polish guy who lives in the UK...it was not that easy for them and cost a good few quid (I believe he got a lawyer to do the application for him.)

Good luck to you but you can't beat the system

RAZZ

Edited December 6, 2011 by RAZZELL

[7by7]

Indeed, Razz.

A Brit, call him Mr. AP, falls in love with and in the fullness of time marries a Thai. Mr. AP then has to quit his job in the UK and find one in another EEA state because to qualify to return to the UK using the EEA regulations under the Surinder Singh ruling he would have to be either working or self-employed in another EEA state, job seeking doesn't count. (I may have said elsewhere that it does; if so, I was wrong. Having checked; it doesn't.)

Mr. and Mrs AP then decide to return to the UK. However, his wife would have entered the UK under the EEA regulations, not the UK immigration rules. It is not possible to switch.

EEA regs, permanent residence after 5 years.

UK rules, ILR after 24 months.

EEA regs, have to have held PR for at least 12 months, so be in the UK for at least 6 years, before time qualified for British citizenship.

UK rules, time qualified after being in the UK for 3 years, provided you hold ILR; so for most this is just three years after first entering with their spouse visa. It could be less as time spent in the UK as, for example, a visitor counts towards the 3 years. (Current proposals mean this may change to 5 years, but it'll still be a shorter time than the EEA route.)

Yes, the EEA route is free and the UK route is expensive. But you have to balance the cost of the UK visas and LTR applications against the cost of moving to another EEA state for a period and then moving back to the UK. Not to mention finding a job in the other EEA state and no guarantee of a job when you return to the UK.

AP, you are right that an EEA national, or their family, cannot be deported for claiming public funds; but for most public funds any claim they made would be refused. Until they have PR they can only receive those benefits to which they have contributed through their NI contributions and some others; most they cannot. See page 18 of this document for the list. Similar rules in the other EEA states.

Turn up at any EEA embassy anywhere to apply for a permit for your non EEA family to live in that state with you saying that you have no income and will be relying on claiming public funds when you get there and you will be shown the door.

[RAZZELL]

^

RAZZ

[AngryParent]

Indeed, Razz.

A Brit, call him Mr. AP, falls in love with and in the fullness of time marries a Thai. Mr. AP then has to quit his job in the UK and find one in another EEA state because to qualify to return to the UK using the EEA regulations under the Surinder Singh ruling he would have to be either working or self-employed in another EEA state, job seeking doesn't count. (I may have said elsewhere that it does; if so, I was wrong. Having checked; it doesn't.)

Mr. and Mrs AP then decide to return to the UK. However, his wife would have entered the UK under the EEA regulations, not the UK immigration rules. It is not possible to switch.

EEA regs, permanent residence after 5 years.

UK rules, ILR after 24 months.

EEA regs, have to have held PR for at least 12 months, so be in the UK for at least 6 years, before time qualified for British citizenship.

UK rules, time qualified after being in the UK for 3 years, provided you hold ILR; so for most this is just three years after first entering with their spouse visa. It could be less as time spent in the UK as, for example, a visitor counts towards the 3 years. (Current proposals mean this may change to 5 years, but it'll still be a shorter time than the EEA route.)

Yes, the EEA route is free and the UK route is expensive. But you have to balance the cost of the UK visas and LTR applications against the cost of moving to another EEA state for a period and then moving back to the UK. Not to mention finding a job in the other EEA state and no guarantee of a job when you return to the UK.

AP, you are right that an EEA national, or their family, cannot be deported for claiming public funds; but for most public funds any claim they made would be refused. Until they have PR they can only receive those benefits to which they have contributed through their NI contributions and some others; most they cannot. See page 18 of this document for the list. Similar rules in the other EEA states.

Turn up at any EEA embassy anywhere to apply for a permit for your non EEA family to live in that state with you saying that you have no income and will be relying on claiming public funds when you get there and you will be shown the door.

Yes, your criticism is valid, but is limited.

Yes, going the British spouse visa route is probably better if Mr AP currently lives in the UK and has a stable job (at least for the next 27 months) and also has a suitable place (without housing benfits) for a family of whaterver size.

