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

[nontabury]

So what would happen in a situation such as, he could 't meet visa requirements. Say for instance he gained a retirement visa on the strength of his earnings against an exchange rate of 70 baths to the pound. Then the exchange rate fell to 40 baths.maybe he would not be able to comply with the visa requirements.and so would have to return to his own country.
In this example we are not talking about someone who is a professional benefit scrounger, but someone who may have worked and payed into the UK system all his life and then through no fault of his own,over which he had no control over,he is left with no alternative than to see his family broken up.

[theoldgit]

Last year I had the honour to meet some retired soldiers who were living in Thailand with their local wives, and had been doing for many years, on pretty small pensions.

Whilst their army pensions were index linked their State Pensions were not, a number of them didn't meet the Thai income levels and were planning to return to the UK. As their pensions didn't total £18,600 they couldn't relocate with their partners to the UK so faced the prospect of returning alone and leaving their partners here.

Why after so many years have they now decided to return to the UK??

If they returned last year before the new rules came in they would have been issued a spouse visa for their wife.

There are to many excuses far to many

How many people out of the 47% actually want to go back to the UK or they just complaining because they are running out of money, and want to go back and claim benefits

I cannot answer for them any more than you can, but I got the impression that they felt they were being got at in all directions.

They had made a decision to live in Thailand with their spouses and now couldn't maintain the level of income required to meet the requirements required by the Thai Immigration authoriities as their pensions were frozen, I didn't put to them that the level hasn't increased for years, as it wasn't my place to do so.

Some felt that they had no option to return home, but couldn't do so because of the new income requirements.

Clearly I don't know their full personal circumstances, but what I can say that not one of them was making excuses but some of them just wanted to be able to have the choice to live in the UK with their partners, not one of them mention benefits, not one of them gave me the impression that they were scroungers, they just wanted to live in their country of choice as their circumstances had changed..

[RAZZELL]

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.

The trouble is...what if that country has similar rules to the UK?

Where would they live then?

RAZZ

[7by7]

What hasn't been mentioned yet is these new financial requirements only apply to those entering as family migrants.

From my submission to the enquiry:-

These new rules, especially the financial requirements, are ill thought out, break up families, encourage visa fraud and whilst devastating to families will have virtually no effect on the government's aim of significantly reducing immigration.

Most immigrants are economic ones, i.e. coming to the UK to work under the PBS or coming from other EEA countries to live and work in the UK.

These new financial requirements don't apply to them; at most they simply have to show that they can support and accommodate themselves and their families without recourse to public funds.

[7by7]

As long as the UK has benefits system for all after visa restrictions have ended and also the ability to gain a UK passport, plus free health care, then this country will be a magnet for immigrants. It would be better if the probationary period was 5 to 10 years and no minimum income requirement, plus a harder English test for a settlement visa.

The probation period for ILR is now 5 years; and I have no problem with that.

The language requirement has also been made harder. From October this year an ESOL course will no longer suffice for ILR or citizenship and a B1 or equivalent pass in speaking and listening will be required in addition to passing the LitUK test.

Some posters have accused family migrants of coming to the UK only to scrounge off the system. I would like to see some evidence of that before I take the accusation seriously as I firmly believe that the majority of family migrants came to the UK for the same reason as my wife; to live with their partners.

Especially as most public funds, including social housing, are unavailable to them until they have ILR and whilst their British partner can claim any and all to which they may be entitled as an individual they cannot claim any extra due to their immigrant partner or other family members living with them.

[johnlandy]

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.

Oh yeah, and in the likes of Thailand earn about THB 20,000/mth. Big deal.

If you were talking about said Brit going to Aust/Canada/NZL/Holland or another 1st world country your statement might hold up

[theoldgit]

Couple of minutes break whilst we all read the report.

http://www.appgmigration.org.uk/family-inquiry

[Jay Sata]

One recurring theme here is the desire to leave Thailand when the money runs out and hope there is a door wide open in the UK.

It's a well known fact that if you retire to Thailand on a UK state pension which is frozen then you are living on borrowed time before inflation takes control.

Another point worth making is that a spouse who cannot pass the English test is also not able to join her husband even if he has the necessary funds.

Edited June 10, 2013 by Jay Sata

[Tony M]

Well, I'm glad to see part of my submission to the committee was quoted on page 23.

