Proposed Uk Settlement Visa Changes

[Gavin46]

I've asked VFS Global about contract work and the requirement that you need to be in employment at the time of application -

First, where the applicant’s partner and/or the applicant (if they are in the UK with permission to work) is in salaried employment at the date of application and has been with the same employer for less than the last 6 months,

If you do contract work then this requirement means you have to be working when your wife applies, but with contract work this isn't always possible, and so you can't use salaried employment to meet the financial requirement.

Am I right in thinking this? I asked VFS and was refered to the FM 1.7 document ,which basically says you have to be working at the time of application, so I guess I am right?

[VisasPlus]

I asked the same question about internet bank statements and got this reply;

Dear Sir / Madam

Thank you for contacting the VFS Visa Information Service.

Ad hoc bank statements printed on the bank's letterhead are admissible as evidence (this excludes mini-statements from cash points).

If you wish to submit electronic bank statements from an online account these must contain all of the details listed below. In addition, you will need to provide a supporting letter from the bank, on company headed paper, confirming the authenticity of the statements provided.

* The personal bank or building society statements much show:

* Your name; and

* The account number; and

* The date of the statement; and

* The financial institution's name and logo; and

* The amount of money available

Alternatively an electronic bank statement bearing the official stamp of the bank in question will be accepted. This stamp must appear on every page of the statement.

In respect of salaried employment, all of the following must be submitted:

* P60 (if this has been issued) and wage slips for the 6-month period prior to the application, or as appropriate, for the 12-month period prior to the application.

* Letter from the employer confirming the person's employment and annual salary, the length of their employment (and the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application), and the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency).

* A signed contract of employment.

* Bank statements corresponding to the same period as the wage slips, showing that the salary has been paid into the person's account.

With reference to the employment, there is no requirement for employment must be in the UK. All employment and income must be lawful, and all cash savings must be lawfully derived.

Best regards,

----------

UK Visa Service Desk

----------

VFS GLOBAL

EST. 2001 | Partnering Governments. Providing Solutions.

With respect, if this reply is from VFS, and it looks like it is, then they are not the right people to be asking ( or answering). You need a response from UKBA at the British Embassy, who are the people responsible for making the decisions.

The specified evidence states :

Entry clearance officer or Secretary of State should normally refuse an application which does not provide the evidence specified in this Appendix. However, where document(s) have been submitted, but not as specified, and the entry clearance officer or Secretary of State considers that, if the specified document(s) were submitted, it would result in a grant of leave, they should contact the applicant or their representative in writing or otherwise to request the document(s) be submitted within a reasonable timeframe. Examples of documents submitted not as specified include:

a) A document missing from a series, e.g. a bank statement;

b ) A document in the wrong format; or

c) A document that is a copy rather than the original.

I think, that, if you provided internet printouts, and stated that you could obtain originals or stamped documents from your bank if insisted upon, then the ECO would be obliged to either accept what you have provided, or ask you to provide the documents. If the ECO refused the application, then that would seem to go against the guidance in the specified evidence stated above. I may be wrong, of course, but that's how I interpret the guidance.

I have sent an email to UKBA at the Embasasy asking for clarification. I will post the response when I receive it.

Edited September 10, 2012 by VisasPlus

[VisasPlus]

I've asked VFS Global about contract work and the requirement that you need to be in employment at the time of application -

First, where the applicant’s partner and/or the applicant (if they are in the UK with permission to work) is in salaried employment at the date of application and has been with the same employer for less than the last 6 months,

If you do contract work then this requirement means you have to be working when your wife applies, but with contract work this isn't always possible, and so you can't use salaried employment to meet the financial requirement.

Am I right in thinking this? I asked VFS and was refered to the FM 1.7 document ,which basically says you have to be working at the time of application, so I guess I am right?

As I said in my post above, VFS are the wrong people to be answering questions like this. They can do no more than refer you to the specified evidence. You should ask them to pass your enquiry to UKBA at the Embassy. They may have asked UKBA for guidance, but it doesn't look like it from the response they have given.

[Gavin46]

Thanks for the quick response and information. I ddn't realise you could ask the UKBA as they say on their website to contact VFS with any enquiries.

[VisasPlus]

Thanks for the quick response and information. I ddn't realise you could ask the UKBA as they say on their website to contact VFS with any enquiries.

Yes they do say that, but ask VFS to pass it on to UKBA. VFS is an application centre only.

