How Long Can My New Wife Stay In The Uk On A Spouse Visa If The Marriage Breaks Down?

[Mrbiggus]

I would like to know how the new immigration rules would affect a sour marriage.

Say I married a beautiful woman from Thailand and managed to get a spouse visa so she could come over and live with me in my lovely house.

Say after a year or two it all went horribly wrong and a divorce was imminent.

What would be the spouses rules on that are they allowed to stay for 5 years?

Or have they got to go as they are not being sponsored anymore?

Would they be allowed to hang around for a divorce or will they be kicked out rather quickly.

I’m pretty sure you guys know what I’m on about.

Do these new immigration rules make it easier to get rid and not be conned or does it make it harder for a Thai beauty to get the better of?

Does it make it easier for a Farang to exploit or is it the other way round or just still the same same same.

[7by7]

The basis of a spouse or partner being in the UK before they have received ILR is their marriage or partnership. If this breaks down then they have no basis for remaining in the UK.

However, it is unlikely, even if the British spouse or partner reports the breakdown to the UKBA, that they would be traced and removed.

But when the time came to make the next application, whether it's FLR after 30 months or ILR after 60 months in the UK (or, if they entered under the old rules, ILR 24 months in the UK) then they could not do so without the aid of their spouse or partner and evidence that the relationship was still extant and they were still living together. So they would have to leave or be in the UK illegally.

If the marriage or partnership breaks down after the foreign spouse has been granted ILR then they may remain in the UK indefinitely.

[Mrbiggus]

So I am to believe that the old rules a spouse visa lasted 24 months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And the new rules of 30 months spouse visa regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And if we get on after 35 months then yet another 25 spouse visa months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

This new law then is very optimistic for the relationship to be successful?

And if a breakdown in the relationship the spouse can easily carry on in the UK as an illegal just as before.

So what’s the difference?

The new rules do not hinder scam marriages then?

[7by7]

I do not understand what you are driving at, although the tone of your OP speaks volumes about your opinion of Thai women; but that's your problem.

At each stage, initial visa, FLR after 30 months in the UK and ILR after a further 30 months in the UK (5 years after arrival in total) applicant and sponsor have to show that their relationship is existing and genuine and for the FLR and ILR applications that they have been and will continue to be living together.

Extending the probationary period for ILR for spouses and partners has surely made sham marriages less likely than before as the couple now have to live together in the UK for 5 years before the foreign spouse can obtain ILR.

If the relationship breaks down before the foreign spouse or partner has ILR they will have to leave the UK when their current LTR expires or remain as an illegal. Not sure if the word 'easily' would apply, though, to living in the UK as an illegal; they could not work, would have no access to health care or other public services, could not leave, even for a short holiday, as they wouldn't get back in and if found and removed, which happens more often than the right wing press would have you believe, their chances of ever returning to the UK in any capacity would be virtually zero.

Of course, no measure will eliminate sham marriages entirely.

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

Edited October 23, 2012 by 7by7

[Issam rider]

I do not understand what you are driving at, although the tone of your OP speaks volumes about your opinion of Thai women; but that's your problem.

At each stage, initial visa, FLR after 30 months in the UK and ILR after a further 30 months in the UK (5 years after arrival in total) applicant and sponsor have to show that their relationship is existing and genuine and for the FLR and ILR applications that they have been and will continue to be living together.

Extending the probationary period for ILR for spouses and partners has surely made sham marriages less likely than before as the couple now have to live together in the UK for 5 years before the foreign spouse can obtain ILR.

If the relationship breaks down before the foreign spouse or partner has ILR they will have to leave the UK when their current LTR expires or remain as an illegal. Not sure if the word 'easily' would apply, though, to living in the UK as an illegal; they could not work, would have no access to health care or other public services, could not leave, even for a short holiday, as they wouldn't get back in and if found and removed, which happens more often than the right wing press would have you believe, their chances of ever returning to the UK in any capacity would be virtually zero.

