Uk Visas, Silomfan Vs. Gu22

[GU22]

Silomfan posted:-

OK seems i can't get this paste and copy quote thing working so i will have to reply the old normal way.

Rather than take every point of GU22's posts and reply to each, which would make a mammoth post that would sedate everyone, i think the best way is to put my feelings about the system and how i think it could be more fairly improved .

GU22 keeps saying that i never say how the system can be made more fair, yet i have said it many times. He doesn't seem to get it , so for the zillionth time here it is again.

1) Whatever type of visa you are applying for the rules and , more particularly,what is required to satisfy them , should be crystal clear. For example the visitors visa. You are told that you need to show when you are going, for how long , where and (if applicable) with whom you are staying, and how you are going to finance it without sponging off the state. Also you must show "reason to return to Thailand" . Ignoring for the moment the last bit, all the rest are factual and not subjective. It is quite easy to provide written documentary evidence (flight tickets, reserved hotel accomodation , bank account in Thailand ) to satisfy the above. If staying with a boy/girl friend settled in the UK then again easy to show written proof of where they live, their status in that property, and their bank account details if they happen to be sponsering the applicant. The Home Office should decide what levels of savings they require as guidelines for meeting the financial side and what accomodation they feel is the minimum standard acceptable to them .

Now if this was stated clearly, on their websites, then no-one should be applying for the vv until they can satisfy these criteria. However , my guess is that most people will find a way to meet these requirements so it shouldn't be a problem .

So what i am saying is that there should be like a checklist of things required and the Home Office websites should be updated to give minimum acceptable levels that have to be met. Now this is all factual so not open to interpretation thus not open to abuse or misinterpretation by an ECO. Its a little like 100 people wanting to go to Tesco's to buy a chicken . If Tesco says the price is £3.99 and in order to buy it applicants must present themselves at a store within opening hours and also be in possession of the means to pay for it then precise criteria is established that is CLEAR to all. It is reasonable to say to applicants don't apply until you can reach this criteria , but that if the 100 people who wish to buy the chicken them go to Tesco's , they must be allowed to buy it , not have an ECO take a few aside and say they don't find their hairstyle credible so they will refuse . Get the point ??

The "reason to return" bit is the little safeguard the Home Office build in to allow ECO's who, for whatever reason don't want to grant the visa , a lifeline to refuse. Because it is subjective and open to different interpretations by different ECO's. So 2 identical cases can be presented and 1 allowed and 1 refused. Can't be right can it ?? Certainly in first time applications i feel this rule should be removed completely . No-one can prove reason to return . First time applicants should not have to satisfy this as they have no negative history to suggest they are anything other than trustworthy.

This "CLEAR RULES" policy can be similarly adapted to other visas like student, settlement , fiancee etc. So if someone can prove everything on the checklist then they MUST be given the visa , and the ECO cannot request an interview because, if they do satify the criteria , why should they have to endure an interview?? Also if they cannot complete the checklist then don't apply until you can . I can't see a set of circumstances where someone wanting to visit the UK cannot meet the requiremnets anyway. Most posts here are from boy friends who want to bring their girlfriends to the UK for a few weeks . Hardly ever do you get a post from someone who has no assets and so couldn't prove the requirements. So in practise it doesn't appear to be a problem . Most of the problem cases here are only problem cases because they fall foul of the "reason to return" clause.

This way only those who met the criteria would apply and , ergo, if they meet the criteria then they will get the visa . That way there will be less appeals and less work for the ECO's all round

2) Second point i would like to make is that several of the key posters on this excellent site constantly say to those refused words to the effect of " well never mind you can always appeal..." or "...procedures are in place to rectify any injustice by review or appeal ..."

This angers me immensely. The review refferred to is the bit where if you aren't satisfied you can ask the ECM to look at it again. Do you really think that , except in the most obvious cases of injustice, that the ECM spends anytime at all looking at these refusals? Of course not . They are rubber stamped through and the bog standard appeal if you want letter is sent out which begins "having carefully reviewed your case i regret...." what a laugh . Carefully reviewed ?? I don't think so. The old boys act where they stick up for their staff is prevalent, as in most other companies come to that. THATS NOT JUSTICE IS IT ??

As for the appeal process, it can take up to a year although i admit this is now finally coming down to half that or even less. The problem here is that why should you have to wait at all for injustice to be corrected ? You are not given compensation at the end so why should you endure the suffering ?Also the appeal time starts to tick from when the British Embassy sends off the papers and they are received in the UK. Now the Embassy is given (i think this is still the same now) 19 weeks to reply and send off the papers. In my case they took ...have a guess how long to send them??...tick tock tick tock...times up ....yes you guessed it ...19 weeks to the day !!! Now is that co-incidence that they dragged it out to the last hour or is it spitefullness ?? I know which i think . And they are allowed to do this because they kn ow they can . They are a law unto themselves accountable only to beurocrats and not to the people directly . Anyone here think thats fair ??

