Returning To Uk With Wife

[realfunster]

Hello all.

After some years in Thailand, myself and my wife have decided to move to the UK.

I have been reading some of the other threads on the settlement visa requirements and I have a few concerns ahead of submitting my wife's application. It seems it is going to be a bit more complicated than I expected !

It would be great if one or two of the 'experts' on here can make sure I am generally on the right track.

Background

UK citizen

Working for 8 years in Thailand, normal base salary in Thailand for this period above UKBA threshold, however, some recent 'complications' as per Q2 below.

Married to Thai national 4.5 years

We visited the UK for a month in October, wife has 6 month multiple entry visa valid to March 2013.

Questions

1) Is the job offer in the UK starting within 3 months of my return fundamental/essential ? Will any application without this be rejected ? (Just to complicate things a little, my previous employer has now just offered me a couple of months of contract work here in Bangkok. For sure the money would be nice but we are also keen to get things moving and this would likely delay any progress in me getting a UK job sorted- if essential)

2) I quit my Thai job on 30/8, therefore not working for the last 3 months (bliss, but need to get back to reality soon..). Under the UKBA FM 1.7 details, annexe 2, category B. I seem to have the option (being overseas resident) of submitting upto 12 months of evidence regarding my employment income for the visa application- am I correct ? If so, will they just look at the total salary over the 12 months ?

3) In terms of investments/savings- will the UKBA consider other investments or just cash in the bank? I have some Thai LTFs which are maturing annually over the next 3 years. I also had an LTF that matured on 1/1/12 and was at my disposal since that date but I have just taken to my bank account in the past week- would they allow this ?

4) My wife has picked up that as we have been married for > 4 years at application date we can go straight to ILR stage- correct ?

5) Any general thoughts on overall strategy for the application ? Clearly myself and my wife would like to keep any separation to a minimum but also get things resolved in the next 3-5 months.

6) Any other comments ?

Thanks in advance.

Edited November 27, 2012 by realfunster

[7by7]

There have recently been some changes to the new rules which I haven't quite got my head around yet; but as I understand it:

1) & 2) Yes, unless you have sufficient savings or unearned income (see below), you must have a definite job starting within three months of your arrival in the UK with a salary of at least £18,600 p.a.

Even then, this will only count if you have been working in Thailand for the same employer for at least the 6 months prior to applying or different employers for at least 12 months prior to applying and your earnings in your lowest month multiplied by 12 equals at least £18,600.

Earned income your wife has had while living in Thailand wont count and neither will any income she may receive from any potential or even definite job offers she may have once in the UK.

This amount can be reduced on a pro rata basis if you have cash savings above £16,000 until cash savings of £62,500 or above means that no income is required at all.

If using cash savings then they must be held by you, your wife or you both jointly and must have been in your, her or your joint possession and complete control for at least the last 6 months.

3) The value of investments cannot be used, but any income you, your wife or you both jointly receive from them and any other unearned income you, she or you both receive, and will continue to receive, can be used towards meeting the income requirement.

4) No, this, known as Indefinite Leave to Enter, was abolished for spouses and partners with effect from 9/7/12.

5) & 6) If you've not already done so, have a read of UK Settlement Visa Basics and the links therein.

Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than I will correct any mistakes in the above. Hopefully VisasPlus as, with respect to the other experts, he seems to have got his head around all this better than most; certainly better than I!

Edited November 27, 2012 by 7by7

[realfunster]

7by7- thanks for your detailed response, very much appreciated !

Thanks for your link (and also the work you out into that) I have been referring to it and it is very helpful also.

Based on your response above, I think I will need to complete the Financial Requirement appendix under Part 3B (returning UK citizen), Category B- which will detail my 12 months employment history to POA. Could you kindly clarify further on how this calculation works ?

For example, assuming we submit on 31/12/12, if I was earning say, THB 150k (GBP 3k) per month to 30/8/12 (8 months) but I was unemployed from 1/9/12 to 31/12/12 (4 months) - how do they calculate whether this meets the income level requirement ?

Thanks again.

[Saudi Sid]

Another great point 7/11

This amount can be reduced on a pro rata basis if you have cash savings above £16,000 until cash savings of £62,500 or above means that no income is required at all.

