Mp's Say New Visa Rules Causing Anguish For British Families.

[theoldgit]

Further off topic posts removed

[Tony K]

A good point raised that the guy I know whose kids are by right UK nationals also that he only requires salary to support spouse. Will kids need UK passports or is Thai sufficient?

They will need British passports. If they only have Thai ones then they will need visas to enter the UK.

To apply for British passports for them, see here.

Note he will need his original long form birth certificate; if he doesn't have it he can obtain one from the GRO in the UK.

The UK cannot place time restrictions on British Citizens entering the UK. A visa request should result in the Embassy asking for the visa request to be withdrawn or just refusing it. They must use British passports to enter the UK to live.

[evadgib]

I haven't checked the entire thread so apologies if this has already been posted:)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23029195

[7by7]

See this post.

Edited June 28, 2013 by 7by7

[7by7]

The UK cannot place time restrictions on British Citizens entering the UK. A visa request should result in the Embassy asking for the visa request to be withdrawn or just refusing it. They must use British passports to enter the UK to live.

Yes, British citizens can, of course, enter the UK as often and for as long as they wish.

But they do need to show that they are British citizens.

If the only ID they have is their Thai passport, then how do they show this?

Their Thai birth certificate with the name of their British parent is not enough; unless the British parent is British otherwise than by descent then the children, if born outside the UK or a qualifying territory, wont be British. The British parent's passport wont say whether they are British by descent or otherwise than by descent.

I believe that turning up at UK immigration with just a Thai passport without a UK visa in it would result in them being refused entry; assuming the airline even let them board in the first place.

However, I am always eager to learn, so can you provide a link to the relevant rule or guidance?

The simplest (only?) way of proving they are British and so have the right to enter the UK is to obtain British passports for them.

Obviously, if someone applied for a UK visa using their British passport the ECO would tell them to withdraw it; bet they'd keep the fee, though!

But I am doubtful that if they applied for a UK visa using their Thai passports that the ECO would tell them to withdraw it. How would the ECO know that they are British?

As I am eager to learn, do you have a link to the relevant rule or guidance?

I am also unsure about your assertion that a British citizen with dual nationality must use their British passport to enter (and leave?) the UK.

Again, do you have a link to the relevant rule or guidance?

Edited June 28, 2013 by 7by7

[MaiChai]

I think its just a matter of time before someone takes the UK government to an international court on the issue of not being able to bring a spouse or child into the UK. It goes against humanitarian rights. The government will eventually have to back down on this. You can't bring your spouse to live with you in the UK when you were born here? Just my opinion.

There was another case recently where a UK lady married a Japanese man, and her husband was not allowed to stay because she could not make the 18,600 amount. The bar is too high in my opinion.

They also don't consider that your wife could take a job on minimum wage and contribute to the family income. They just ask if the spouse has a pre arranged job. Assuming a minimum wage of 6 pounds an hour, a 40 hour week and 48 weeks of work, I make that 11,520 pounds per year, which would make a difference.

[theoldgit]

Further off topic post removed, can I remind members that this thread relates the report regarding income levels for settlement visas.

[7by7]

I think its just a matter of time before someone takes the UK government to an international court on the issue of not being able to bring a spouse or child into the UK. It goes against humanitarian rights. The government will eventually have to back down on this. You can't bring your spouse to live with you in the UK when you were born here? Just my opinion.

The government are not saying that a British citizen cannot bring their family members to live in the UK with them. They are saying that in order to do so certain criteria have to be met.

This has been the case ever since immigration rules of some sort were first introduced; whenever that was ( I think the first law in England concerning this was the Status of Children Born Abroad Act, 1350.)

As said previously, the government and their lawyers have opined that the changes introduced last July do not breach any article of the European Convention on Human Rights nor the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Until and unless someone who is refused for not meeting this requirement appeals and takes their case all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, that will not change. Even then there is no guarantee the court will not agree with the government!

My opinion is that this Parliamentary review and pressure from government MPs whose constituents are effected is more likely to change this new financial requirement to a more reasonable one; hopefully similar to the one which preceded it.

But I'm not holding my breath waiting for that, either!

However, the more people who write to their MPs, especially if that MP is on the government benches, expressing their opposition to these changes, and why, then the more likely that MP is to listen.

Get writing, people; especially if you have personally been affected.

Will a change in government at the next election change anything?

Doubtful, I have seen very little opposition to these requirements from Labour. Indeed, the coalition is simply continuing the changes to and 'tightening up' of the UK immigration rules began by Labour.

But the biggest problem we face is the attitude of the British people them selves.

Most of population, whatever their ethnic background, will tell you that too many immigrants are coming into the UK and that any measure to reduce the numbers is a 'good thing.'

The problem being that they lump all immigrants together; family members, students, workers and EEA nationals.