[durhamboy]

RE - BANK STATEMENTS

Many thanks guys for your responses to my original post.

I would have thought that this query would have come up many times before. Many people have internet accounts these days. Interestingly no one has posted about a refusal/deferment in their own applications regarding internet print outs.

In my own case I can produce the print out with all the relevant details specified above such as logo, a/c no., my name etc. I can also produce original letter from the bank when I opened the account and also some original evidence of where some of the funds came from - i.e. house sale.

Someone said that a print out could be fraudulently altered but surely that is also the case with an original?

Visa Plus - would be vert interested to hear what UKBA say. I'm going to Jomtien tomorrow so may pop in and see you if that's ok.

Cheers

[VisasPlus]

RE - BANK STATEMENTS

Many thanks guys for your responses to my original post.

I would have thought that this query would have come up many times before. Many people have internet accounts these days. Interestingly no one has posted about a refusal/deferment in their own applications regarding internet print outs.

In my own case I can produce the print out with all the relevant details specified above such as logo, a/c no., my name etc. I can also produce original letter from the bank when I opened the account and also some original evidence of where some of the funds came from - i.e. house sale.

Someone said that a print out could be fraudulently altered but surely that is also the case with an original?

Visa Plus - would be vert interested to hear what UKBA say. I'm going to Jomtien tomorrow so may pop in and see you if that's ok.

Cheers

I haven't had any reply from the Embassy yet. Not even their usual " we will reply within 20 working days ".

You are welcome to pop into the office, but I can't guarantee being there. If you want a chat, it's always best to make an appointment with the girls in the office. Hopefully I will be around if you do call in.

[durhamboy]

Visa Plus - I did pop into your office and spoke with one of your ladies. She wasnt 100% sure about internet accounts but she did say that many of your clients in the UK scan and send original bank statements which your office then prints out for the visa applications. There was never a problem with this. She was very helpful.

Cheers

[spinkler]

I used internet print out bank statements with my settlement visa application and they where accepted and visa issued if that is of any help. (That was under the old rules if that make any difference)

[jimyoung]

Hi, I'm moving back to the uk next year after living in thailand for 2 years and want bring my wife and her son but not sure on a few things and need some advice please. 1. As a self employed builder, will I need to show a full years accounts? If so does that mean as tax returns are done in April the earliest we will be able to apply for the visas is when my tax return is completed for April 2014? 2. When applying for my wife's 6 year old sons visa does that mean we have pay for another visa or is it included in her application? I'm assuming we pay the fee twice. 3. I was recently discharged from bankruptcy this year, do I need to declare this and will it affect the applications? 4. They ask for proof of the applicants age, my wife doesn't have a birth certificate so is passport and I.D card ok? Thanks in advance, Jim. Sorry about the strange lay out of this post, it didn't look like this when I wrote it.

Edited September 13, 2012 by jimyoung

[crazydrummerpauly]

To be fair I kind of agree!

I am all for foreign spouse/partners coming to the UK (mine has) but as along as they pay the relevant taxes, and integrate into society.

As the article says "If a British citizen or a person settled here cannot support their foreign spouse or partner they cannot expect the taxpayer to do it for them"

I don't think that is in dispute. What is in dispute is that the requirement is divisive and discriminatory. People with high incomes will be able to bring a spouse/partner into the UK, but a low income earner, or a pensioner will not. What about the British citizen who has worked overseas for many years, has a non-EU spouse and a couple of kids ? He wants to retire to the UK, his home, but cannot as his pension is below the level that someone in government has dictated is sufficient. What about the British citizen who earns 100,000 GBP a year, but spends 99,000 GBP a year because he has a high mortgage, etc ? He might be able to bring a spouse/partner, but the man who earns 24,000 GBP, has no mortgage, but has a greater disposable income cannot ? Is that right ? Income should not be the deciding factor. Maybe a form of means testing is appropriate.

We have to wait and see what the changes will be, but if the government just brings in a stated minimum income level then I'm sure it will be tested in the European courts, and the government will lose. In the meantime they will be able to say that they have reduced net immigration by x thousand a year, as they promised to do. Unfortunately, they are going after the wrong targets.

As you say --->

"What about the British citizen who earns 100,000 GBP a year, but spends 99,000 GBP a year because he has a high mortgage, etc ? He might be able to bring a spouse/partner, but the man who earns 24,000 GBP, has no mortgage, but has a greater disposable income cannot ? Is that right ? Income should not be the deciding factor. Maybe a form of means testing is appropriate."