Of course, no measure will eliminate sham marriages entirely.

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

lol

[electau]

Just as a matter of interest how long does the ILR remain valid for once issued and how long can one be absent from the UK before one loses connection with the UK as far as permanent residency is concerned. Taking up UK citizenship is of course another matter.

One is comparing the UK requirements to Australian ones.

[7by7]

ILR stands for Indefinite Leave to Remain and so is indefinite.

However, it will lapse if the holder spends a continuous period of two years or more out of the UK. In addition, if an immigration officer at a port of entry can show that an ILR holder doesn't actually live in the UK but is using their ILR just for visits then that person's ILR will be canceled, although they will be allowed in as a visitor on that occasion.

ILR will be canceled if it was obtained fraudulently and may be canceled if the holder is convicted of a serious criminal offence which results in a custodial sentence.

British citizenship, once granted, cannot lapse, no matter how long the holder spends outside the UK, and can only be removed if the holder is convicted of a very serious offence such as terrorism, and even then it wont be removed if the person would be rendered stateless by it's removal.

[electau]

Australia. Resident Return Visa required for travel after 5 years. Permanent visa valid for travel for 5 years only. If a relationship breaks down it will be most likely be within this period.

[Richard W]

British citizenship, once granted, cannot lapse, no matter how long the holder spends outside the UK, and can only be removed if the holder is convicted of a very serious offence such as terrorism, and even then it wont be removed if the person would be rendered stateless by it's removal.

Current practice appears to be to remove citizenship if involved in 'terrorism' on the balance of probabilities and removing British nationality will enable the person to be excluded from the UK. No conviction is required. Notable examples include attempts to deprive Halil al Jeddah (interned in Iraq on suspicion of terrorism, not charged and subsequently freed) and a father and three sons ('S1', 'T1', 'U1' and 'V1') born British in the UK but of Kashmiri origin and involved in attempting to liberate Kashmir from India, thereby getting involved in the murky world of al Qaeda, Taliban and the Pakistani ISI.

Involvement in espionage can also result in the loss of British citizenship, as in the case of Anna Chapman.

There was also the case of a Vietnamese boat baby 'B2' who grew up in Britain, got involved with Islamic extremists and terrorists and was deprived of British citizenship and would have been deported if Vietnam were subject to the rule of law. Like Halil al Jeddah, 'B2' currently stands to have his British citizenship restored on the basis that stripping him of British nationality left him stateless.

The legal position is that someone may be deprived of British citizenship if the Home Secretary considers so doing conducive to the public good and is satisfied that so doing will not render them stateless. (Thus we may get into a race to deprive someone of citizenship, a race Britain lost in the cases of Abu Hamza and, effectively, 'B2'.) Various reports on Human Rights from a joint select committee of the two houses have expressed concern at the relatively low threshold for being stripped of citizenship. As far as I can tell, campaigning for the recriminalisation of sodomy would probably be enough in law - whether a Home Secretary would be foolish enough to deprive in such a case is another matter.

When collating information on deprivees, I noticed the following chilling paragraph in the response (dated August 2010) to the freedom of information request at http://www.whatdothe....of_citizenship:

The Government's highest priority is to protect public safety. We will seek to deprive citizenship to anyone whose presence is not conducive to the public good.

(To access the response, follow the link and click on 'download'). I have no definite evidence that this statement reflects the view of Theresa May. (There have reportedly been at least nine deprivations on conducive grounds between the response and April 2012.)

[7by7]

As soon as I had typed that, I wondered how long it would be before you arrived with a yet another repeat of your absurd rants and scaremongering.

Please don't hijack yet another thread with it.

[Richard W]

As soon as I had typed that, I wondered how long it would be before you arrived with a yet another repeat of your absurd rants and scaremongering.

If you keep to the facts, I won't have to correct you.