Other points i would like to raise....

3) why are the British Embassy staff at Bangkok so bloody rude ?? (not all but some and thats unacceptable)

4) why are people on this forum so grateful and relieved that they get given what they are entitled to anyway ? Answer is because they know that the staff at the Embassy are peppered with b*st*rds and they realise they were lucky enough to avoid them .

5) Ask yourself why someone would want to do the job of ECO in the first place.. as bit like why does someone chose to be a traffic warden ?? You have to be a certain type of person do you not ?

6) I can't avoid laughing in disbelief when people post here saying that they have managed to get a visa for their wife to come and live in the UK with them and how pleased they are . You are entitled to it , after all you are married so why be so grateful ?? I can understand people posting to give their good news , its the often excessive gratitude that i don't understand .

7) Sometimes you see a post where the originator is contemplating moving to another country to get married because of problems with getting their intended to the UK or even , and this one made me scream , someone who was being advised to take a holiday in a Euroland country so they could meet their Thai friend there because they were worried the Thai person may not get a visitors visa to visit the UK. I mean how insane is that ?? They only want a holiday in the UK but are thinking seriously of meeting instead in a third ,neutral country. All because of worries about not getting a vv !! I practically choked !!

8) Why is it that , having coped very easily for years , the British Embassy in Bangkok now cites overcrowding as a reason to refuse entry to anyone other than the applicant ? They are sitting on a huge plot of land and they say they are overcrowded... rubbish !! In all the times i have been there i have never seen anything even resembling overcrowding. Of course it is a good way of ensuring that UK sponsers can't be witness to what is happening and also are thus denied the previous right to see the ECO concerned directly after any refusal to discuss it .

9) Why don't they break down the statistics for each category of visa application . What are the figures for visitors visas for the last year and previous years ? The percentage refused of those would make more interesting reading i think.

All these points are of course my own opinions but i feel sure that some points raised are worthy of answering . To keep saying that each case is different (in fact they are similar .. Thai person wants vv.. whats different about that ?) is a way used to justify giving ECO's the power to make subjective judgements when none is needed . To blather on about our phone boxes being riddled with calling cards ...who cares ?? So an handful of Thais come here and go on the game .. big deal !! If you don't like it don't phone them ..easy. You can't assume the majority will do what a minority do.

Sorry for the length of this post but it is mainly for the benefit of my critics who have put in considerable effort to reply to me so i felt i should do the same .

Finally one fact remains . Can anyone doubt that getting a visa is very very stressful , that very many people feel the staff are arrogant and rude (see recent poll initiated by GU22 when only 25% were happy with the ECO's ) , that you have to provide phonebook sized folders loaded with documents because you are fearful that to do any less could put your application at risk, ... that basically getting a visa is far far harder than the websites lead you to believe . And that this situation IS therefore unacceptable ........

SILOMFAN

You have not really posted anything new, and despite my challenge to you to actually produce evidence to back up your claims and arguments; you have not done so. However, to take your points in order.

1) Whatever type of visa you are applying for the rules and , more particularly,what is required to satisfy them , should be crystal clear.

They are, as far as they can be. The guidance notes give guidance as to what is required. They do not say that if you can provide x,y & z you will get the visa because that would be totally unfair. Not everyone can provide x, y & z! The current system allows discretion, your suggestion doesn't. How is that more fair?

The vast majority of visas, of all types, are issued without the need for an interview because the paperwork shows that the criteria are met. If the paper work doesn't, then the applicant gets a second chance to present their case at interview. Under your proposal, this second chance would be gone. How is that more fair?

Reason to return is difficult to prove beyond doubt. But it doesn't have to be, ECOs work on the balance of probabilities. Many applicants have been granted a visit visa despite not having what could be called a concrete reason to return, as posts on this and other forums show.

2) Second point i would like to make is that several of the key posters on this excellent site constantly say to those refused words to the effect of " well never mind you can always appeal..." or "...procedures are in place to rectify any injustice by review or appeal ..."

They are there to do just that. Would you rather there was no appeal system?

The fact is that your appeal did not go ahead because your boyfriend successfully applied for a civil partners visa and so the appeal became irrelevant.

