Civil Partnership Visa's

[Prakanong2005]

Just been reading on another board (will not post it as against forum rules) but it is a board targeted at the UK and Thai Community ;-)

There have been acouple of postings regarding the success of applications for C

Civil Partnership Visa's

What I was surprised about was how quick the whole application to the granting of the visa took.

One guy applied on the 6th of December - called for interview a week later and got visa same day - total of 13 days from start to finish

There was another one appied 14th November, letter on 26th asking to attend interview on 7th December and granted that day.

This seems pretty quick as I thought the waiting length for Settlement Visa's was into the months now - was I told the wrong info?

[the scouser]

It appears that the Foreign Office has thrown a few more staff at the settlement backlog in Bangkok. Over the last month or so the queue has rapidly diminished.

Scouse.

[Prakanong2005]

Thanks for the update Scouse - that would explain it

Last year my ex had a 6 week wait but this year someone else said it was up to 20 weeks this year.

[GU22]

The embassy website is still quoting a wait of 8 to 10 weeks for an interview.

However, not all applications, even settlement applications, require a full interview. Often, applicants are asked to attend a "short interview."

If all the supporting documents are submitted with the application and if those documents satisfy the ECO that the criteria are met and so the ECO is "minded to grant" the visa, then the applicant will not need a full interview. In which case the applicant will be contacted by phone and asked to attend the embassy at the applicant's convenience. The ECO will ask a few simple questions at the counter and, provided the answers are consistent with the information already provided, the applicant will be told to come back later that day, or maybe the next, to collect their visa.

Remember, though, that not getting a short interview does not mean that there is a problem with the application, merely that there are some questions in the ECOs mind that the documents don't answer. Provided the applicant and sponsor are open and honest, provided they have ensured that they have satisfied the criteria and, above all, provided that they have told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth; then even if they are required to have a full interview they should still get their visa.

Of course, if tempted to tell a lie or withhold possibly embarrassing information, then the ECO will almost certainly discover this and refuse. If they know you have told one lie, they suspect that the rest of the application is untruthful too.

[the gent]

ECOs are no more prescient than anyone else.Each case is decided on its merits and there is no magic formula or 'silver bullet' which guarantees success. If you, the sponsor, and the applicant are a cut above the herd then the ECO can fast track the application because the prospect of refusal is dim and a delay holds up other more 'labour intensive'applications.In those circumstances the demand for supporting documentation is less critical.More often than not a simple 'once over' with the applicant, face to face, will confirm his /her earlier assessment and the visa is issued.

Many applications do not qualify for this procedure and a full interview will ensue.No amount of ducumentation will rescue a doomed application.Insufficient documentation can be used to justify a refusal but in most cases that is simply a hook on which the refusal is hung. The substantive reason will be more generic.

ECOs in a well run visa section do not wish to waste time refusing good applications if the only bar to issue is the absence of some piffling piece of paperwork that could be provided at a later stage.

However, if the parties to the application give cause for concern then a refusal can be constructed in any number of ways.Despite best endeavours one cannot make a silk purse from the proverbial.Also, it is not a good idea to piss the ECO off, a fact which obnoxious sponsors never seem to grasp.

Applicants with a previous chequered immigration history obviously merit closer scrutiny.Assessing credibility in such cases is not formulaic but the applicant will have a mountain to climb in order to restore a balance in their favour.

Discrimination or prejudice are not factors in the equation but aggrieved sponsors often choose to see things differently for obvious reasons.

[Prakanong2005]

Yeah - I was told by a guy I know who works at the Embassy (not the consular Section) told me that telling the truth even if it means saying you met in a bar.

This was in relation to a girl who we both knew who was applying April 2004.

She and her new husband told the whole truth and she moved to the UK in July that year.

Funnily enough my best pal who is a Brit Diplomat had problems with the Home Odffice when he married his ex-wife when she was on a visitors visa!