[MAJIC]

British citizenship, once granted, cannot lapse, no matter how long the holder spends outside the UK, and can only be removed if the holder is convicted of a very serious offence such as terrorism, and even then it wont be removed if the person would be rendered stateless by it's removal.

Current practice appears to be to remove citizenship if involved in 'terrorism' on the balance of probabilities and removing British nationality will enable the person to be excluded from the UK. No conviction is required. Notable examples include attempts to deprive Halil al Jeddah (interned in Iraq on suspicion of terrorism, not charged and subsequently freed) and a father and three sons ('S1', 'T1', 'U1' and 'V1') born British in the UK but of Kashmiri origin and involved in attempting to liberate Kashmir from India, thereby getting involved in the murky world of al Qaeda, Taliban and the Pakistani ISI.

Involvement in espionage can also result in the loss of British citizenship, as in the case of Anna Chapman.

There was also the case of a Vietnamese boat baby 'B2' who grew up in Britain, got involved with Islamic extremists and terrorists and was deprived of British citizenship and would have been deported if Vietnam were subject to the rule of law. Like Halil al Jeddah, 'B2' currently stands to have his British citizenship restored on the basis that stripping him of British nationality left him stateless.

The legal position is that someone may be deprived of British citizenship if the Home Secretary considers so doing conducive to the public good and is satisfied that so doing will not render them stateless. (Thus we may get into a race to deprive someone of citizenship, a race Britain lost in the cases of Abu Hamza and, effectively, 'B2'.) Various reports on Human Rights from a joint select committee of the two houses have expressed concern at the relatively low threshold for being stripped of citizenship. As far as I can tell, campaigning for the recriminalisation of sodomy would probably be enough in law - whether a Home Secretary would be foolish enough to deprive in such a case is another matter.

When collating information on deprivees, I noticed the following chilling paragraph in the response (dated August 2010) to the freedom of information request at http://www.whatdothe....of_citizenship:

The Government's highest priority is to protect public safety. We will seek to deprive citizenship to anyone whose presence is not conducive to the public good.

(To access the response, follow the link and click on 'download'). I have no definite evidence that this statement reflects the view of Theresa May. (There have reportedly been at least nine deprivations on conducive grounds between the response and April 2012.)

Your statement above is not true anymore,Abu Hamza,was extradited to the USA, 3-4 weeks ago,and as far as I am aware he has never been granted British Citizenship???

[electau]

Deprivation of British nationality

Under amendments made by the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, British nationals can be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied "deprivation is conducive to the public good". This provision has been in force since 16 June 2006 when the Immigration, Nationality and Asylum Act 2006 (Commencement No 1) Order 2006 came into force. This provision only applies to dual nationals, and does not operate to render a person stateless.

Previously, since 2003, under amendments made by the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, British nationals could be deprived of their citizenship if the Secretary of State is satisfied they are responsible for acts seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or an Overseas Territory.

British nationals who are naturalised or registered may have their certificates revoked (and hence lose British nationality) if British nationality was obtained by fraud or concealment of a material fact.

[Richard W]

Your statement above is not true anymore,Abu Hamza,was extradited to the USA, 3-4 weeks ago,and as far as I am aware he has never been granted British Citizenship???

Then someone's successfully hacked the website of the Special Immigrations Appeals Commission:

Abu Hamza: http://www.siac.trib...ent05112010.pdf

S1, T1, U1 & V1: http://www.siac.trib...SC_106_2011.pdf (Google's not finding it!)

B2 (Vietnamese): http://www.siac.trib...B2_Judgment.pdf

Abu Hamza is an example of how secure British citizenship used to be and still is if you have no other nationality. Should he be acquitted or complete his sentence, he has every right to return to Britain. He got British citizenship through his first wife, and he's keeping it.

The FoI link is:

Request: http://www.whatdothe..._of_citizenship

Answer: http://www.whatdothe...oc dr k tai.doc

(Again, Google is not finding the text I quoted!)