You constantly carp on about how the Bangkok embassy in general and a particular ECO are biased against you. You have produced no evidence of this except your own prejudice. You have also again chosen to ignore the point that your boyfriend's previous visa difficulties have one main cause; his previous breaches of the immigration rules. If he hadn't broken the rules before he probably wouldn't have had these difficulties. You say "First time applicants should not have to satisfy this as they have no negative history to suggest they are anything other than trustworthy." Well, your boyfriend wasn't a first time applicant and did have a negative history. So, if your proposals were to be adopted he shouldn't have bothered to apply, should he?

3) why are the British Embassy staff at Bangkok so bloody rude ?? (not all but some and thats unacceptable)

Rudeness is not acceptable from anyone, let alone a public official. But maybe you are mistaking a brusque, business like manner for rudeness. If an embassy official is rude to anyone then rather than moaning about it on a forum, complain to their manager.

You will now no doubt say that that is no good as they all stick together, but have you tried?

4) why are people on this forum so grateful and relieved that they get given what they are entitled to anyway ? Answer is because they know that the staff at the Embassy are peppered with b*st*rds and they realise they were lucky enough to avoid them .

I have often seen posts on this and other sites expressing gratitude to those that have given them advice. I have also seen posts expressing surprise at the quick and courteous service they have received at the embassy. But expressing gratitude to the embassy staff? Will you please post a link to one of these, because I cannot remember any!

Are people entitled to a visa? Where does it say that they are? Perhaps you could provide a link. (BTW, the European convention on human rights does say that everyone is entitled to a family life, but where does it say that that family life has to be in the UK?)

5) Ask yourself why someone would want to do the job of ECO in the first place.. as bit like why does someone chose to be a traffic warden ?? You have to be a certain type of person do you not ?

I don't know, why don't you ask Scouse, as he used to be one. I would imagine they are ordinary civil servants who make certain career choices.

Tell me, do you "have to be a certain type of person" to be a homosexual? (If that annoys you, it was meant to; in order to make a point.)

I wont deal with your point 6) as it's just a repetition of your point 4). Please arrange your thoughts before posting, it makes your arguments a lot clearer.

7)......someone who was being advised to take a holiday in a Euroland country so they could meet their Thai friend there because they were worried the Thai person may not get a visitors visa to visit the UK. I mean how insane is that ?? They only want a holiday in the UK but are thinking seriously of meeting instead in a third ,neutral country. All because of worries about not getting a vv !! I practically choked !!

Your selective memory is playing tricks again, like when you leaped on a post about the Australian system as proof that you were right about the UK one!

The poster concerned was not advised anything. He asked about how to get a Schengen visa as he didn't want his "girlfriend" to come to the UK as he was married! That was his original story, anyway. His responses and subsequent disappearance lead one to one of 2 conclusions:-

1) He was a troll.

2) He was trying to bring a girl to Europe for professional reasons.

8) Why is it that , having coped very easily for years , the British Embassy in Bangkok now cites overcrowding as a reason to refuse entry to anyone other than the applicant ? They are sitting on a huge plot of land and they say they are overcrowded... rubbish !! In all the times i have been there i have never seen anything even resembling overcrowding. Of course it is a good way of ensuring that UK sponsers can't be witness to what is happening and also are thus denied the previous right to see the ECO concerned directly after any refusal to discuss it .

I don't know when you last went, but it was certainly overcrowded in 2000 and 2001 when I went, with nowhere to sit and people spilling out into the courtyard.

Sponsors have never been allowed into interviews, for reasons outlined in Diplomatic Service Procedures - Entry clearance, Volume 1 - General instructions (12/07/05) 13.16 Attendance of Sponsors at visa interviews. Neither have they had the right to speak to the ECO, although the ECO may still speak to them separately if necessary. This is still possible.

9) Why don't they break down the statistics for each category of visa application . What are the figures for visitors visas for the last year and previous years ? The percentage refused of those would make more interesting reading i think.

Er...they do! Haven't you even bothered to look at the figures! Here is the link again; Entry clearance - facts and figures. I suggest that you actually take the time to look at them!

As to your last paragraph, yes. Applying for a visa can be a stressful and worrying time. Do you know what is the main cause for it being so? People like you who have a personal axe to grind and ignore all the evidence that contradicts their prejudice continuously posting a as you have above! As Scouse said

If a visa naif were to read SF's posts in isolation, their alarmist nature would perhaps deter even the most worthy of visa applicants. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of applications meet with success and, of course, we don't hear from those people on fora such as these.

SF, I challenged you to produce actual evidence of you claims, not another rant based on misinterpretation of other posts and your own bitter prejudiced opinion. I'm still waiting.

