Uk Visas, Silomfan Vs. Gu22

[the gent]

Silomfan's interminable diatribe on the UK visa system in general, and the ecos in particular, leads him to conclude that the only fair system is one that removes any element of critical assessment of the visa applicant's credibility. The reasons why that is not possible, nor even desirable, have been given in previous threads which Silomfan studiously ignores much to the evident chagrin of GU22, a man I have come to admire for his sheer stamina alone!

Ultimately, the only system that would find favour with Silomfan is the one that accords with his definition of fairness i.e. Silomfan cannot be wrong.

Which of course is why all argument is futile!

[Prakanong2005]

Maybe a "pre-screening" of docs could have advantages ie

Evidence of Relationship - pre-screen and applicant told it is fine and no more dcumentation required or documented clarification sought

Evidence of place to live - again as above - is it satidfactory

Evidence of no recourse to public funds - as above

This pre-screening would surely save time and money - in the area I work (Clinical Trials) this is done as it saves time and money and can be carried out by cheaper and less qualified staff (although still qualified to do this screening as it could be a nurse or Junior Dr)

You would think with all the govt emphasis on trying to improve business process's and cut costs they could look at this.

This is not in placce of an interview of course and I know a less formal process seems to be in place but by formalising the process expectations on both sides can be managed - its simply good business practice and communication between customer/client and the busness.

On another note how do those in arranged marriages or have just met through a marriage agency one week and marry the next prove relationship?

[thai3]

Maybe a "pre-screening" of docs could have advantages ie

Evidence of Relationship - pre-screen and applicant told it is fine and no more dcumentation required or documented clarification sought

Evidence of place to live - again as above - is it satidfactory

Evidence of no recourse to public funds - as above

This pre-screening would surely save time and money - in the area I work (Clinical Trials) this is done as it saves time and money and can be carried out by cheaper and less qualified staff (although still qualified to do this screening as it could be a nurse or Junior Dr)

You would think with all the govt emphasis on trying to improve business process's and cut costs they could look at this.

This is not in placce of an interview of course and I know a less formal process seems to be in place but by formalising the process expectations on both sides can be managed - its simply good business practice and communication between customer/client and the busness.

On another note how do those in arranged marriages or have just met through a marriage agency one week and marry the next prove relationship?

good points but they do have a sort of screeening process but it seems pretty poor. They only pointed out one extra document needed when mrs visited before the interview. At the interview though three other documentary wants were pointed out. How are you expected to know what they want unless they tell you first? Seems like you have to apply once just to find out what they require to make their fickle minds up.

I assume the agencies know the ropes when it comes to getting just arrived and newly marrieds through, but I wonder what they are too. Anyone who says the system is fair or does not need improving has their head in the sand. the whole process is loaded against the applicant.

Edited February 24, 2006 by thai3

[Prakanong2005]

I agree they will have a screening process but I am saying a clearer, more transparent better communcated screening process which manages the expectations of both client/customer and service provider would benfit all, be more efficient and effective while saving money on behalf of the taxpayer.

It would not be tick all the boxes and you are in procedure and the interview would be still used as a tool where required.

I know it could be argued that this is the cae now and it may well be in a high proportion of cases that the (informal) screening does mean the applicant gets either a short interview or no interview but there are cases where two peple could provide the same documentation and one is approved and the other not.

Not trying to suggest completely re-engineering the process but totry and make business process improvements.

In the area I work as I say we have both exclusion and inclusion criteria - fail in one of these and you are out. This is the non-discretionary part - ie excluded because of age, nowhere to live, not enough money etc etc. Of course more evidence could be asked for but that would be part of the screening process.

Then follows a discretionary requirment by a skilled professional who has to be convinced the subject is correct for the study and I reliably informed of what it means and gives consent.

A visa application process could be similar - inclusion or exclusion criteria upon which there are no grey area's then the discretionary component.

Not much different to now I believe but more transparency, clear communication of the objectives and no moving goalposts - we strive for this in the private sector in very heavily regulated industries and no reason why the public sector could not do the same.

[thai3]

I only just realised the appeal process can take months so it's better just to apply again, it's a f-cking joke. First they won't tell you want you need to meet their requirements, then when they turn you down you find out, even though some may be impossible to satisfy anyway. is this just a money making scheme?

[silomfan]

This idea by Prakanong2005 makes sense although by allowing discretionary interviewing you still run the same risks as now..which is that an ECO may decide they don't like this application (e.g. they could be homophobic..it does happen) and use the fact that they can interview to try and find a reason to refuse. This is prejudice but is virtually impossible to prove so it occurs around the world every day.