Family migration is an easy target. So even though reducing the number of family migrants will result in an extremely tiny drop in overall immigration, it is the target the government has gone for. That way they can tell the British people that they are 'doing something.'

Most voters do not have foreign spouses or partners, so most voters don't care. Therefore most MPs don't care.

We have to make them care, if we can.

Edited June 30, 2013 by 7by7

[Kevin1908]

I think its just a matter of time before someone takes the UK government to an international court on the issue of not being able to bring a spouse or child into the UK. It goes against humanitarian rights. The government will eventually have to back down on this. You can't bring your spouse to live with you in the UK when you were born here? Just my opinion.

The government are not saying that a British citizen cannot bring their family members to live in the UK with them. They are saying that in order to do so certain criteria have to be met.

Doesn't UK law state that immigrants have to be upright citizens, ie not criminals or have false identities. I don't see that law being upheld. Time and time again, and in the news last week, criminals appeal being deported on human rights grounds. My spouse has never committed a criminal offence, I have never committed a criminal offence. But if I fail to maintain an income of £18600 a year my wife will be kicked out of the country.

Edited July 1, 2013 by theoldgit
This thread isn't about if or if not an individual may, or may not, be removed from the UK.

[theoldgit]

More off topic posts removed, this thread is not about proposed tax changes.

[bobrussell]

I take on board the oldgit's comments about possible removal of a family member if the £18,600 target is missed at any of the 'checkpoints' introduced by the new rules!

However it is IMO relevant to the original topic!

We now have a group of families living under the shadow of problems should their financial situation change for the worst. Who knows what their situation is going to be next year let alone at the FLR or ILR point? Nobody has any idea how these families will be treated but it must be like living under a permanent cloud!

As the first people facing FLR applications under the new rules will do so after the next general election I doubt any politician will worry about it now so everything has to be speculation (probably unproductive!)

Edited July 1, 2013 by bobrussell

[Kevin1908]

As the first people facing FLR applications under the new rules will do so after the next general election I doubt any politician will worry about it now so everything has to be speculation (probably unproductive!)

This will be the number one question that I will be asking the candidates. The constituency that I live in could go any of 3 ways so you can bet that the parasites will be out saying what a wonderful job they will do then I will put the killer question. I don't see any sign that Labour are going to do anything about this either but most of my anger will be aimed at the Libearl Democrate hypocrates.

[slipperx]

The rules, however, aren't "tearing British families apart". There is always the option of the British partner to go and live in the country of the foreign spouse.

Maybe if the family is predominantly British, becoming a resident of the country of the spouse and obtaining education for the children etc. may not be easy in the short or long term or even possible at all. I don't think it is quite that simple.

[evadgib]

(Feel free to move if already posted or in the wrong place)

Changes to UK visas for foreign spouses are barring thousands of citizens from going home. My choice? Exile in Australia, or breaking up my family

Richard Fabb

Tuesday 9 July 2013

guardian.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/uk-australia-spouse-visa

Edited July 10, 2013 by evadgib

[theoldgit]

@evadgib, that story has been widely circulated and is just another take on this saga, might be of interest though.

[nontabury]

What would happen in the situation of say a Romanian now living in Romania , who comes to Thailand next month, meets a Thai girl and then marries her. She then remains in Thailand. Meanwhile the Romanian husband returns to Romania, until the 1st of January, the date when Romanians are officially allowed to entry and work in the UK, he then decides to go the the UK, stays there for a couple of weeks,then his new Thai wife would she be able to join him in the UK without the Romanian husband having to prove his income.

[nontabury]

What would happen in the situation of say a Romanian now living in Romania , who comes to Thailand next month, meets a Thai girl and marries her. She then remains in Thailand. Meanwhile the Romanian husband returns to Romania, until the 1st of January, the date when Romanians are officially allowed to entry and work in the UK, he then decides to go the the UK, stays there for a couple of weeks. would his new Thai wife be able to join him in the UK without the Romanian husband having to prove his income?.

[Kevin1908]

What would happen in the situation of say a Romanian now living in Romania , who comes to Thailand next month, meets a Thai girl and marries her. She then remains in Thailand. Meanwhile the Romanian husband returns to Romania, until the 1st of January, the date when Romanians are officially allowed to entry and work in the UK, he then decides to go the the UK, stays there for a couple of weeks. would his new Thai wife be able to join him in the UK without the Romanian husband having to prove his income?.

I would assume that he would apply in Romania for Romanian visa for his wife and then he could bring her to the UK.

I was wondering, Thai wife married to UK man comes to the UK. They have 2 children. Husband's salary falls below £18600, the wife gets kicked out. Do the kids get kicked out as well?

[7by7]

The Romanian, assuming he is exercising an EEA economic treaty right in the UK, would be able to apply for his Thai wife to join him under the EEA regulations.