And

this could help Angry Parent. He could just release the equity on his UK home (having worked for decades in the UK) and show this as cash savings.

Job done

[7by7]

Sid, you certainly have a bee in your bonnet over Angry Parent, don't you?

Selling a property, or 'releasing the equity' as you put it, may provide a cash surplus after paying off any mortgage still owed of £62,500 or more. But you are forgetting that this cash must have been in the possession of sponsor, applicant or both for at least 6 months prior to the application. So it wouldn't solve Angry Parent's problem.

[7by7]

Realfunster,

From Para 5.3.2 of Appendix FM 1.7

Where the applicant’s partner is returning with the applicant to the UK to work

Category B operates differently where the applicant’s partner is returning with the applicant to the UK to work. The partner does not have to be in employment at the date of application.

First, the couple returning to the UK must have received in the 12 months prior to the application the level of income required to meet the financial requirement applicable to it, based on:

The gross salaried employment income overseas of the applicant’s partner;

The gross amount of any specified non-employment income received by the applicant’s partner, the applicant or both jointly;

The gross amount of any State (UK or foreign) or private pension received by the applicant’s partner or the applicant; and/or

The gross amount of any UK Maternity Allowance, Bereavement Allowance, Bereavement Payment and Widowed Parent’s Allowance received by the applicant’s partner or the applicant.

Second, the applicant’s partner must in addition have confirmed salaried employment to return to in the UK (starting within 3 months of their return). This must have an annual starting salary sufficient to meet the financial requirement applicable to the application, alone or in combination with any or all of the items in 5.3.1.

Now comes the bit I'm confused about.

If you had been working in the UK they would take the month in which you earned the least and multiply this by 12 to get your gross annual earnings. But you were working in Thailand, so I think, but am not sure, that they take the total you have earned over the 12 months prior to the application.

As I said earlier, VisasPlus seems to have his head around this better than most of us, so hopefully he will see this topic and confirm or correct the above.

Edited November 28, 2012 by 7by7

[Saudi Sid]

Sid, you certainly have a bee in your bonnet over Angry Parent, don't you?

Selling a property, or 'releasing the equity' as you put it, may provide a cash surplus after paying off any mortgage still owed of £62,500 or more. But you are forgetting that this cash must have been in the possession of sponsor, applicant or both for at least 6 months prior to the application. So it wouldn't solve Angry Parent's problem.

Sometimes, 711, helping someone who abused you, calls you names and offers zero thanks is the best, most worthwile Karma one can accumilate.

Selling a property and releasing equity are two entirely different concepts, 7. And in Angry's case, he could release the equity, bank it in no risk bond, use the interest to pay any rise in any mortgage (or just extend the term and see no payment rise). And wait out the 6 months in Thailand so the money has been, as you say, in his possession. Then, his wife can appply for settlement, no need to bullshit the ECO and get a 6 month visit visa.

I hope Angry reads this, and I hope it works out for him and his family. And I continue to earn karmatic points.

[7by7]

The savings need to be in cash to count toward the financial requirement.

If he puts the money into a bond then it is only any income received from that which would count, not the value of the bond.

Can you know take your obsession with AP elsewhere and allow this topic to get back on topic?

[Saudi Sid]

The savings need to be in cash to count toward the financial requirement.

If he puts the money into a bond then it is only any income received from that which would count, not the value of the bond.

Can you know take your obsession with AP elsewhere and allow this topic to get back on topic?

That's fine then - he simply adds the equity cash payment into the Nottingham immediate access, non-resident, cash account running at 3.25% interest and restructures any mortgage he may have so he is not out of pocket. Simple.

Why do you always do this? Have your say, respond to a point and then tell other posters to stop? Its strange, like an obsession to have the last word / say.

Anyway, Angry will read this now and we have helped him.

Back on topic and it may also benefit the OP in that he could go down this route and his Thai LTFs can be kept in cash (inclduing the soon to mature second LTF mentioned)

Edited November 28, 2012 by Saudi Sid

[VisasPlus]

Lots of discussion points here:

Firstly, the "savings" do have to be under the sponsor's control, not just in his possession, which does rather rule out long term bonds, etc. It will be interesting to see how the appeal courts in the UK might interpret " under their control".