However it would be a (limited) improvement on now .

I am still waiting for someone who doesn't agree with my "tick the boxes" approach to give me a couple of theoretical examples of cases where this very simple criteria couldn't be met , and yet also explain how these same cases would stand a cat in hells chance of being approved under the present system thus showing my way is more unfair and would lead to more refusals. I still can't think of any . Please enlighten me ...

To address the many points that GU22 raised in his original post on this thread in reply to mine on Wayners thread (and this is where most of you will want to switch off i guess) .....

GU22 , not for the first time i am left wondering if we are speaking the same language. I mean on the face of it we both communicate in English yet you seem to be unwilling or unable to grasp what i am saying on so many points. To try and take them in the same sort of order that you posted i will try to reply as best i can .....

1) i went into great detail to explain what i mean by clear rules (and several posters here seem to agree that the rules are not clear enough as they stand). You say its unfair to say provide x,y,and z..why?? see my question to everyone above. Why can't applicants provide info on when, where and with who they intend to go and show funds and accomodation? Are you telling me that an applicant with no funds and no-where to stay will apply under the present system and be given a visa ?? is that what you are suggesting ?

2) you quote this point out of all context by your selective use of the "quote facility". I go to some lengths to explain what is so unfair about this "review and appeal" bit, yet you use it to suggest that i am saying this shouldn't be there !! where am i saying that ? Bearing in mind this is supposed to be a thread about how to improve the current system you then go on to make personal insulting comments about my previous applications based on your (limited) knowledge of it . You choose not to address my point about being made to wait the full 19 weeks less about 12 hours for the British Embassy Bangkok to send the appeal papers into the UK. I ask you again , wasd this timing co-incidence or spitefulness? How does it look to you ?? mmmm??

3)Rudeness.. no i am not mistaking a brusque reply (and anyway why be brusque why not be pleasant ?) for rudeness, i am correctly identifying rudeness for what it was. Of course i reported it to the ECM , no response (could say that was more rudeness i guess) , my solicitor also reported it ..again just silence from the Embassy. I am not the only one here to complain about rudeness from the British Embassy am i ?

4) The point i am making (not clearly enough for you ) is that i am surprised at the apparent relief, joy and thus by default , gratitude that posters express when reporting visa success as if they are somehow being done a favour by the Embassy in granting what they can have anyway. Does that make it any clearer to you . I have not disputed that people are grateful to this forum for their advice, indeed i was and am grateful to this forum for the same , but i think you are confusing what i said with gratitude to this forum . Does that make sense?? ...even i am getting confused on how to phrase it ..hopefully you can get the point here. As to your point about being entitled to a visa , well the rules say if you can satisfy the criteria you get the visa, so doesn't that mean the same thing ? Aren't you just nit picking on wording here?

And this bit about family life ... the implication from you here, and from the Embassy in my case in the past , is that its ok for you to have family life but why have it in the UK?? Why not live in Thailand earning £1.50 a month as a teacher , living in a fan cooled room and sweating all night . (exaggeration here , but you get the point) . Answer is BECAUSE THATS WHERE WE CHOSE TO LIVE! Why can't we live in the UK?? Perhaps they would prefer Burma or North Korea ?? (one way to keep me quiet i guess) Also it was held by the courts in 1996 , i forget the case but its there in the Diplomatic Services Protocol somewhere , that just because the sponser refuses to leave the UK to be with their partner that cannot be used to show lack of intention to live together. They can demand to live in the UK ...and why shouldn't they?

I have lived all my life in the UK, i work here, my friends and family are here, my property is here. Why should i leave ?? Just because some homophobic ECO wants to be as difficult as he can ?

5)i confess i don't understand your snide comment on this point so i can't reply. It is however, in the scheme of things , only a minor point i was making.

6)Its not quite the same , as here i am talking about those who are married so have an even stronger right to live together , in the UK if thats where they chose to live. Again it doesn't deserve your sniping comment.

7)Another snide comment , this time about selective memory . However you are wrong here !! I was not referring to the example you gave but to one where a guy was asking about a vv and scouse replied suggesting they met in a neutral country to solve their problems . This is a fairly recent post if you don't believe such a post exists , certainly in the last few weeks , maybe less. So now you know this why not address the points i made , preferably without making it personal and insulting (you are starting to remind me of "the gent" another BRUSQUE person )

8) I can only say that having been there around 20 times at least since 1993 , i have never seen it overcrowded. People don't spill into the courtyard , they go out there to have a smoke , drink and chat because you can't do that inside. And you still haven't said how a sponser can see the ECO after the refusal interview if they are stuck out in the street.