But unfortunately the idea of means-testing was already ruled out in the policy-document, because the govt just wouldn't want to be be that fair or that busy with paperwork! From the 'Financial Requirement' section of the new document --->

"The purpose is not to draw up a personal financial balance sheet for each couple

(outgoings, credit card and other debts, mortgage, etc), but to take £18,600 (or the higher

level for children) as a benchmark for financial stability and independence on the part of the

3 partner or the couple. Circumstances may change over time, so they will be reassessed

when the applicant applies for further leave to remain and for indefinite leave to remain."

[manxninja]

Jim in a nutshell you will have no chance of a visa.

You would indeed have to apply for a second visa for the child.

Yes she would need a bith certificate.

My advise. Wait at least 2 years before applying.

With the current changes and what you posted above youwill only be wasting your money.

[theoldgit]

Flame removed, please don't judge people.

[Seekingasylum]

My online bank account with Natwest can provide hard copy statements upon request but a small charge is likely. Presumably, other banks do the same even internet banks.

I would have thought the new rules ( another addition to the dog's dinner the immigration rules have now become ) made it clear only original documents would be acceptable. A printout of an internet account statement is not original in the sense the idiots at UKBA meant although commonsense dictates anyone with half a brain could reach a reasonable judgement upon the credibility of the information provided by them. That's the rub though, isn't it? If one doesn't specify to the nth degree how rules should be interpreted the incompetents of the visa section arrive at stupid decisions and when they are defined it is at the expense of intelligence and discretion.

Personally, I would provide hard copy supplied by the bank everytime.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Seekingasylum

[VisasPlus]

My online bank account with Natwest can provide hard copy statements upon request but a small charge is likely. Presumably, other banks do the same even internet banks.

I would have thought the new rules ( another addition to the dog's dinner the immigration rules have now become ) made it clear only original documents would be acceptable. A printout of an internet account statement is not original in the sense the idiots at UKBA meant although commonsense dictates anyone with half a brain could reach a reasonable judgement upon the credibility of the information provided by them. That's the rub though, isn't it? If one doesn't specify to the nth degree how rules should be interpreted the incompetents of the visa section arrive at stupid decisions and when they are defined it is at the expense of intelligence and discretion.

Personally, I would provide hard copy supplied by the bank everytime.

I have posted this before, but for those who missed it this a response from UKBA Bangkok on the subject of online bank statements :

With regard to internet banking, we acknowledge the fact that original statements may not be produced and will accept the internet printouts especially if they are backed with other forms of original evidence such as employment contracts and wage slips.

Bank statements whether they be originals or internet printouts (when no originals are produced) must be

(i) from a financial institution regulated by the appropriate regulatory body for the country in which that institution is operating.

(ii) not be from a financial institution on the list of excluded institutions in Appendix P of these rules.

(iii) in relation to personal bank statements be only in the name of:

(1) the applicant's partner, the applicant or both as appropriate; or

(2) if the applicant is a child the applicant parent's partner, the applicant's parent or both as appropriate; or

(3) if the applicant is an adult dependent relative, the applicant's sponsor or the applicant,

unless otherwise stated.

[ThaiVisaExpress]

We have had no issues with internet bank accounts print outs being supplied with any visa applications.

Sent from my GT-N8000 using Thaivisa Connect App

[crazydrummerpauly]

We have had no issues with internet bank accounts print outs being supplied with any visa applications.

Sent from my GT-N8000 using Thaivisa Connect App

Very helpful, thanks. Is it also true that you haven't had problems with internet print-outs of other important documents, such as building society savings accounts, and mortgage statements/property-deeds ? And to come at it a different way, are there types of document which the UKBA insist on being originals ? ( i'm thinking of divorce papers and birth certs, that type of doc.)

[crazydrummerpauly]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

[VisasPlus]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

I think what they are saying is that any rent from a lodger living in the same house as you cannot be counted as rental income. Unless, it is a self contained flat, or similar, and then that would not be your main residence, as you are not living in it.

[crazydrummerpauly]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

I think what they are saying is that any rent from a lodger living in the same house as you cannot be counted as rental income. Unless, it is a self contained flat, or similar, and then that would not be your main residence, as you are not living in it.