Secondly, the rule changes which come into force on 13th December have changed the goalposts slightly. It looks like any employment in the previous 12 months can be used ( the total gross income) to meet the requirement, not just the last 6 months worth of wage slips. The current rules require that, if with the same employer for at least 6 months, then the last 6 months of wage slips must be provided. From these 6 months, the lowest month will be used, and multiplied by 12 to give an "annual" income. So, if you had a month with no salary (sickness, etc) you couldn't qualify ( your annual income would be nil). This looks to have changed. The new rules ( from 13/12/12) say :

2. In respect of salaried employment in the UK, all of the following evidence must be provided:

(a) Wage slips covering:

(i) a period of 6 months prior to the date of application if the applicant has been employed by their current employer for at least 6 months (and where paragraph 13(b ) of this Appendix does not apply); or

(ii) any period of salaried employment in the period of 12 months prior to the date of application if the applicant has been employed by their current employer for less than 6 months (or at least 6 months but the person does not rely on paragraph 13(a) of this Appendix), or in the financial year(s) relied upon by a self-employed person.

(b ) A letter from the employer(s) who issued the wage slips at paragraph 2(a) confirming:

(i) the person's employment and gross annual salary;

(ii) the length of their employment;

(iii) the period over which they have been or were paid the level of salary relied upon in the application; and

(iv) the type of employment (permanent, fixed-term contract or agency).

(b ) Personal bank statements corresponding to the same period(s) as the wage slips at paragraph 2(a), showing that the salary has been paid into an account in the name of the person or in the name of the person and their partner jointly.

and then :

13. Based on evidence that meets the requirements of this Appendix, and can be taken into account with reference to the applicable provisions of Appendix FM, gross annual income under paragraphs E-ECP.3.1., E-LTRP.3.1., E-ECC.2.1. and E-LTRC.2.1. will be calculated in the following ways:

(a) Where the person is in salaried employment in the UK at the date of application and has been employed by their current employer for at least 6 months, their gross annual income will be (where paragraph 13(b ) does not apply) the total of:

(i) The gross annual salary from their employment as it was at its lowest level in the 6 months prior to the date of application;

(ii) The gross amount of any specified non-employment income (other than pension income) received by them or their partner in the 12 months prior to the date of application; and

(iii) The gross annual income from a UK or foreign State pension or a private pension received by them or their partner.

(b ) Where the person is in salaried employment in the UK at the date of application and has been employed by their current employer for less than 6 months (or at least 6 months but the person does not rely on paragraph 13(a) , their gross annual income will be the total of:

(i) The gross annual salary from employment as it was at the date of application;

(ii) The gross amount of any specified non-employment income (other than pension income) received by them or their partner in the 12 months prior to the date of application; and

(iii) The gross annual income from a UK or foreign State pension or a private pension received by them or their partner.

I take this to read that any income in the 12 months prior to the date of application can be used. In theory, if you earned enough in, for instance, 9 months of employment but took the last 3 months off, then that will still meet the requirement.

The rules also say, in respect of employment outside of the UK, for a sponsor returning to the UK :

3. In respect of salaried employment outside of the UK, evidence should be a reasonable equivalent to that set out in paragraph 2.

4. In respect of a job offer in the UK (for an applicant's partner or parent's partner returning to salaried employment in the UK at paragraphs E-ECP.3.2.(a) and E-ECC.2.2.(a) of Appendix FM) a letter from the employer must be provided:

(a) confirming the job offer, the gross annual salary and the starting date of the employment which must be within 3 months of the applicant's partner's return to the UK; or

(b ) enclosing a signed contract of employment, which must have a starting date within 3 months of the applicant's partner's return to the UK.

So, if the sponsor earned enough money overseas in his last year, then he would seem to meet the requirement, but the requirements of paragraphs 13 and 15 of the Appendix FM-SE must be met. With respect to all, that is a lot to post here.

Edited November 28, 2012 by VisasPlus

[jbrain]

Another great point

7/11

[VisasPlus]

The savings need to be in cash to count toward the financial requirement.

If he puts the money into a bond then it is only any income received from that which would count, not the value of the bond.