Edited October 26, 2012 by Richard W

[theoldgit]

Whilst the subject of loss of citizenship in the case of a terrorist may be very interesting, for some people, the OP asked a simple question about what happens to a spouse if a marriage breaks down, and he has got an answer.

To prevent this thread going further into the realms of fantasy, can we keep it on topic please.

[Baerboxer]

So I am to believe that the old rules a spouse visa lasted 24 months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And the new rules of 30 months spouse visa regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And if we get on after 35 months then yet another 25 spouse visa months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

This new law then is very optimistic for the relationship to be successful?

And if a breakdown in the relationship the spouse can easily carry on in the UK as an illegal just as before.

So what’s the difference?

The new rules do not hinder scam marriages then?

There are numerous checks in place to weed out the scam marriages prior to granting the spousal visa. 7by7 has provided information on the visa FLR and ILR rules for you.

If you doubt the sincerity of your prospesctive spouse then don't get married. Don't confuse the visa rules and the "ease" of getting a failed marriage partner out of the UK with the laws applying to divorce. I sense, possibly wrongly, that your question is "can I get rid of her easily if it all goes wrong without he taking anything off me"? Remember you will be legally married and subject to divorce laws.

[billythehat]

So I am to believe that the old rules a spouse visa lasted 24 months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And the new rules of 30 months spouse visa regardless of breakdown in marriage.

And if we get on after 35 months then yet another 25 spouse visa months regardless of breakdown in marriage.

This new law then is very optimistic for the relationship to be successful?

And if a breakdown in the relationship the spouse can easily carry on in the UK as an illegal just as before.

So what’s the difference?

The new rules do not hinder scam marriages then?

There are numerous checks in place to weed out the scam marriages prior to granting the spousal visa. 7by7 has provided information on the visa FLR and ILR rules for you.

If you doubt the sincerity of your prospesctive spouse then don't get married. Don't confuse the visa rules and the "ease" of getting a failed marriage partner out of the UK with the laws applying to divorce. I sense, possibly wrongly, that your question is "can I get rid of her easily if it all goes wrong without he taking anything off me"? Remember you will be legally married and subject to divorce laws.

“Remember you will be legally married and subject to divorce laws.”

Indeed, Sir, indeed; Caveat Emptor - A warning that notifies a buyer that the goods he or she is buying are "as is," or subject to all defects and to the OP, at the end of the day it’ll be you who decides how much of a mug she makes of you.

[Mrbiggus]

Thanks very much to clarify my questions.

I will be not marrying my new Thai girlfriend as I'm just not that sure. She is either a very good actress or is madly in love with me.

It is one of those things one will ever know. But she is very keen on coming to live with me in the UK which is what is making me ask these questions regarding the new rules as they have recently been put into place.

Anyway I'm not earning enough at the moment which me girlfriend does not understand, as if she got a job in the UK we will, but her income is not taken into consideration is it.

[transam]

I do not understand what you are driving at, although the tone of your OP speaks volumes about your opinion of Thai women; but that's your problem.

At each stage, initial visa, FLR after 30 months in the UK and ILR after a further 30 months in the UK (5 years after arrival in total) applicant and sponsor have to show that their relationship is existing and genuine and for the FLR and ILR applications that they have been and will continue to be living together.

Extending the probationary period for ILR for spouses and partners has surely made sham marriages less likely than before as the couple now have to live together in the UK for 5 years before the foreign spouse can obtain ILR.

If the relationship breaks down before the foreign spouse or partner has ILR they will have to leave the UK when their current LTR expires or remain as an illegal. Not sure if the word 'easily' would apply, though, to living in the UK as an illegal; they could not work, would have no access to health care or other public services, could not leave, even for a short holiday, as they wouldn't get back in and if found and removed, which happens more often than the right wing press would have you believe, their chances of ever returning to the UK in any capacity would be virtually zero.

Of course, no measure will eliminate sham marriages entirely.

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

Perhaps his head is screwed on for asking the question, cos many have fallen, eh. .