Hi, thanks for that. I understand the part about not being able to include Rent from a Lodger sharing one's house, but your answer does not touch on my main question : what IS one's 'main residence', and could one count Rental Income if one had made the decision to leave tenants in place and go to a smaller rented place oneself. It should be simple really but as so often with government texts isn't - is one's 'main residence' where one is LIVING, or the property one OWNS ? I might be being stupid here - say so if that's the case - but i don't think you have answered that.

[crazydrummerpauly]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

SORRY : 'BUY to LET'.

[VisasPlus]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

I think what they are saying is that any rent from a lodger living in the same house as you cannot be counted as rental income. Unless, it is a self contained flat, or similar, and then that would not be your main residence, as you are not living in it.

Hi, thanks for that. I understand the part about not being able to include Rent from a Lodger sharing one's house, but your answer does not touch on my main question : what IS one's 'main residence', and could one count Rental Income if one had made the decision to leave tenants in place and go to a smaller rented place oneself. It should be simple really but as so often with government texts isn't - is one's 'main residence' where one is LIVING, or the property one OWNS ? I might be being stupid here - say so if that's the case - but i don't think you have answered that.

There is no single answer to your main question. You can look at these, and make your own decision :

You can use this ( re Council tax) :

http://www.bristol.g... Discount_0.pdf

or this :

Sole or Main Residence

There is no legal definition of sole or main residence, the principles for determination are those that were established under community charge and in subsequent case law.

The following factors should be considered:-

‘Sole or main residence’ implies that the resident has to actually live in the dwelling

If a person has never lived in the dwelling in question, it cannot be their ‘sole or main residence’.

Not everyone has a sole or main residence

Residence implies a degree of permanence – security of tenure might have a bearing, but is not conclusive;

Temporary presence at an address does not make a person resident there;

Temporary absence does not deprive a person of residence, for example in the case of a mariner;

The lawfulness or otherwise of any home is irrelevant in considering whether that place is the individual’s residence;

In determining whether a person not present at a given place is legally resident there, it is relevant to ascertain whether that person intends to return, and whether or not he or she could return without breach of any public or private obligation.

Or this :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A person's primary residence, or main residence is the dwelling where they usually live, typically a house or an apartment. A person can only have one primary residence at any given time, though they may share the residence with other people. A primary residence is considered as a legal residence for the purpose of income tax and/or acquiring a mortgage.

Criteria for a primary residence consist mostly of guidelines rather than hard rules, and residential status is often determined on a case-by-case basis.

Or this :

Sole or Main Residence

A person is regarded as living in a property for council tax purposes if it is their sole or main residence. Although this is straightforward if a person only has one home, when a person has more than one home we have to decide which is their main residence.

Main residence is not defined in law but over the last few years there have been a number of tribunal / court cases to decide what is and is not main residence. The kind of things we will take into account in deciding somebody's main residence are based on judgements from these cases and include the following:

Security of Tenure / Rights of Occupation

· At each residence, whether or not you are;

an owner

a tenant (and the nature of any tenancy)

a lodger

in accommodation provided with employment

Your right to occupy a property

· Your residence is conditional (for example: residence in a country is dependant on holding a work permit)

Personal Ties

· At which residence you are registered with a doctor / dentist

· Where the majority of your possessions are kept

· Where you return to during periods of leave or at the end of employment

· Your long-term intentions

· Are you already regarded as mainly resident elsewhere for council tax purposes

· Where you are registered to vote

· Membership of clubs and other social activities

· Where you receive post

· Which property you regard as your main residence

· How you split your time between your residences

Family Ties

· At which residence your partner / dependants live

· From which residence your children attend school

· At which residence you spend time with your family

Edited November 14, 2012 by VisasPlus

[crazydrummerpauly]

I've made this enquiry to UKBA -

"I have a problem about understanding the new rules, in relation to Rental Income being counted towards the £18,600 threshold.

There's quite a bit of chat online about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are, and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'Buy-To-Let' , investment basis (mine was) but has since been lived in from time to time as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a 'Buy-to-Let' type. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on? - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ? Put in another way - is one's 'main residence' where one is LIVING, or the property one OWNS ? I might be being stupid here, but it is very important question to get clear about.

Putting it as simply as i can : If someone goes back to the UK where their mortgaged house is rented out for say £1,000 a month, and they go to live in a rented flat for say £1,000 a month, (or if it makes any difference, £500 a month), will the £1,000 a month from their mortgaged house be allowed to count as part of the £18,600 threshold amount under the new 2012 rules for settlement ?"