Can you know take your obsession with AP elsewhere and allow this topic to get back on topic?

That's fine then - he simply adds the equity cash payment into the Nottingham immediate access, non-resident, cash account running at 3.25% interest and restructures any mortgage he may have so he is not out of pocket. Simple.

Why do you always do this? Have your say, respond to a point and then tell other posters to stop? Its strange, like an obsession to have the last word / say.

Anyway, Angry will read this now and we have helped him.

Back on topic and it may also benefit the OP in that he could go down this route and his Thai LTFs can be kept in cash (inclduing the soon to mature second LTF mentioned)

There might be a problem. The sponsor has to declare the source of his savings ( especially if they have recently been deposited ). If he declares the truth ( which he must do) then the use of the equity as savings will not be allowed. Paragraph 20(d) of the Appendix states :

20(d) Equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

Now, whether the savings are "savings", or still regarded as having been equity, could be a debating point. I think the intention of the rule is that you can't say " my house is worth a million, so I have a million", but the rule, taken literally, could be a problem.

The money would also need to be in the account for 6 months, of course.

[Saudi Sid]

Lots of discussion points here:

Firstly, the "savings" do have to be under the sponsor's control, not just in his possession, which does rather rule out long term bonds, etc. It will be interesting to see how the appeal courts in the UK might interpret " under their control".

Understood - though we are thinking about different bonds - I was talking about simple no risk bonds which are not locked in and the holder can casht hem in with immediate effect with justa loss of quaterly interest. Either way, it can as easily be in an easy access cash account.

[7by7]

Thanks for that, VP.

Could you clarify something for me, though.

Take the OP's situation as an example. He hasn't worked for the last 3 months but, presumably, was working for the 9 months prior to that.

So, must he have earned at least the equivalent of £18,600 in total during the 9 months he did work out of the last year, or will it be calculated on his lowest monthly income during that 9 months multiplied by 12?

[Saudi Sid]

20(d) Equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

Now, whether the savings are "savings", or still regarded as having been equity, could be a debating point. I think the intention of the rule is that you can't say " my house is worth a million, so I have a million", but the rule, taken literally, could be a problem.

Ah yes but this would be released equity IE cash savings. Equity in a property is of course, generally, not savings. And as the size of a mortgage isn't a deciding factor, then releasing equity and exptended a mortgage period could work.

And of course, they may not even be a mortgage so, the homeowner raised 60k on a property via a new mortgage. I just did that to buy a condo in BKK.

That said, I have four buy to let houses each worth about 180k and each with a 100k mortgage so 320k unrealeased equity. It would be intesting how these are viewed also as they are investments though - I guess - not under my control.

If I released 60k equity to satisfy the requirements of a settlemen visa, is it any of their business where the cash comes from?

Edited November 28, 2012 by Saudi Sid

[Saudi Sid]

Thanks for that, VP.

Could you clarify something for me, though.

Take the OP's situation as an example. He hasn't worked for the last 3 months but, presumably, was working for the 9 months prior to that.

So, must he have earned at least the equivalent of £18,600 in total during the 9 months he did work out of the last year, or will it be calculated on his lowest monthly income during that 9 months multiplied by 12?

And what about oil workers working just 6 months a year? Paid for 6 only but the salary is many times over the minimum req

[VisasPlus]

Thanks for that, VP.

Could you clarify something for me, though.

Take the OP's situation as an example. He hasn't worked for the last 3 months but, presumably, was working for the 9 months prior to that.

So, must he have earned at least the equivalent of £18,600 in total during the 9 months he did work out of the last year, or will it be calculated on his lowest monthly income during that 9 months multiplied by 12?

And what about oil workers working just 6 months a year? Paid for 6 only but the salary is many times over the minimum req

The way I read the new rules is that the sponsor ( in this case) must have earned at least 18,600 over the previous 12 months. It looks like, in this case, he can use para 2(b ) and 13(b ). If he relies on 2(a ) and 13(a ) then it will be the lowest month of the previous 6 months x 12 ( which will be nil).

Oil workers will qualify under the example you give, for the reasons I have given. I think this may be one of the reasons why the rules have been changed, as people such as oil workers were unable to qualify even when they were earning half a million a year or more.