In the unfortunate event that Mr AP has a job that is unstable, where he might need government support within 27 months, then getting a spouse visa might be a waste as, renewal of this (or permanant residence) will be difficult. It may end with Mr AP's Thai spouse and children having to return to Thailand!

In the other extreme, where Mr AP has not lived or worked in the UK for many years and does not have savings that are more than the level (for a family - quite high) and does not have any house there, then a spouse visa may be difficult and/or a waste of money. Also, he would need to live apart from his Thai family for a minimum of 3 months to try and start a UK life that qualifies the spouse for a visa.

In the other 2 situations I have mentioned above, I am sure there are many British citizens! For them the EEA route is perfect! With such a route, they do not have to live apart (for even a day), and as Mr AP is British, he can claim all the benefits he may need (and the family cannot be deported) for the entire family and not be refused.

The EEA route also ensures that the Thai family does not have to pass any difficult English language tests or even more difficult (as the level of English is quite high) for the KOL test. Also, as you mention EEA residence is really permanent, as long as the family wants to live in the UK.

As for not being given an EEA permit for the Thai family to go to an EU country based on lack of funds etc: "A residence permit will be granted to a EU citizen on condition that he/she :

- intends to perform or performs work, a free profession or business activity on the territory of the RP for a period exceeding 12 months" al that is required is an intention!

And to return to the UK, all one would have to have accomplished is to have had any job in that third party EU nation (even a month or 2)! Or as mentioned, he could have been self-employed in a business that never had a customer but wanted them In fact, I already see a great business oportunity! Mr AP opens a business in cheap Poland to provide employment and housing to 1000s of Brits (at a fee that is lower than the spouse visa) that offers 100% approval and entry to the UK for not just the spouse, but dependants and the extended family!!!

And for those who love UK permanent residence in 2 years or less, from my reading, after having moved back to the UK, if Mr AP does get established in a permanant job, the wife can always take a month trip back to Thailand (cancel the EEA family permit) and easily apply for a Spouse visa or maybe even ILE!

Think about it!

Any other criticisms?

Edited December 6, 2011 by AngryParent

[samran]

The concept of 'opportunity cost' comes to mind, but what would I know?

[Soutpeel]

The concept of 'opportunity cost' comes to mind, but what would I know?

The OP has obviously given up on becoming a Thai citizen...

[samran]

^^

Sure, why not Soutpeel? When moving employer in Thailand to earn a couple of hundred more bucks per month which would make you eligible for Thai citizenship is dismissed, then obviously spending thousands of pounds, an undetermined amount of time, and uprooting a family to a EU third country where no one speaks the lingo is the obvious alternative.

Obviously makes more sense too than fronting up the fee's and moving directly back to the UK.

But then again, I am a fake Thai citizen living in Pattaya who has never migrated to the UK myself.

[Soutpeel]

But then again, I am a fake Thai citizen living in Pattaya who has never migrated to the UK myself.

[Eff1n2ret]

Can you please show me where it says that one must be able to "support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds"?

Thanks in advance.

Have a trawl through the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006, which is the UK's implementation of the European Directive. :-

http://www.ukba.home...pdf?view=Binary

If you look at the definitions in Para 4, you will see that if someone exercises their Treaty Rights as a 'self-sufficient person' or as a student, they should be able to provide for their family members without recourse to benefits. As you would presumably be exercising your rights as a "jobseeker", "worker", or "self-employed person", those provisions would not apply to you. However,turn to Para 13 - Initial Right of Residence:-

13.—(1) An EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom for a period not exceeding

three months beginning on the date on which he is admitted to the United Kingdom provided that

he holds a valid national identity card or passport issued by an EEA State.

(2) A family member of an EEA national residing in the United Kingdom under paragraph (1)

who is not himself an EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom provided that he

holds a valid passport.

(3) But—

(a) this regulation is subject to regulation 19(3)B; and

b -an EEA national or his family member who becomes an unreasonable burden on the

social assistance system of the United Kingdom shall cease to have the right to reside

under this regulation

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

13-(3b) is only for those who become an unreasonable burden. And as per the law it really is unreasonable i.e. massive claims to public funds!

Also, the point is not that appropriate for entry into the UK as what you have quoted is only for those who are in the UK!