Edited February 23, 2006 by GU22

[vinny]

GU22, Some corrections to your answers to question 8.

Sponsors have never been allowed into interviews, for reasons outlined in Diplomatic Service Procedures - Entry clearance, Volume 1 - General instructions (12/07/05) 13.16 Attendance of Sponsors at visa interviews.

Not quite. It actually says:

Current policy is that Posts have discretion on whether or not to admit sponsors to interviews. There is no blanket ban on sponsors attending. Equally they have no automatic right to attend. It is preferable to conduct the interview with the applicant alone, seeing the sponsor separately if necessary.

and further down:

at the discretion of the ECO sponsors or representatives (e.g. solicitors) may be permitted to attend an interview with an applicant, but will be given observer status only.They may make notes but should not intervene.

Neither have they had the right to speak to the ECO, although the ECO may still speak to them separately if necessary.

Sponsers can speak to the ECO.

If a sponsor wants to speak to an ECO it can help to do this seperately from the interview with the applicant. This jelps ECO's to verify that the information presented by both is consistent

and further down:

Posts should meet requests from accompanying sponsors who ask to speak to the ECO dealing with the application

Edited February 23, 2006 by vinny

[GU22]

GU22, Some corrections to your answers to question 8.

Poor wording on my part. Apologies, and thanks to Vinny for the correction.

Doesn't change the thrust of my argument, though.

[vinny]

Doesn't change the thrust of my argument, though.

More than that. I think that it supports your argument even more.

[Rj 81]

GU22, I 'm not saying the system should be perfect, I know that is isn't a possibility. I don't agree with the open door theory either, no way. The present system IMPROVED is what I am talking about.

To me, it sounds like you thought that something should be changed so you wrote to your MP ect... now you find that nothing has changed, you think well thats the way it is, if I can't change it, no one can. Instead, now your trying to tell silomfan he can't also and your probably right, he can't, as you couldn't.

That said he, I and anyone else unfortunate enough to have to go through the process is entitled to his opinion that the system can / should be improved.

I am only concerned in making it a better system. One where some 70 odd year old millionare can't bring over a 21 year old woman, and one where a tax paying, hard working, British citizen can bring his G/f to the UK without himself or his G/f being treated like shit or suffering any prejudice.

[GU22]

The present system IMPROVED is what I am talking about.

But how? All the suggestions put forward by Silomfan, rigid rules and no discretion, would make it more difficult for ordinary working people like thee and me to get visas, particularly visit visas, for our friends, family and loved ones, not easier!

if I can't change it, no one can.

I am not that arrogant, and am sorry if I come across as such. I used that example for 2 reasons:-

1) To show how difficult it is.

2) To show SF that if he wants to enlist the aid of politicians he had better come up with more than the ill thought out arguments he currently propounds.

That said he, I and anyone else unfortunate enough to have to go through the process is entitled to his opinion that the system can / should be improved.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if one wants to convince others to change their mind and agree then one needs to have answers and evidence. Something SF hasn't been able to do.

I am surprised that the word you use to describe bringing your partner to the UK to be with you is "unfortunate!"

I am only concerned in making it a better system. One where some 70 odd year old millionare can't bring over a 21 year old woman,......

The most vociferous and self important unsuccessful sponsor I have ever come across was someone like this. The main thrust of his argument being "Don't they know who I am?"

Having said that; why can't a 70 year old millionaire get a visa for a 21 year old woman? Who are we to judge their relationship?

one where a tax paying, hard working, British citizen can bring his G/f to the UK without himself or his G/f being treated like shit or suffering any prejudice.

Happens all the time. 2648 settlement visas issued by the Bangkok embassy alone last year. Edited February 23, 2006 by GU22

[thai3]

I am only concerned in making it a better system. One where some 70 odd year old millionare can't bring over a 21 year old woman, and one where a tax paying, hard working, British citizen can bring his G/f to the UK without himself or his G/f being treated like shit or suffering any prejudice.

well it seems to me with only a little experience that it could be made a lot easier, not in making a decision, but in giving applicants the correct information at the start.

On the website they say (for a visitor visa anyway) that no particular evidence is required other than a sponsor letter. I very much doubt if any woman turning up with only such a letter has ever been given a visa, not in recent times anyway.

At a first application they tend to leave you in the dark as to what they will be looking for so it puts the applicant at a great disadvantage. Of course as soon as they do turn you down you have something to work on. My mrs went first to show them the documents and they said OK except put more passport pages in, but then turned her down for lack of documentary proof at interview.why not tell people what they should include at that point?