[7by7]

Anyway I'm not earning enough at the moment which me girlfriend does not understand, as if she got a job in the UK we will, but her income is not taken into consideration is it.

Not at the initial visa stage; no. Though it will be at the FLR and ILR stages.

[7by7]

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

Perhaps his head is screwed on for asking the question, cos many have fallen, eh. .

Of the 20+ Thai/British couples we know in the UK, three marriages have broken down.

One after the Thai wife had ILR when she discovered that whilst she was visiting her parents her husband was sampling the delights of bar girls in Pattaya.

One before the Thai wife had ILR when she became pregnant by her husband and he kicked her out because he didn't want a child; she is currently in the process of applying to remain in the UK under the Zambrano ruling.

One who did do a runner before she had ILR; she had used her husband and marriage just to get into the UK (I didn't say it never happens) so she could continue in her previous occupation. She was found and removed.

Not a very scientific sample, I'll grant you, but hardly 'many' and in two of the cases the fault lay with the British husband.

But the tone of the OP's remarks clearly indicates that he has a low opinion of Thai women in general and does not yet trust his girlfriend. Based on that, he is not ready for marriage.

[transam]

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

Perhaps his head is screwed on for asking the question, cos many have fallen, eh. .

Of the 20+ Thai/British couples we know in the UK, three marriages have broken down.

One after the Thai wife had ILR when she discovered that whilst she was visiting her parents her husband was sampling the delights of bar girls in Pattaya.

One before the Thai wife had ILR when she became pregnant by her husband and he kicked her out because he didn't want a child; she is currently in the process of applying to remain in the UK under the Zambrano ruling.

One who did do a runner before she had ILR; she had used her husband and marriage just to get into the UK (I didn't say it never happens) so she could continue in her previous occupation. She was found and removed.

Not a very scientific sample, I'll grant you, but hardly 'many' and in two of the cases the fault lay with the British husband.

But the tone of the OP's remarks clearly indicates that he has a low opinion of Thai women in general and does not yet trust his girlfriend. Based on that, he is not ready for marriage.

He ''rightly'' has probably read a lot, and he is right to ask questions here. 10 out of 10 to the OP.

I can say that cos l have witnessed what he fears.

[7by7]

Nothing wrong in asking questions; that is what this forum is for.

But you have missed my point; by miles!

I'll try and make it easy for you:

• He doesn't trust Thai women in general
  
• He doesn't trust his girlfriend in particular
  
• Therefore he is not ready for marriage.
  

I have seen, as listed above, three Thai/British marriages break down; two due to the British husband's actions.

I have seen, percentage wise, far more British/British marriages break down.

Edited October 28, 2012 by 7by7

[transam]

Nothing wrong in asking questions; that is what this forum is for.

But you have missed my point; by miles!

The OP will read the posts.

[natnatnatnat]

But if you suspect that your new wife has only married you to get into the UK and will do a runner as soon as she can; why the hell did you marry her in the first place?

Perhaps his head is screwed on for asking the question, cos many have fallen, eh. .

Of the 20+ Thai/British couples we know in the UK, three marriages have broken down.

.

Just for my own interest, of those 20 marriages how many are Thai man / Farang woman? How many, see an age difference of more than 10 years between the partners?

Thanks

[natnatnatnat]

Nothing wrong in asking questions; that is what this forum is for.

But you have missed my point; by miles!

I'll try and make it easy for you:

• He doesn't trust Thai women in general
  
• He doesn't trust his girlfriend in particular
  
• Therefore he is not ready for marriage.
  

I have seen, as listed above, three Thai/British marriages break down; two due to the British husband's actions.

I have seen, percentage wise, far more British/British marriages break down.

Are you comparing apples and oranges. How many of those20 Biritsh / British are of such an age gap and how many were formed via perhaps the internet / marriage agencies or in tourist hotspots in the UK?