I still cannot see any evidence that says one can be prohibited from entry based on lack of funds or job etc.

On reflection I think you're probably right, and unless the EEA sponsor is going to, or present in, the UK as a student or "self-sufficient person" there is no requirement for them to have a job or funds on initial entry to the UK. One assumes that the details required on the application form of the sponsor's employment and income are to verify that he/she has been exercising Treaty Rights in another state. In any case, to include in legislation terms like "unreasonable" is an open invitation for years of wrangling in various courts, and is in effect unworkable.

Effectively an EEA National has an absolute right to travel to the UK and stay for up to 3 months. Thereafter, their right to stay derives from being a "qualified person", i.e. jobseeker, worker, self-employed, self-sufficient or student. If they cease to be a "qualified person", they are liable to administrative removal, similar to an overstayer, but those provisions of the Regulations are not enforced by UKBA. Even if they were, without further legislation there is nothing to prevent someone removed in this way from coming straight back. A Brit entering under "Surinder Singh" has a double advantage, because while they can take their Non-EEA spouse with them as easily as any other EEA national, he/she has Right of Abode in the UK, so once they're there, nothing in the EEA Regulations really applies except the provisions for the spouse to get Permanent Residence and citizenship.

In answer to 7by7's question about what happens in other EEA countries I honestly don't know. I have at various times seen accounts in the news media of people's frustrations in dealing with the bureaucracy in such as Germany France and Spain where they seem to be more prescriptive about getting Residence Cards than the UK

[RAZZELL]

"I have given this system much academic thought but have never done it in practice. "

There's the rub

RAZZ

[AngryParent]

"I have given this system much academic thought but have never done it in practice. "

There's the rub

RAZZ

Very valid point! Let's see if anybody who has tried this can comment. However, on paper it looks good! So far?

Edited December 7, 2011 by AngryParent

[ludditeman]

For someone who has been working in Thailand teaching English, it would be easy to get a job in Spain or France doing the same.

Also there are many other jobs available in tourist resorts, bar work, waiter, hotel clerk, fruit picking.

There is no requirement to have a high paying job or your own company, but just to be employed.

[AngryParent]

Can you please show me where it says that one must be able to "support and accommodate you and your non EEA family without recourse to public funds"?

Thanks in advance.

Have a trawl through the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006, which is the UK's implementation of the European Directive. :-

http://www.ukba.home...pdf?view=Binary

If you look at the definitions in Para 4, you will see that if someone exercises their Treaty Rights as a 'self-sufficient person' or as a student, they should be able to provide for their family members without recourse to benefits. As you would presumably be exercising your rights as a "jobseeker", "worker", or "self-employed person", those provisions would not apply to you. However,turn to Para 13 - Initial Right of Residence:-

13.—(1) An EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom for a period not exceeding

three months beginning on the date on which he is admitted to the United Kingdom provided that

he holds a valid national identity card or passport issued by an EEA State.

(2) A family member of an EEA national residing in the United Kingdom under paragraph (1)

who is not himself an EEA national is entitled to reside in the United Kingdom provided that he

holds a valid passport.

(3) But—

(a) this regulation is subject to regulation 19(3)B; and

b -an EEA national or his family member who becomes an unreasonable burden on the

social assistance system of the United Kingdom shall cease to have the right to reside

under this regulation

Thus while an entire family of EEA Nationals may be able to rock up in the UK with nothing but the clothes on their back and stay as long as they like because UKBA has never had the will to implement the removal provisions in these Regulations (see Para 19), those who have to apply for a Family Permit for a non-EEA national are liable to supply some evidence of their financial situation. One assumes that if the applicant or their sponsor declined to do so, the ECO would invoke 13-(3b), although I have no direct knowledge of such cases.

13-(3b) is only for those who become an unreasonable burden. And as per the law it really is unreasonable i.e. massive claims to public funds!

Also, the point is not that appropriate for entry into the UK as what you have quoted is only for those who are in the UK!

I still cannot see any evidence that says one can be prohibited from entry based on lack of funds or job etc.