9) Point taken here, although ploughing through the pages , there are 96 of them for the latest year, sometimes the figures for applications minus those granted DON'T leave the figure quoted for refusals. I must look closer to see why this is and may post later on this .

Well that covers it i think for now . I was amused that on a recent post you said that you don't think the system is completely ideal , mainly cos the fees are so high !! Never mind about the discrimination, the lottery of who you get, the farce of the "review and appeal " , all you can find to complain about are the fees !! Yes they are high and yes they serve as a way of funding the Embassy costs and yes they are exhorbitant , but it would seem from this forum that most people don't reall y care about this . They want the injustices dealt with first.

I'm off to have a cuppa now ... will check back later

SILOMFAN

[silomfan]

I only just realised the appeal process can take months so it's better just to apply again, it's a f-cking joke. First they won't tell you want you need to meet their requirements, then when they turn you down you find out, even though some may be impossible to satisfy anyway. is this just a money making scheme?

Thank God that there are still people out there who understand what an unfair system this is . However satisfying as it is to complain on this forum about it , you MUST get out there and complain to both UK Visas and your local MP. Most MP's hold surgeries a few times each month . Go to see him or her , don't write (takes too long and is more difficult to get all your points across than face to face is ) . You have a voice and you must use it . Change only comes about by protest , not by passive acceptance .

SILOMFAN

[Prakanong2005]

Discretionary interviewing could be for a number of reasons

ie

The applicant has not abided by rules in a previous visit but they do not want to exclude outright ie overstayed a VV before but is now married and wants a SV. Its not clear cut so an interview could clarify matters

The ECO want to make sure the applicant understands what is happening and is applying with "Informed consent" just as we require in Clinical Trials

I am sure this is what happens in most cases anyway but transparency all round would make for a better system.

The rejections I hear of (and have no personal experience of) where an applicant has shown months of emails, pics, evidence of contact by phone, meeting and comms with family are the same as candidates who fly through - I am talking where the reason for rejection is not enough evidence and not for another reason.

No system is ever going to be perfect and all systems need to be looked at to see if they are functioning as they should, improvements can be identified and made while quality standards adhered too.

My best pal had problems with his Japanese wife actually but I do not know all the details. She is the daughter of the head honcho of the Japanese arm of a very large oil company and he is a senior Brit Diplomat who was on the Fast Stream programme at the time - its not only just us proles have problems ;-)

[thai3]

I only just realised the appeal process can take months so it's better just to apply again, it's a f-cking joke. First they won't tell you want you need to meet their requirements, then when they turn you down you find out, even though some may be impossible to satisfy anyway. is this just a money making scheme?

Thank God that there are still people out there who understand what an unfair system this is . However satisfying as it is to complain on this forum about it , you MUST get out there and complain to both UK Visas and your local MP. Most MP's hold surgeries a few times each month . Go to see him or her , don't write (takes too long and is more difficult to get all your points across than face to face is ) . You have a voice and you must use it . Change only comes about by protest , not by passive acceptance .

SILOMFAN

Yes I just called to book and see the MP I imagine she (patricia hewitt) is quite well versed on this stuff as the constituancy comprises more foriegners than natives. I did email the embassy to ask if they don't accept going twice a year is enough how many times would be etc but no answer. Who do these people serve if not us?-peter

Edited February 24, 2006 by thai3

[GU22]

Silomfan,

You say there should be clear rules, yet you don't say what you think those rules should be. It is therefore difficult to offer a detailed critique. Perhaps you would like to enlighten us as to exactly what you think these clear rules and set criteria should be?

You use as your case for these clear rules and set in stone criteria that everyone would know where they stand, and so if they knew they could not meet these set criteria then they would not bother to apply. Therefore there would be fewer refusals.

You are, of course, correct. !00% of applicants would be successful. But there would be far fewer applicants. People who currently apply, are interviewed and then granted a visa would instead be told "Don't even bother applying because you cannot tick all the boxes!"

My step son visited us in the UK in 2004. He was at the time a student. He would have been unable to provide documents to show that he met your clear and rigid set of requirements. He would not have got his visa under your proposal. But, as the requirements are flexible, he was able to get one.

If a clear and rigid set of requirements were to be introduced, then any applicant having previously been in breach of the immigration rules would be refused. Where would that leave you and your partner?

5)i confess i don't understand your snide comment on this point so i can't reply. It is however, in the scheme of things , only a minor point i was making.

No, it was a prejudiced attack. Like all prejudice it was based totally on ignorance. My, as you call it, snide comment was an attempt to make you see this by making a similarly ignorant and prejudiced attack on you. It seems to have worked as you are now attempting to excuse this stupid remark by calling it a "minor point."