[ava15]

Ive been living in thailand since the birth of my daughter in november.

I was a couple of grand short of the minimum income requirements for my wife.

I was still putting away 400-500 gbp per month in my old job back home - according to the Tories this isnt enough to feed an extra mouth per month.

How long will I be made to live in thailand? I dont really have any high hopes these new rules will be changed. With the uk press hammering on about immigrants this and immigrants that, hardworking young families like my own will never be given a fair shot

[thaicbr]

One recurring theme here is the desire to leave Thailand when the money runs out and hope there is a door wide open in the UK.

 

It's a well known fact that if you retire to Thailand on a UK state pension which is frozen then you are living on borrowed time before inflation takes control.

 

Another point worth making is that a spouse who cannot pass the English test is also not able to join her husband even if he has the necessary funds.

The recurring theme is only what YOU believe.

I work here but at some time in the future I may want to return to the UK with my wife. These new rules would make that very difficult. And as 7by7 says people will try and look for loop holes to exploit... Why as a British citizen am I forced to think these thoughts!

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[prestburypark]

£18600 pa is barely a living wage for one person now in the UK. I spend time in both countries and at present we just do the visit visa. I couldn't see us living here(UK) on that amount of income, though I am sure it can be done, its not much of a life.

I think we might go for the settlement visa next year for easier travelling between the two countries and after ILR for the option of travelling together to other places .

Wages in the UK are crap and inflation and devaluation are taking the value of peoples savings away so it gets harder and harder to maintain a Thai based life on UK earnings, let alone a UK based life.

None of the UK/Thai relationships I know of here involve benefits of any kind, bit of a red herring . Most Thai wives seem happy to work if they can from what I have seen, or husbands have good enough incomes. The ridiculous questions in life in UK exam are a puzzle to me as most school leavers in the UK are flummoxed by them.

Good luck to all applying for settlement.

[Jay Sata]

Then may I suggest that you check the full facts before throwing wild accusations about?

Migrants’ entitlement to JSA: Those from countries within the EU are entitled to benefits if they are defined as a worker – this includes unemployed workers and so includes JSA, but only if you have previously worked in the UK. This entitles you to JSA and Housing Benefit, but not Disability Benefit or Employment Support Allowance.

After 5 years legal residence in the UK however, the claimant is entitled to all benefits.

Do I understand that a person legally in the UK can claim after 5 years? EG asylum seekers?

Of course the other issue is that it's easy to get a national insurance number which then opens up access to JSA etc.

[bobrussell]

@bobrussell

There is no recourse to public funds for Thai people settling in the UK on marriage/spouse visas.

Where is the drain on publc funds?

If you read my post I was not talking about the non-EU applicant draining funds but British citizens coming back to the UK, no job, no housing etc.

We are dealing with perception (Daily Mail style) and for many it is that the family has paid nothing into the system, comes back and is claiming benefits. My delightful ex-brother in law did this and there are several families locally that fall into this category.

I accept a returning citizen is legally entitled to benefits!

Edited June 10, 2013 by bobrussell

[7by7]

Then may I suggest that you check the full facts before throwing wild accusations about?

Migrants’ entitlement to JSA: Those from countries within the EU are entitled to benefits if they are defined as a worker – this includes unemployed workers and so includes JSA, but only if you have previously worked in the UK. This entitles you to JSA and Housing Benefit, but not Disability Benefit or Employment Support Allowance.

After 5 years legal residence in the UK however, the claimant is entitled to all benefits.

Do I understand that a person legally in the UK can claim after 5 years? EG asylum seekers?

Of course the other issue is that it's easy to get a national insurance number which then opens up access to JSA etc.

I think quite a few of the claimants files I have seen maybe asylum seekers and getting a NI number is not that hard to obtain!

I have to go to work now, but I don't think many people realize how much abuse of the benefits system actually goes on.

But having an NI number doesn't mean that one can then claim benefits unless one's immigration status, e.g. ILR, allows it.

Anyone coming to the UK to work will need an NI number, whether they come via the family route, the PBS or whatever.

But they still cannot claim public funds until they have ILR; except NIC based ones to which they have contributed via their own NICs.

I think people should check the facts before they throw wild accusations about.