She would not need to have lived with him in Romania first. He could move to the UK and then apply for his wife to join him straight from Thailand.

Families entering the UK under the EEA regulations do not have to meet this financial requirement. Which is why some Brits are considering moving, or already have moved, temporarily to live and work in another EEA state with their non EEA national partner so they can then use the EEA regulations to return to the UK under the Surinder Singh ruling.

Whilst they do not have to satisfy the same financial requirement as families entering the UK under the UK immigration rules, families following the EEA route do have to show that they can support and accommodate themselves without becoming an unreasonable burden upon the state.

Kevin, as the children would be British citizens they would not have to leave.

Whether or not the wife would, we will have to wait and see. As I read the new FLR and ILR requirements, if the family cannot meet the financial requirement (and the immigrant partner's income, if any, can be used, when she makes those applications then her application will be refused so she will no longer have leave to remain in the UK.

I can see lots of appeals and court cases and bad headlines for the government if families are forced to separate in this way.

Yet another example of how this is a knee jerk reaction from the government which they have not thought through properly.

[Kevin1908]

Kevin, as the children would be British citizens they would not have to leave

I would assume that the kids could in their own right bring a case that it was against their human rights to be deprived of one parent.

Not that I am suggesting anybody would do this but if the wife was kicked and the husband opted to join her I wonder what the reaction of Passport Control would be if the kids were deposited with then on exiting the country on the basis that forcing them to leave their country of birth was against their rights.

[nontabury]

What would happen in the situation of say a Romanian now living in Romania , who comes to Thailand next month, meets a Thai girl and marries her. She then remains in Thailand. Meanwhile the Romanian husband returns to Romania, until the 1st of January, the date when Romanians are officially allowed to entry and work in the UK, he then decides to go the the UK, stays there for a couple of weeks. would his new Thai wife be able to join him in the UK without the Romanian husband having to prove his income?.

I would assume that he would apply in Romania for Romanian visa for his wife and then he could bring her to the UK.

I was wondering, Thai wife married to UK man comes to the UK. They have 2 children. Husband's salary falls below £18600, the wife gets kicked out. Do the kids get kicked out as well?

Re your question, if the children have British passports No. If they don't, I'm guessing they probably would by virtue of the fact that they came in as the children of a none British person.

If you are correct in your reply to my post regarding the Romanian, just think how a British passport holder, who may have been married to his Thai wife for many years, is going to think. These rules are completely unfair to native Brits, but are we surprised.

[7by7]

This has been gone through many times.

One cannot use the EEA freedom of movement regulations to gain entry to one's native country; unless qualifying under the Surinder Singh ruling.

A Romanian could not use the EEA route to take his Thai wife to Romania; she would have to apply under, and satisfy the requirements of, the Romanian immigration rules.

In my opinion you are correct in that the financial requirement of the new rules is completely unfair. But let's not cloud the issue by railing against the EEA freedom of movement regulations; regulations which many Brits take advantage of to live, work, retire in other EEA states.

[2yearvisitvisa]

Get writing, people; especially if you have personally been affected.

.

We have to make them care, if we can.

A very valid, logical and well thought out point. Perhaps you could post up the letter(s) you sent your MP and this can be downloaded, edited and resent to the posters' MPs. I would certainly do so.

[MrZM]

This has been gone through many times.

One cannot use the EEA freedom of movement regulations to gain entry to one's native country; unless qualifying under the Surinder Singh ruling.

A Romanian could not use the EEA route to take his Thai wife to Romania; she would have to apply under, and satisfy the requirements of, the Romanian immigration rules.

In my opinion you are correct in that the financial requirement of the new rules is completely unfair. But let's not cloud the issue by railing against the EEA freedom of movement regulations; regulations which many Brits take advantage of to live, work, retire in other EEA states.

The income requirement is not unfair. The rest of the financial requirements are unfair.

If your spouse was a millionaire you are not able to use this towards the financials, as its down to the sponsor. That is what is unfair.

[TCA]

The income requirement is not unfair. The rest of the financial requirements are unfair.

Any income requirement that disregards outgoings is unfair. It favours higher salaried individuals regardless of whether they're up to their eyeballs in debt.

Edited July 11, 2013 by theoldgit
Quote fixed

[Jay Sata]

Nothing in life is fair.

All I can say is that the entry requirements to bring a spouse and family to the UK are a lot better than trying to have any rights to live,work and buy property in Thailand.

If you think it's hard here try getting a visa for Australian residency.

[Kevin1908]

If your spouse was a millionaire you are not able to use this towards the financials, as its down to the sponsor. That is what is unfair.

Now I thought that if you had enough dosh then you can get a visa. How to Mittal and Abramovich do it?

[theoldgit]

Time to close this thread as it's going nowhere.

When and if the Government lays firm proposals to change the rules we can consider a fresh discussion.