9) Point taken here, although ploughing through the pages , there are 96 of them for the latest year, sometimes the figures for applications minus those granted DON'T leave the figure quoted for refusals. I must look closer to see why this is and may post later on this .

As the figures cover all visa issuing British missions and all type of visas, the document is bound to be lengthy. There is a list of contents that will guide you to the right set of pages, then it's a simple matter of scrolling through for SE Asia and then looking for Bangkok. I am sorry if this task is too onerous for you. How do you expect to prepare a case to put to your MP if even this simple piece of research is beyond you?

The apparent discrepancy in the figures is explained on the very first page. As "ploughing through" 96 pages in order to find the first page seems beyond your capabilities, I reproduce it below.

Apparent errors in arithmetic, e.g. where the total of applications issued and refused do not equal the total of applications received,

are usually for the following reasons:

•

Applications can be carried forward from one year to another before being resolved.

•

Applications may be withdrawn during processing (but still count as an application received).

•

There may be instances of appeals received being a percentage figure greater than 100% if appeals are received from the

previous financial year (but still in the time-scale permitted).

•

Posts are also required to count all applications received (a mother and three children on one passport may count as four

applications but only one entry clearance may be issued).

•

Applications can also be referred to the Home Office for a decision to be taken, or for further enquiries to be carried out, or for

Sponsors to be interviewed. In these circumstances, delays can and do occur between the application being received and a decision being taken.

I know I have not dealt with every point you raised in your post as I am not going to repeat all that I have previously said. It is on record for those that care to look. So, in the words of the Prime Minister at PMQs; "I refer the Hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave earlier."

BTW, before getting too overjoyed at support from Thai3, be warned that he does tend to be prone to self-contradiction.

QUOTE(GU22 @ 2006-02-22 04:57:48)

QUOTE(thai3 @ 2006-02-22 03:14:06)

Am I right in thinking the service at the UK embassy is a lot worse than other countries?-peter

No, have a read of some of the posts from our transatlantic and antipodean friends about the hassles they have and you will see that getting a UK visa is a portion of micuration by comparison.

BTW, is this 'wife' the same girl you that you posted about on a different forum. You remember, the one you said you has dumped because her family asked for sinsort?

no that was not me, or if same handle an imposter I never dumped her obviously. One before we decided against going the whole way but nothing really to do with sin sott.

(source)

thai3>

Posted 19 April 2004 22:51

What a depressing if honest thread this is. Makes me wonder why anyone gets married, let alone to a thai.

Went to bkk three weeks ago to get married but saw another side to her after knowing her for more than three years.She changed her mind over no or little sinsott and when could not get own way turned quite nasty.

I have yet to meet one whose motive for marriage to a westerner was not financial, if you have got a wife who married for love well done as the odds are against it.-peter

(source)

[thai3]

)[/url]

seems like know it all is back and now that he lost the argument of the thread, he's put me on trial again. I did not post this stuff but what if I had? BTW I joined pattaya bar girls that you accused me of belonging to-as GU22 and there seems to be no record of a thai 3 posting on there. Don't worry I will not be posting on there as GU22 as I have little interest in whores and even less is shitty pattaya. You should get a life mate you obviously spend too much time on the interent, its worrying

[GU22]

It seems very strange that there are two people in Leicester named Peter who post on Thai related forums using the moniker Thai3. But if you say it is so, you must be right.

Lost the argument? How do you work that out?

[Rj 81]

QUOTE

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.

GU22, So you think that even though this happened the system doesn't need to be improved, yes or no?

silomfan, the system of set criterea would also make it easier for non genuine applicants to get a visa because the ECO would have no discretion.

Edited February 24, 2006 by Rj 81

[thai3]

It seems very strange that there are two people in Leicester named Peter who post on Thai related forums using the moniker Thai3. But if you say it is so, you must be right.

Lost the argument? How do you work that out?

So being called peter and living in leicester is a sort of internet crime is it? you seem to have an obsession about this, whatever keeps you off the streets I guess. What a pity mango sauce archives no longer exist or you'd be up all night trawling through them, rather sad don't you think?

BTW the mrs (visalady) bit slow there wern't you, says asking for a review did not work. She wants me to call the consul and tell him our marriage is genuine, but I don't think that will do any good. I think it's pretty obvious to all but the most biased you lost the argument some time ago.

[Nignoy]

It seems very strange that there are two people in Leicester named Peter who post on Thai related forums using the moniker Thai3. But if you say it is so, you must be right.

Lost the argument? How do you work that out?