[MrZM]

Any system which sets criteria which have to be reached is, by it's very nature, discriminatory.

The old system where sponsor and applicant had to satisfy the ECO that they could support themselves without recourse to public funds was also discriminatory.

The crux of the matter is whether the system is fair.

In my view, this new system is not.

Especially to those expats who, often through necessity rather than choice because, for example, their contract has finished, who are returning to the UK and unless they have been earning at least £18,600 for the previous 6 months cannot bring their partner with them. Even though they may have a guaranteed job in the UK paying them much more than the minimum!

So you do what I did, I took my wife back on a visit visa, worked for 6 months gained all the required information and then applied for spouse visa.

There is no need for separation.

Again it's another case of people find it easier to complain than actually do.

[pattayadingo]

£18600 pa is barely a living wage for one person now in the UK. I spend time in both countries and at present we just do the visit visa. I couldn't see us living here(UK) on that amount of income, though I am sure it can be done, its not much of a life.

I think we might go for the settlement visa next year for easier travelling between the two countries and after ILR for the option of travelling together to other places .

Wages in the UK are crap and inflation and devaluation are taking the value of peoples savings away so it gets harder and harder to maintain a Thai based life on UK earnings, let alone a UK based life.

None of the UK/Thai relationships I know of here involve benefits of any kind, bit of a red herring . Most Thai wives seem happy to work if they can from what I have seen, or husbands have good enough incomes. The ridiculous questions in life in UK exam are a puzzle to me as most school leavers in the UK are flummoxed by them.

Good luck to all applying for settlement.

If that £18,600 is barely a liveable wage, how on earth do all the U.K. pensioners survive? The greatest majority get a lot less than that.

The U.K. income support level is also way below that figure too, yet there are people who manage on that.

[7by7]

............. people have arranged marriages through payment in order to claim entrance In to the UK and other countries.

But the new financial requirements will do nothing to stop such arrangements. The person wishing to do this will obviously pick someone who meets the requirements.

Although increasing the probation period for ILR may have some effect.

Remember, too, that even though the Primary purpose Rule was abolished some time ago, sponsor and applicant have always had to satisfactorily show that their relationship is genuine; not just at the initial visa stage but at FLR, if needed, and ILR as well.

That hasn't changed.

[MrZM]

Ive been living in thailand since the birth of my daughter in november.

I was a couple of grand short of the minimum income requirements for my wife.

I was still putting away 400-500 gbp per month in my old job back home - according to the Tories this isnt enough to feed an extra mouth per month.

How long will I be made to live in thailand? I dont really have any high hopes these new rules will be changed. With the uk press hammering on about immigrants this and immigrants that, hardworking young families like my own will never be given a fair shot

I'm sorry but if your child was born in November you could have applied for the spouse visa April may June and first week of July last year, when you would have qualified for the spouse visa, and asked for the visa to start in January of this year.

Everyone was warned quite well in advance there were new rules coming in.

[GuestHouse]

If that £18,600 is barely a liveable wage, how on earth do all the U.K. pensioners survive? The greatest majority get a lot less than that.

The U.K. income support level is also way below that figure too, yet there are people who manage on that.

They survive on a raft of welfare add ons to the state pension. Housing allowances, winter fuel allowances, independance allowances etc etc etc.

Just like families on low incomes receive welfare. Hence a minimum income requirement above which most would not receive welfare.

[GuestHouse]

Gotta love this 'splitting up families and causing anguish' bit.

Almost every guy I work with has at least once in his life had to work overseas, away from his family, often in shitey locations, sometimes dangerous locations - to keep a roof over his family's head, put food on their table and shirts on his kid's backs.

So a tiny percentage of people have to go back to the UK alone for a few months while they set up and get a job earning enough to keep their own family ..... And this causes 'anguish'.

We need to end this 'Entitlement Culture' now!

[7by7]

Ive been living in thailand since the birth of my daughter in november.

I was a couple of grand short of the minimum income requirements for my wife.

I was still putting away 400-500 gbp per month in my old job back home - according to the Tories this isnt enough to feed an extra mouth per month.

How long will I be made to live in thailand? I dont really have any high hopes these new rules will be changed. With the uk press hammering on about immigrants this and immigrants that, hardworking young families like my own will never be given a fair shot

I'm sorry but if your child was born in November you could have applied for the spouse visa April may June and first week of July last year, when you would have qualified for the spouse visa, and asked for the visa to start in January of this year.