If i ever get a clear answer, i will post it.

Edited November 14, 2012 by crazydrummerpauly

[crazydrummerpauly]

There's quite a bit of chat about 'Rental Income' being useful in reaching the new £18,600 requirement. But the UKBA clearly states that income from one's Main Residence cannot be counted. So, what does that exactly mean ? It is important for me and could be for many others because many ex-pats have a property (their own) which they rent out while abroad. IF 'main residence' just means the place one lives when back in the UK, then that opens the obvious possibility of leaving the tenants where they are and the rental money coming in, and going elsewhere to live in a rented place oneself. This would be especially handy if the rent from one's own property was a lot more than the rent on a little rented place. It gets even more interesting if one's own property was originally bought on a 'But-To-Let' basis (mine was) but has since been lived in as one's own home - but the mortgage remains a buy-to-let. So what exactly is one's 'main residence' - where one lives or what one owns or pays a mortgage on - and how would UKBA deal with the situation i describe ?

I think what they are saying is that any rent from a lodger living in the same house as you cannot be counted as rental income. Unless, it is a self contained flat, or similar, and then that would not be your main residence, as you are not living in it.

Hi, thanks for that. I understand the part about not being able to include Rent from a Lodger sharing one's house, but your answer does not touch on my main question : what IS one's 'main residence', and could one count Rental Income if one had made the decision to leave tenants in place and go to a smaller rented place oneself. It should be simple really but as so often with government texts isn't - is one's 'main residence' where one is LIVING, or the property one OWNS ? I might be being stupid here - say so if that's the case - but i don't think you have answered that.

There is no single answer to your main question. You can look at these, and make your own decision :

You can use this ( re Council tax) :

http://www.bristol.g... Discount_0.pdf

or this :

Sole or Main Residence

There is no legal definition of sole or main residence, the principles for determination are those that were established under community charge and in subsequent case law.

The following factors should be considered:-

‘Sole or main residence’ implies that the resident has to actually live in the dwelling

If a person has never lived in the dwelling in question, it cannot be their ‘sole or main residence’.

Not everyone has a sole or main residence

Residence implies a degree of permanence – security of tenure might have a bearing, but is not conclusive;

Temporary presence at an address does not make a person resident there;

Temporary absence does not deprive a person of residence, for example in the case of a mariner;

The lawfulness or otherwise of any home is irrelevant in considering whether that place is the individual’s residence;

In determining whether a person not present at a given place is legally resident there, it is relevant to ascertain whether that person intends to return, and whether or not he or she could return without breach of any public or private obligation.

Or this :

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A person's primary residence, or main residence is the dwelling where they usually live, typically a house or an apartment. A person can only have one primary residence at any given time, though they may share the residence with other people. A primary residence is considered as a legal residence for the purpose of income tax and/or acquiring a mortgage.

Criteria for a primary residence consist mostly of guidelines rather than hard rules, and residential status is often determined on a case-by-case basis.

Or this :

Sole or Main Residence

A person is regarded as living in a property for council tax purposes if it is their sole or main residence. Although this is straightforward if a person only has one home, when a person has more than one home we have to decide which is their main residence.

Main residence is not defined in law but over the last few years there have been a number of tribunal / court cases to decide what is and is not main residence. The kind of things we will take into account in deciding somebody's main residence are based on judgements from these cases and include the following:

Security of Tenure / Rights of Occupation

· At each residence, whether or not you are;

an owner

a tenant (and the nature of any tenancy)

a lodger

in accommodation provided with employment

Your right to occupy a property

· Your residence is conditional (for example: residence in a country is dependant on holding a work permit)

Personal Ties

· At which residence you are registered with a doctor / dentist

· Where the majority of your possessions are kept

· Where you return to during periods of leave or at the end of employment

· Your long-term intentions

· Are you already regarded as mainly resident elsewhere for council tax purposes

· Where you are registered to vote

· Membership of clubs and other social activities

· Where you receive post

· Which property you regard as your main residence

· How you split your time between your residences

Family Ties

· At which residence your partner / dependants live

· From which residence your children attend school

· At which residence you spend time with your family

Hi - jeez, a complete can-of-worms ! I need to digest all that - but in the end, it is probably irrelevant as it is only what the UKBA has in it's weird mind that actually counts. Thanks.