So being called peter and living in leicester is a sort of internet crime is it? you seem to have an obsession about this, whatever keeps you off the streets I guess. What a pity mango sauce archives no longer exist or you'd be up all night trawling through them, rather sad don't you think?

BTW the mrs (visalady) bit slow there wern't you, says asking for a review did not work. She wants me to call the consul and tell him our marriage is genuine, but I don't think that will do any good. I think it's pretty obvious to all but the most biased you lost the argument some time ago.

Oh my you two have got your knickers in a twist, suggest a swift resolvement, handbags at 10 paces or short appearances on the weakest link, who lost or won what argument,that topics were open for discussion , why take comments as personal attacks, you both sound like a pair of balding ,beer bellied, sad pommie old farts , I,m english too by the way,Nignoy

[the gent]

Oh dear, no, Nignoy, I rather think thai3 has the unresolved issues if you pardon the dreadful americanism. Perhaps he could take up home brewing or some such like occupation as an alternative to his current hobby which patently doesn't seem to be agreeing with him. Mind you he and Silomfan would make excellent bedfellows, don't you think?

[thai3]

Oh my you two have got your knickers in a twist, suggest a swift resolvement, handbags at 10 paces or short appearances on the weakest link, who lost or won what argument,that topics were open for discussion , why take comments as personal attacks, you both sound like a pair of balding ,beer bellied, sad pommie old farts , I,m english too by the way,Nignoy

well to state the obvious he started it, and has ended up posting things he must have lifted from other sites to try and prove god knows what or why, on a place that is meant to be about visa questions. Still, I forgive him as he's a relative newcomer and being from the UK he's probably a bit frustrated.

The only unresolved issue I have of course is the visa problem which is why some people post here I believe. Of course there are those without visa problems who just want to show how important, useful and oh so clever they are, nothing wrong with that, as long as they keep to the topics in hand, but them it's too much to expect from some I guess. Interestingly when you do meet know it all show offs in person they are nothing like their internet personas, which seem to be inflated to make up for various inadequecies, strange.

Edited February 24, 2006 by thai3

[the scouser]

Peter,

I can understand your frustration at your wife being refused, but if she manifests the same propensity for vitriol and vituperation that you do, it's hardly surprising. Anyway, we can all derive a degree of schadenfreude from the fact that an ECO has given us something to have a good giggle over.

Scouse.

[thai3]

Peter,

I can understand your frustration at your wife being refused, but if she manifests the same propensity for vitriol and vituperation that you do, it's hardly surprising. Anyway, we can all derive a degree of schadenfreude from the fact that an ECO has given us something to have a good giggle over.

Scouse.

Only giving as good as I got I think, it is frustrating to be picked over and accused of posting something or other on other forums years ago that have nothing to do with the issues at hand. My wife does have the same propensity to vitriol as many thai ladies, and I would not want to be the interviewer who turns her down again

[usatrader]

My-o-My, words like Schadenfreude and Vitriol and vituperations, are indeed an example of people talking to someone but in an effort to talk past them and of someone listening not to someone but of something else all together. Hey!

Plutarch

To find a fault is easy; to do better may be difficult.

Wayne Dyer

All blame is a waste of time. No matter how much fault you find with another, and regardless of how much you blame him, it will not change you.

[Rj 81]

My-o-My, words like Schadenfreude and Vitriol and vituperations, are indeed an example of people talking to someone but in an effort to talk past them and of someone listening not to someone but of something else all together. Hey!

Sorry, but the paragraph you just posted doesn't make sense.

[Ollie]

I've been keeping half an eye on this thread with an even droopier eye that just manages to stay open.

Is there any point to it?

Its not gonna change anything, little more than an MP, even if (currently) a cabinet minister - but hope I'm proved wrong. I don't trust politicians.

GU22 and Scouser have for many, provided real advice and good luck to them for doing so.

If you don't like the rules, it seems those to have a pop at are those that create them. Not those that administer them or on this forum, interpret them to help others.

Is there any point in continuing with this thread?

[GU22]

BTW the mrs (visalady) bit slow there wern't you, says asking for a review did not work.

Visalady has posted 3 times. One post originates in Houston, one in New York, and one from the UK. Perhaps she already has her visa! Whichever, she's certainly not in Thailand.

Scouse.

Care to explain, Peter?

BTW, searching the PBG archive for Thai3 wont work, as you know. But a certain jbond used to post there and always signed his posts "-peter". Another coincidence?

[the scouser]

I think Ollie's got a valid point.

I don't like closing threads just for the sake of it, but I don't think this one is going to progress.

Scouse.