Everyone was warned quite well in advance there were new rules coming in.

The maximum period an applicant can ask for their visa be post dated is three months; so applying before 19th July 2012 and asking for the visa to start January 2013 would have been impossible.

As the visa is valid for 33 months they could have applied 18th July and asked for the start to be post dated to 17th October and then arrived by 16th January; but that's it.

People who actively read forums such as this one would have known about these changes in advance, but only a few months in advance.

Otherwise, unless they regularly read the UKBA website, they wouldn't have; the media gave this virtualy no publicity until after the changes came into force!

[nontabury]

I am a UK citizen, my son is also a UK citizen, my wife is not.

As a pensioner I barely meet the financial limit now.

What that means is that my son and I can go to live in the UK but my wife cannot. Does that not transgress ALL our human rights to separate a family like this?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but why can't you simply continue living where you are? Who is trying to separate you as a family and violating all your human rights?

And since when has it been a human right to bring a foreigner of your choosing into your home country - particularly if you're impoverished and can't afford adequately to support that person without recourse to taxpayer money?

So what would happen in a situation such as, he could 't meet visa requirements. Say for instance he gained a retirement visa on the strength of his earnings against

An exchange rate of 70 baths to the pound. Then the exchange rate fell to 40 baths.maybe he would not be able to comply with the visa requirements.and so would have to return to his own country.

In this example we are not talking about someone who is a professional benefit scrounger, but someone who may have worked and payed into the UK system all his life and then through no fault of his own,over which he had no control over,he is left with no alternative than to see his family broken up.

It's sad when that happens and of course it occurs with regularity. However if your friend can not live on his pension and support a family in Thailand how is he going to manage if he brings them to the UK?

He'll need public funding.

He would only be allowed to claim any benefits to which He has Paid into, and is entitled to,for himself and child, his wife would not be entitled. Unlike a returning ex-pat from one of the EEC countries who could claim for his wife.

We all know why these stringent rules are taking place, it's to try and reduce the number of NON UK citizens gaining entry and then gaining access to UK benefits,this is something I'm fully in agreement with.

But the reality is that UK citizens are being trawled up in these rules, some of these

UK citizens may have also been ex- servicemen who may have served their country in dangerous situations in their earlier life, yet this very same country that they put their lives at risk for, is now in some instances preventing them from returning to their home country,with their wives.

[7by7]

MrZM; you should read the report, linked to earlier by theoldgit.

You will see quotes from many submissions where it is, and will be for the foreseeable future, impossible for the respondent to meet the financial requirement simply because the immigrant spouse's potential income in the UK is not taken into account.

The document only opens in read only, so I can't copy any of them, but here's one example on page 26.

An Australian national working in Dubai with a salary of £250,000 p.a. and potential earnings in the UK of £400,000 p.a. He and his wife own property in the UK valued at £3.5 million.

His British wife doesn't work, they have children.

But because his earnings are not taken into account and because savings have to be in cash; they do not meet the financial requirement!

You will no doubt now say that the wife should come to the UK for 6 months and take a job paying at least £18,600.

Why? How does forcing her to do that make any kind of sense?

Who will look after their children while she does?

[7by7]

Yet more posts claim that the new financial requirement is a good thing because it will stop people coming to the UK and living off benefits.

How many more times do people have to be told.

Non EEA immigrants cannot claim benefits, except those they have paid for via NICs, until they have ILR.

Their British sponsor cannot claim benefits for them or because they are living with them until they have ILR.

This includes social housing.

This prohibition is nothing new and the rule changes last July did not change it in any way.

Got it now?

[Kevin1908]

Ive been living in thailand since the birth of my daughter in november.

I was a couple of grand short of the minimum income requirements for my wife.

I was still putting away 400-500 gbp per month in my old job back home - according to the Tories this isnt enough to feed an extra mouth per month.

How long will I be made to live in thailand? I dont really have any high hopes these new rules will be changed. With the uk press hammering on about immigrants this and immigrants that, hardworking young families like my own will never be given a fair shot

I'm sorry but if your child was born in November you could have applied for the spouse visa April may June and first week of July last year, when you would have qualified for the spouse visa, and asked for the visa to start in January of this year.