[VisasPlus]

20(d) Equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

Now, whether the savings are "savings", or still regarded as having been equity, could be a debating point. I think the intention of the rule is that you can't say " my house is worth a million, so I have a million", but the rule, taken literally, could be a problem.

Ah yes but this would be released equity IE cash savings. Equity in a property is of course, generally, not savings. And as the size of a mortgage isn't a deciding factor, then releasing equity and exptended a mortgage period could work.

And of course, they may not even be a mortgage so, the homeowner raised 60k on a property via a new mortgage. I just did that to buy a condo in BKK.

That said, I have four buy to let houses each worth about 180k and each with a 100k mortgage so 320k unrealeased equity. It would be intesting how these are viewed also as they are investments though - I guess - not under my control.

If I released 60k equity to satisfy the requirements of a settlemen visa, is it any of their business where the cash comes from?

Firstly, I think there are many reasons why the government wants to know where the money has come from, including tax evasions and illegal sources . There are plans to share financial "information" with HMRC ( and maybe other government agencies) in the future.

Secondly, you can use the rental income from owned property to meet the financial requirement, but not the equity or investment value.

[7by7]

Thanks.

[Saudi Sid]

20(d) Equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

Now, whether the savings are "savings", or still regarded as having been equity, could be a debating point. I think the intention of the rule is that you can't say " my house is worth a million, so I have a million", but the rule, taken literally, could be a problem.

Ah yes but this would be released equity IE cash savings. Equity in a property is of course, generally, not savings. And as the size of a mortgage isn't a deciding factor, then releasing equity and exptended a mortgage period could work.

And of course, they may not even be a mortgage so, the homeowner raised 60k on a property via a new mortgage. I just did that to buy a condo in BKK.

That said, I have four buy to let houses each worth about 180k and each with a 100k mortgage so 320k unrealeased equity. It would be intesting how these are viewed also as they are investments though - I guess - not under my control.

If I released 60k equity to satisfy the requirements of a settlemen visa, is it any of their business where the cash comes from?

Firstly, I think there are many reasons why the government wants to know where the money has come from, including tax evasions and illegal sources . There are plans to share financial "information" with HMRC ( and maybe other government agencies) in the future.

Secondly, you can use the rental income from owned property to meet the financial requirement, but not the equity or investment value.

Yep, got that. However, we are talking about released equity - cash money not bricks and mortar.

[Saudi Sid]

Well, at least your problems are solved now Angry. Good luck to you and your family. Finally, after all those years working in England, you can realease up some of the equity.

[Khonwan]

Saudi Sid, given that a mortgage is a loan or credit facility, I think that such release of equity may contravene the following:

5.4.4. Income from the following sources will not be counted towards the financial requirement:

<snip>

Loans and credit facilities.

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/IDIs/chp8-annex/section-FM-1.7.pdf?view=Binary

[realfunster]

Thanks all for your comments and advice - much appreciated.

On the basis of all these discussions and also (finally) some clear guidance from VFS, I have decided to head off to the UK next week to get a job offer sorted out sharpish !

[lufc74]

Hi,

I posted a couple of days ago, with some questions on the same subject. I have a further question that somebody may be able to answer, regarding income required.

I was hoping I would be able to use income recieved from house rents, both in the uk, and here in thailand. Would that be able to be used towards the yearly figure of around £18000.

I was planning to work once back in the uk, but only part time, so not alarge amound, and should be able to reach £18000 with rents alone. Would that be acceptable.

Thanks in advance.

[7by7]

From the financial requirement.

Property rental income:

The property, in the UK or overseas, must be owned by the applicant’s partner, the applicant or both jointly, and must not be their main residence (and therefore income from a lodger in that residence cannot be counted). If the applicant’s partner or applicant shares ownership of the property with a third party, only income received from the applicant’s partner’s and/or applicant’s share of the property can be counted. Income from property which is rented out for only part of the year (e.g. a holiday let) can be counted. The equity in a property cannot be used to meet the financial requirement.

[lufc74]

Once again 7by7, you cleared things up. Much appreciated, as it certainally looks like I can use this as evidence towards my income.

Thanks again.