Interesting that the guys from lets say USA have a different view of their embassy and seem to think they are there to serve them. I think to many brits are conditioned to feel they are doing us a favour by seeing us at all. I don't know if they are rude or not, the thai's I have found very good. The system is hardly user friendly and I expect they don't want it to be.

Edited February 23, 2006 by thai3

[Rj 81]

But how? All the suggestions put forward by Silomfan, rigid rules and no discretion, would make it more difficult for ordinary working people like thee and me to get visas, particularly visit visas, for our friends, family and loved ones, not easier!

I don't agree with silomfan's suggested changes. More subtle changes to improve like I mentioned in a thread the other day, here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...76entry645076

I am not that arrogant, and am sorry if I come across as such. I used that example for 2 reasons:-

1) To show how difficult it is.

I didn't mean it to come across as though I think you are arrogant, I don't. Rules change, one man on a mission may not be able to do it, but alot of people all pissed off could.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if one wants to convince others to change their mind and agree then one needs to have answers and evidence. Something SF hasn't been able to do.

I agree

I am surprised that the word you use to describe bringing your partner to the UK to be with you is "unfortunate!"

Very good, you know what I mean GU22!

The most vociferous and self important unsuccessful sponsor I have ever come across was someone like this. The main thrust of his argument being "Don't they know who I am?"

Having said that; why can't a 70 year old millionaire get a visa for a 21 year old woman? Who are we to judge their relationship?

I read on here somewhere that this did actually happen!! Also why are they so good at refusing genuine people and yet there are so many illegals in the UK? Pisses me off.

Happens all the time. 2648 settlement visas issued by the Bangkok embassy alone last year.

Good for them, what about the ones refused?

[thai3]

The 70 year old sounds like the ex british gas head from brighton who brought over a young girl. She buggered off after a couple of weeks complaining ' he promise to introduce me to friends but only introduce me to hoover and washing up' How do these guys fly over there for the first time, marry someone they just met from an agency and the next thing is they get a visa first time? Years ago in the early 90's thais I knew swore blind you could pay under the counter at the embassy for a visa.

[Rj 81]

The 70 year old sounds like the ex british gas head from brighton who brought over a young girl. She buggered off after a couple of weeks complaining ' he promise to introduce me to friends but only introduce me to hoover and washing up' How do these guys fly over there for the first time, marry someone they just met from an agency and the next thing is they get a visa first time? Years ago in the early 90's thais I knew swore blind you could pay under the counter at the embassy for a visa.

What system that allows this to happen doesn't need improving GU22? .

[GU22]

Good for them, what about the ones refused?

383. Why were they refused? Obviously I don't know, but from what I have read here and on other forums I would suggest lack of preparation is the main cause.

What system that allows this to happen doesn't need improving GU22? .

I cannot remember the details of this case, though I do vaguely remember reading about it. I have no idea where or how they met nor how long they had known each other. However, if Thai3 is correct (it could happen) then all I can say is that we have both agreed ECOs can and do make mistakes.

Thai3 posted

On the website they say (for a visitor visa anyway) that no particular evidence is required other than a sponsor letter.

I suggest that you actually read the website. From Guidance - Visitors (INF 2)

What supporting documents should I include with my application?

You should include all the documents you can to show that you qualify for entry to the UK as a visitor. If you do not, we may refuse your application.

As a guide, you should include:

bank statements, payslips, or some other evidence to show that you can pay for the trip and that you have enough money to support yourself and any dependants without working or getting any help from public funds, and

evidence that you intend to leave the UK at the end of your visit (for example, a letter from your employer).

If you are visiting family or friends you will need:

a letter from your sponsor (the person you are visiting) explaining your relationship with them and the purpose of your visit.

If your sponsor will be supporting you during your visit, or paying for the cost of the visit, you will need:

payslips, bank statements, or some other evidence to show that they have enough money to support you.

Reading the guidance notes properly means you may be more successful next time! Edited February 23, 2006 by GU22

[silomfan]

Wow...considering how boring this feud (if thats the right word) is supposed to be between GU22 and myself, i am amazed how many people have read it and replied so far.

Its going to take me a while to read and re-read all the comments but a quick look shows that GU22 has a lot of support , which is hardly surprising as its easier to defend a government system than critisise it . And of course GU22 is one of the most senior members here (certainly in this field of British Embassy matters) and is not used to being contradicted. I suspect not many dare to do so.

This thread began actually on Wayners thread (which i apologise for hi-jacking) and i want to thank TONY123

Hit the wrong button ...sorry ....to continue....

I wish to thank TONY123 who did agree with everything i said which proves that at least 2 people in the world don't like the system.