On reflection I think you're probably right, and unless the EEA sponsor is going to, or present in, the UK as a student or "self-sufficient person" there is no requirement for them to have a job or funds on initial entry to the UK. One assumes that the details required on the application form of the sponsor's employment and income are to verify that he/she has been exercising Treaty Rights in another state. In any case, to include in legislation terms like "unreasonable" is an open invitation for years of wrangling in various courts, and is in effect unworkable.

Effectively an EEA National has an absolute right to travel to the UK and stay for up to 3 months. Thereafter, their right to stay derives from being a "qualified person", i.e. jobseeker, worker, self-employed, self-sufficient or student. If they cease to be a "qualified person", they are liable to administrative removal, similar to an overstayer, but those provisions of the Regulations are not enforced by UKBA. Even if they were, without further legislation there is nothing to prevent someone removed in this way from coming straight back. A Brit entering under "Surinder Singh" has a double advantage, because while they can take their Non-EEA spouse with them as easily as any other EEA national, he/she has Right of Abode in the UK, so once they're there, nothing in the EEA Regulations really applies except the provisions for the spouse to get Permanent Residence and citizenship.

In answer to 7by7's question about what happens in other EEA countries I honestly don't know. I have at various times seen accounts in the news media of people's frustrations in dealing with the bureaucracy in such as Germany France and Spain where they seem to be more prescriptive about getting Residence Cards than the UK

Thanks for the confirmation! I too have read about the Spain paperwork and etc. However, that is just it - paperwork and not anything that changes status or ability to remain.

You mentioned the EEA "sponsor" - no, that is the big difference between the visa in Thailand and the EEA route. There is no sponsor! It is entry as the "three muskateers" and whilst unified all then are treated as one big EEA group (can include extended family too)!

And also as you mentioned, there is nothing stopping re-entry and even more legal is that by basis of "qualified person" one has right of abode till death (as one is a permanent jobseeker - if unemployed, or one can easily fit in any of the other groups).

[AngryParent]

For someone who has been working in Thailand teaching English, it would be easy to get a job in Spain or France doing the same.

Also there are many other jobs available in tourist resorts, bar work, waiter, hotel clerk, fruit picking.

There is no requirement to have a high paying job or your own company, but just to be employed.

You have summed it up! Yes, do any silly job and then go back to the UK with a higher status than those who come over on spouse visas etc. And less mountains to climb etc too!

I knew reading about the EU laws and ECHR laws would have some value!

[ludditeman]

For someone who has been working in Thailand teaching English, it would be easy to get a job in Spain or France doing the same.

Also there are many other jobs available in tourist resorts, bar work, waiter, hotel clerk, fruit picking.

There is no requirement to have a high paying job or your own company, but just to be employed.

You have summed it up! Yes, do any silly job and then go back to the UK with a higher status than those who come over on spouse visas etc. And less mountains to climb etc too!

I knew reading about the EU laws and ECHR laws would have some value!

What about someone on a pension?

Would you need to be working to qualify?

[AngryParent]

For someone who has been working in Thailand teaching English, it would be easy to get a job in Spain or France doing the same.

Also there are many other jobs available in tourist resorts, bar work, waiter, hotel clerk, fruit picking.

There is no requirement to have a high paying job or your own company, but just to be employed.

You have summed it up! Yes, do any silly job and then go back to the UK with a higher status than those who come over on spouse visas etc. And less mountains to climb etc too!

I knew reading about the EU laws and ECHR laws would have some value!

What about someone on a pension?

Would you need to be working to qualify?

No!

I posted the Polish EU entry statement. And those guys have it sorted - they know the EU better than anybody (as most of their citizens are in another EU country - smile)!

You have 2 choices, you could declare yourself as retired and thus show some element of financial support - as per the EU (and once again from the Polish) - you need medical insurance and something.... Why go backwards?

The other choice: as I said, you are a perpetual employee or jobseeker (till death) claiming a pension is not a legal definiton of "out of the employment race"!

The issue is the bounce back to the UK from the third EU nation. For this, choose what you want... employed, self-employed, 50 Euro registered company director or any thing else. Once you are in the EU with the equivalent of a family permit. Then, there is nothing at all in law that can stop you, your family members etc from going HOME!!!

Edited December 7, 2011 by AngryParent