Everyone was warned quite well in advance there were new rules coming in.

I heard about it 2 weeks before it was implemented. Clearly not paying enough attention. In fact apart from a brief mention on the news in June 2012, today's piece on the BBC is the only time that I have seen it mentioned.

Personally I think that this is going nowhere. With only 27 people affected per year per constituency there are not enough votes to make the MPs sit up and take notice.

Far more votes for MPs in using the reduction in immigration by 18000 per year. There is still immigration of 528,000 per year but we wont hear about thet.

[Ianatlarge]

This in no way affects me directly, but it strikes me as a petty and even spiteful attempt to attack an easy target — UK men with foreign wives — as a way to balance the budget. I have no idea of the numbers involved, but I doubt if the financial saving would even amount to a noticeable amount in the total budget. If the UK gov seriously wants to reduce expenditure I could suggest a dozen significant items it could drop from its budget (but I won't mention any, doing so would merely start another line of disputation).

[bwalker1973]

I met all the requirements, except the relationship, they stated that I'm not in a genuine relationship, even though I'm married and have a child born who is now British.

I'm currently filing 2 test court cases, one from myself under the European Human Rights 8.1, and a test case brought by a child under the UN convention on the rights of a child. The child has the right to live with both parents and not to be separated from them, and it states that the government should do everything in their powers to protect the child's rights under the UN, which they have signed up for and ratified into law.

The current government is breaching all British citizens fundamental rights, and the way they are going, the international community are thinking the British government are a big joke at minute trying to pull out of the EU, just to evict a terrorist human rights, which has and will effect all other British rights.

[pattayadingo]

If that £18,600 is barely a liveable wage, how on earth do all the U.K. pensioners survive? The greatest majority get a lot less than that.

The U.K. income support level is also way below that figure too, yet there are people who manage on that.

They survive on a raft of welfare add ons to the state pension. Housing allowances, winter fuel allowances, independance allowances etc etc etc.

Just like families on low incomes receive welfare. Hence a minimum income requirement above which most would not receive welfare.

Those welfare add ons are a pittance.

Add to that the bedroom tax and the minimum interest mortgage rate that many cannot achieve so they also pay out extra each month.

Some people seem to believe all the crap doled out by the government about welfare scroungers getting a fortune and that pensioners are now so well off.

The odd case of some people who do get away with a lot are headline news and trumpeted as much as possible.

I know many pensioner couples who get by each month on a lot less than the stated amount.

That though is besides the point. The bar at £18600 has been set too high as far as I am concerned. many pensioners here in thailand would not qualify. Why/ Because their pensions are below the minimum required amount being talked about.

The current single basic pension = £5,587 per year.

Some get extra help but in no way do they get more than triple their basic pension in extras.

Weekly state pension allowances

(2012/2013)

Single person state pension allowance

£107.45

Married partner's state pension allowance

£64.40

Married coulple's state pension allowance

£171.85

Both partners with full individual entitlement

£214.90

[winstonc]

Anything that steps in the direction of putting an end to the British mindset of "Knowing one's rights but not knowing one's responsibilities" is a possitive move.

The government are not telling poor people they can't marry people from overseas and start a family then bring them to the UK.

They are saying, marry who you like, start whatever family you like, but if you go finding a wife/husband overseas and start a family overseas don't expect to be able to bring them back to the UK unless you can support YOUR family from YOUR wallet - Not other people's taxes.

What's wrong with that?!

Here in Thailand I can support my family. However, my income here is a few thousand short of the threshold required. If I was to return to the UK I would earn more, but to get my wife there I would need to go alone at first, meaning being separated from my wife.

But your point is invalid, non-EU immigrants have no recourse to public funds. This whole immigrants on benefits thing is the result of a racist campaign by the right wing press. It is nonsense.

its not racist and its mainly aimed at eu migrants claiming in the uk i believe,you should see what an eu migrant can claim in the uk even with his/or her family not EVEN LIVING THERE,,,scandalous its being challenged by the uk and germany now,,also the threshold of 18,600,=357 a wk,how do these people even afford a foreign holiday to meet a wife,unless they met on the internet ,comments welcome,,but dont give it the racist line,hardly if were all married to thais maybe,,