I'm off to read the posts now and thanks to all who have participated so far. (would be nice to hear from someone who supports me ...just to add a little balance to the arguement)

SILOMFAN

GU22, Some corrections to your answers to question 8.

Poor wording on my part. Apologies, and thanks to Vinny for the correction.

Doesn't change the thrust of my argument, though.

Not poor wording , you just got it wrong !!

And then Vinny goes on to say that this error actually supports your arguement even more ...how is that ?? i can't see how this mistake actually strenthens your point ..

I was saying that this overcrowding thing is rubbish...i have been to the Embassy i guess , realistically, about 20 times since 1993 and i have never seen it remotely overcrowded . Yes its busy but its also huge and lots of people wait outside in the courtyard where they can chat more freely anyway. Now could it be that i have just been lucky on SO many occasions or could it be that its not overcrowded. Like i say , this ban does conveniently stop the sponser seeing the ECO after the refusal as they can hardly do that if they are forced to wait outside in the sweltering heat and dust of Wireless Road can they ??

SILOMFAN

[silomfan]

RJ81 , you say you don't agree with my suggested changes but there isn't a lot of difference between what you suggested on your thread you pasted a link to , and what i am saying . We both agree on making it more clear (and thats my number 1 change, more important than the others,) and allowing sponsers to be present . Where exactly do we disagree ??

SILOMFAN

[Rj 81]

RJ81 , you say you don't agree with my suggested changes but there isn't a lot of difference between what you suggested on your thread you pasted a link to , and what i am saying . We both agree on making it more clear (and thats my number 1 change, more important than the others,) and allowing sponsers to be present . Where exactly do we disagree ??

SILOMFAN

Your idea of either meeting the requirements or not, is what I don't agree with. I used to think the same but I have changed my mind on that one, as GU22 says it would be discriminatory and unfair to applicants unable to meet the requirements.

GU22 said,

I cannot remember the details of this case, though I do vaguely remember reading about it. I have no idea where or how they met nor how long they had known each other. However, if Thai3 is correct (it could happen) then all I can say is that we have both agreed ECOs can and do make mistakes.

So you are saying that even though this happened, and genuine people are refused, you don't think the system needs to be improved? Edited February 23, 2006 by Rj 81

[silomfan]

Rj81 and GU22, i don't understand how this system of more rigid rules would be unfair.

Are you understanding me correctly?? What i am saying is why don't the websites make it crystal clear exactly what is the required documents for a given visa , which they kinda do already but not in enough detail, what criteria are to be met (with figures , not just vague comments as now) and that therefore if these are met the visa IS issued . End of story . Now how will that be more unfair or lead to more refusals? Presumably people wouldn't apply until they did meet the criteria , and then do so knowing they will get it . You say that would be unfair to those who don't meet the criteria . Well they get refused now anyway !!

I am making it easier not more difficult by saying that "reason to return" should be removed as this is where human error on the part of ECO's can lead to injustice. And why have this rule for first time applicants anyway ?

Hve i made it any clearer to you now ?

SILOMFAN

[Rj 81]

Rj81 and GU22, i don't understand how this system of more rigid rules would be unfair.

Are you understanding me correctly?? What i am saying is why don't the websites make it crystal clear exactly what is the required documents for a given visa , which they kinda do already but not in enough detail, what criteria are to be met (with figures , not just vague comments as now) and that therefore if these are met the visa IS issued . End of story . Now how will that be more unfair or lead to more refusals? Presumably people wouldn't apply until they did meet the criteria , and then do so knowing they will get it . You say that would be unfair to those who don't meet the criteria . Well they get refused now anyway !!

I am making it easier not more difficult by saying that "reason to return" should be removed as this is where human error on the part of ECO's can lead to injustice. And why have this rule for first time applicants anyway ?

What if a applicant could never meet the exact criterea set, yet there were absolutley genuine?

That wouldn't be fair would it?

Edited February 23, 2006 by Rj 81

[thai3]

What if a applicant could never meet the exact criterea set, yet there were absolutley genuine?

That wouldn't be fair would it?

seems some of the objections are next to impossible to satisfy take 2 from our rejections

1 Husband only goes to thailand twice a year ( SO WHAT?)

2 no evidence husband will retire to LOS in the near future (told them 2-4 years, what has that to do with a visitor visa)

Turn up at gatwick though and claim PA and you can't lose, we are even paying them 2000 quid to sod off again when the calim and appeal for PA get turned down, bar.

[silomfan]

What if a applicant could never meet the exact criterea set, yet there were absolutley genuine?

That wouldn't be fair would it?