I do not think it is right that you judge the OP and I say this as an educated Thai. Many people do not trust their partners, maybe he was burnt by a Thai bar girl, maybe burnt by a wayward British wife. Perhaps he met his wife in a bar, many farang do. He is asking questions not seeking your approval.

[natnatnatnat]

I can say that cos l have witnessed what he fears.

This gentleman proves the point, he appear to have witnessed poor behaviour by wayward Thai.

[7by7]

@ natnatnatnat,

Just for my own interest, of those 20 marriages how many are Thai man / Farang woman? How many, see an age difference of more than 10 years between the partners?

All are Thai woman and British man, except for one which isn't actually a marriage but a civil partnership between a Thai man and a British man.

I believe the largest age gap is that between my wife and myself; 7 years.

How many of those20 British / British are of such an age gap and how many were formed via perhaps the internet / marriage agencies or in tourist hotspots in the UK?

I didn't specify how many British/British couples i was talking about or know.

I can't really say how most of the couples we know met, Thai/British or British/British; not my business unless they want to tell me; don't see the relevance anyway.

I do not think it is right that you judge the OP and I say this as an educated Thai. Many people do not trust their partners

Not judging; advising. He doesn't trust his girlfriend so, in my opinion, he should not marry her until and unless he does.

I believe that trust is one of the foundations of a solid marriage. That without trust the marriage will fail; no matter how well educated you are.

I am sorry for both you and your spouse if you do not trust each other.

This gentleman (Transam) proves the point, he appear to have witnessed poor behaviour by wayward Thai.

Transam has witnessed poor behaviour by wayward Thais; as I said before I have witnessed equally poor, or worse, behaviour toward their Thai spouse by British men. But I don't stereotype.

[MiG16]

Let me remind everyone to stay on topic please

This thread is about spousal visa to the uk

It is not about discussing marriage breakdown rates and probability. Cheers

[natnatnatnat]

@ 7by7

Just for my own interest, of those 20 marriages how many are Thai man / Farang woman? How many, see an age difference of more than 10 years between the partners?

All are Thai woman and British man, except for one which isn't actually a marriage but a civil partnership between a Thai man and a British man.

I believe the largest age gap is that between my wife and myself; 7 years.

Would you say this is unusual?

How many of those20 British / British are of such an age gap and how many were formed via perhaps the internet / marriage agencies or in tourist hotspots in the UK?

I didn't specify how many British/British couples i was talking about or know.

I know you didn't.

I can't really say how most of the couples we know met, Thai/British or British/British; not my business unless they want to tell me; don't see the relevance anyway.

Do you not know them very well or do you avoid asking? I know how all my friends met

I do not think it is right that you judge the OP and I say this as an educated Thai. Many people do not trust their partners

Not judging; advising. He doesn't trust his girlfriend so, in my opinion, he should not marry her until and unless he does.

Sounds like judging to me.

I believe that trust is one of the foundations of a solid marriage. That without trust the marriage will fail; no matter how well educated you are.

So do I, completely.

I am sorry for both you and your spouse if you do not trust each other.

I am also sorry for your wife if she does not trust you.

This gentleman (Transam) proves the point, he appear to have witnessed poor behaviour by wayward Thai.

Transam has witnessed poor behaviour by wayward Thais; as I said before I have witnessed equally poor, or worse, behaviour toward their Thai spouse by British men. But I don't stereotype.

Stereotypes, whether you do not do it yourself, unfortunely, do exist. I am sure you have met many Thai women married to farang who you and your wife suspsect of being ex sex workers. In many cases the stereotype is real. My best friend works at the Thai embassy in a senior role, she is a careea diplomat. According to her, she susgest 75% of Thai women married to farang are either much younger, met through agencies or are ex sex workers . She does not suggest there is no love involved however, she argues that many marriages were forged on economic advantage and escapism from sex trade / broken Thai/Thai marriages. She is a published academic and lectures at Chula and is also heavily involved in the Pavena Honsakul charity.

Back to topic

Edited October 28, 2012 by natnatnatnat