No it wouldn't , but i can't imagine what bits of criteria you are referring to that they couldn't meet (excluding the reason to return bit which i am suggesting should be removed anyway because its not factual like the rest) . Can you maybe give a couple of examples ??

SILOMFAN

What if a applicant could never meet the exact criterea set, yet there were absolutley genuine?

That wouldn't be fair would it?

seems some of the objections are next to impossible to satisfy take 2 from our rejections

1 Husband only goes to thailand twice a year ( SO WHAT?)

2 no evidence husband will retire to LOS in the near future (told them 2-4 years, what has that to do with a visitor visa)

Turn up at gatwick though and claim PA and you can't lose, we are even paying them 2000 quid to sod off again when the calim and appeal for PA get turned down, bar.

Not sure about his last sentence , but i agree with thai3 in his points 1) and 2) . I also say ....SO WHAT ?? how is either objection of any relevance to a vv??

SILOMFAN

[thai3]

I know these points were made because mrs sent me the refusal form yeaterday, some things you can say well ok they might think we are not genuine so lets give them the documents to prove it, but these points cannot be proved as they seem just things they don't seem to like. The fact that I only go twice a year and might be retiring there can hardly be satisfied with documents, except the passport pages and then they turn theit noses up and ask why only twice a year. If I were going say 4 times a year the response might be well why do you need a VV if he comes here so often.

[silomfan]

I know these points were made because mrs sent me the refusal form yeaterday, some things you can say well ok they might think we are not genuine so lets give them the documents to prove it, but these points cannot be proved as they seem just things they don't seem to like. The fact that I only go twice a year and might be retiring there can hardly be satisfied with documents, except the passport pages and then they turn theit noses up and ask why only twice a year. If I were going say 4 times a year the response might be well why do you need a VV if he comes here so often.

Exactly ... you can't win . So like i say , take away all this subjective stuff and just replace it with clear criteria. Why do we (we meaning all UK citizens affected by immigration issues)put up with all this nonsense . Get onto your MP and complain and complain and complain . It does produce results if enough people do it .

SILOMFAN

[thai3]

Exactly ... you can't win . So like i say , take away all this subjective stuff and just replace it with clear criteria. Why do we (we meaning all UK citizens affected by immigration issues)put up with all this nonsense . Get onto your MP and complain and complain and complain . It does produce results if enough people do it .

SILOMFAN

Well if we get turned down again at appeal I certainly will be doing this. The interpreter told the mrs it's easier to get a settlement visa (no idea if its true) but why pay the buggers almost another 300 quid when that's not what you need. I must say thinking way back they do make you feel like you are at the DHSS claiming for something you're not entitiled to.

[silomfan]

Exactly ... you can't win . So like i say , take away all this subjective stuff and just replace it with clear criteria. Why do we (we meaning all UK citizens affected by immigration issues)put up with all this nonsense . Get onto your MP and complain and complain and complain . It does produce results if enough people do it .

SILOMFAN

Well if we get turned down again at appeal I certainly will be doing this. The interpreter told the mrs it's easier to get a settlement visa (no idea if its true) but why pay the buggers almost another 300 quid when that's not what you need. I must say thinking way back they do make you feel like you are at the DHSS claiming for something you're not entitiled to.

Its certainly not easier to get a settlement visa , and why should it be ? Doesn't make sense. Why wait for the appeal to start complaining? (time the Bangkok Embassy take to send the papers you will both be a lot older !!) If you do it now he/she could write you a supporting letter. You could then send it to the ECM who ,don't forget, will "review" the refusal. HeHe that last bit was a joke ...like hel_l they will review the refusal.

SILOMFAN

[Rj 81]

Silomfan, I can't remember who it was, but a member on here recently had the refusal decision overturned by the ECM.

[silomfan]

Silomfan, I can't remember who it was, but a member on here recently had the refusal decision overturned by the ECM.

Yes i remember that as well . Memorable because i can't recall any others .. can you ?? Wonder how many don't get overturned as a percentage of those who asked . ? Wouldn't that be an interesting statistic .. maybe GU22 has the answer.. he is the "statistics " man on this forum.

SILOMFAN

ps maybe you missed it but i asked re your previous post of examples of circumstances where an applicant couldn't meet the (rather simple) criteria laid down? Its just that i don't think many would apply unless they had ticked all the boxes themselves so i don't see how they could fail to meet them . Examples would be nice

[thai3]

[its certainly not easier to get a settlement visa , and why should it be ? Doesn't make sense. Why wait for the appeal to start complaining? (time the Bangkok Embassy take to send the papers you will both be a lot older !!) If you do it now he/she could write you a supporting letter. You could then send it to the ECM who ,don't forget, will "review" the refusal. HeHe that last bit was a joke ...like hel_l they will review the refusal.

SILOMFAN

It's a farce then appealing? I expect though that after a failed appeal people apply again with the same evidence they presented at the appeal but then get granted a visa? otherwise hardly anyone would get one, but then I am starting to wonder how they ever do. Are some interviewers harsher than others do you think? As for writing to the MP it usually takes her weeks to reply.

[Nignoy]

But how? All the suggestions put forward by Silomfan, rigid rules and no discretion, would make it more difficult for ordinary working people like thee and me to get visas, particularly visit visas, for our friends, family and loved ones, not easier!

I don't agree with silomfan's suggested changes. More subtle changes to improve like I mentioned in a thread the other day, here http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?sh...76entry645076

I am not that arrogant, and am sorry if I come across as such. I used that example for 2 reasons:-

1) To show how difficult it is.

I didn't mean it to come across as though I think you are arrogant, I don't. Rules change, one man on a mission may not be able to do it, but alot of people all pissed off could.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if one wants to convince others to change their mind and agree then one needs to have answers and evidence. Something SF hasn't been able to do.

I agree

I am surprised that the word you use to describe bringing your partner to the UK to be with you is "unfortunate!"

Very good, you know what I mean GU22!

The most vociferous and self important unsuccessful sponsor I have ever come across was someone like this. The main thrust of his argument being "Don't they know who I am?"

Having said that; why can't a 70 year old millionaire get a visa for a 21 year old woman? Who are we to judge their relationship?

I read on here somewhere that this did actually happen!! Also why are they so good at refusing genuine people and yet there are so many illegals in the UK? Pisses me off.

Happens all the time. 2648 settlement visas issued by the Bangkok embassy alone last year.

Good for them, what about the ones refused?

I have been following this thread with great amusement,surely all these guidelines are there to weed out the import of illegal labour into UK, a well known thai business family in Guildford Surrey,brought a thai lady on a legalwork visa in 1989 for their restaurant in Farnborough,the restaurant went bust in 1993, the owners had conveniently lost the womans passport, this poor woman has since then been trying to become legal in UK ever since, this is not a troll, until we left UK we ran a thai social club in Farnborough hants, and we still are in touch with lots of thais in the guildford area, at least the embassy no longer has the power to annul marriages like they used to have, but that is another story, Nignoy

[tony123]

I thought that our settlement visa application was thoroughly researched and presented yet the ECO declined it for no apparent reason, yes the ECM did review the decision and sent a bog standard 'see no reason to overturn the decision , see you at the appeal'.

We with the help of Scouse did get the decision overturned without having to wait for the appeal but where is the fairness when one persons prejudice can be allowed to ruin two peoples lives ?

It seems any visa decision is based on one persons judgement and without any accountability this person can make an arbitrary decision which can literally pull two peoples lives apart.

I am with Silom on this one and there needs to be a system in place that protects the applicants/the innocents as it seems in the eyes of the ECO's you are presumed guilty without any good reason.

[silomfan]

I thought that our settlement visa application was thoroughly researched and presented yet the ECO declined it for no apparent reason, yes the ECM did review the decision and sent a bog standard 'see no reason to overturn the decision , see you at the appeal'.

We with the help of Scouse did get the decision overturned without having to wait for the appeal but where is the fairness when one persons prejudice can be allowed to ruin two peoples lives ?

It seems any visa decision is based on one persons judgement and without any accountability this person can make an arbitrary decision which can literally pull two peoples lives apart.

I am with Silom on this one and there needs to be a system in place that protects the applicants/the innocents as it seems in the eyes of the ECO's you are presumed guilty without any good reason.

Spot on Tony .. i hope you are giving the Embassy hel_l for TRYING to ruin your lives and not just keeping quiet .

All the best

SILOMFAN

[vinny]

Silomfan,

And then Vinny goes on to say that this error actually supports your arguement even more ...how is that ?? i can't see how this mistake actually strenthens your point ..

The guidelines are actually less restrictive than what GU22 had said, but they do leave the sponser's attendance to the discretion of the ECOs.

Current policy is that Posts have discretion on whether or not to admit sponsors to interviews.

The guidelines, being less restrictive, strengthens GU22's point. However, improper use of discretion would support your position.

[vinny]

Silomfan,

1) Whatever type of visa you are applying for the rules and , more particularly,what is required to satisfy them , should be crystal clear.

I tend to agree with GU22's answer. To cover every possible situation with the rules would imply that the rules can be made to be complete. Unfortunately, the rules can never be complete. According to Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, it is not logically possible!