UK visa rule challenge rejected by High Court

[MrZM]

Well if you thought logically, the reason (she was refused) was they didn't believe I could afford, £2,500 for flights for my wife and child, though I don't know how they worked out the figure.

I don't need to lie, I am very open on this forum

Didn't she apply under the old rules and wasn't she refused on maintenance grounds because you followed a dodgy agent's advice and only supplied 7 days bank statements?

Or was that a different Mr and Mrs. ZM?

I know the requirement is illogically thought out; yet you seem to be supporting it.

Care to go into more detail and actually answer the questions?

A simple "I don't know" will suffice.

I just answered your questions or didn't I?

Actually there were many reasons of why my application was refused, and wouldn't expect a friend of 6 years to do what he did, I wouldn't class him as dodgy, he is quite successful at what he does.

I showed 7 days bank statements as he refused to how I had an overdraft of £100, which was cleared every week with my income but then taken out. It should have been explained I am mont currently working whilst I reside in Thailand with my family again another mistake.

On date of application I had a substantial amount of money in my account, more then was required to be showed. They also asked even though on my statement it had my name, about another bank account, that I transferee money from.

You don't need to try and be clever with me, as I said I'm very open to discuss.

The ECO was very nitty picky, on there answers for refusal.

I clearly stated there is nothing wrong with having a minimum income requirement, but you and everyone else miss the fact, that the savings requirements is actually the main problem.

If you are earning £15,000 a year, then you need to have savings exceeding £30,000 that is illogical.

If you are self employed you are unable to use savings to meet e requirement, that is illogical.

Shall I go on....

7by7 I am happy to discuss this properly and wisely, but you have the wrong manner, you have to be right in every topic, you don't think outside the box, and only disclose information on facts that you manoeuvre.

[MrZM]

http://http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23253092

This is interesting

[Jay Sata]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

[MrZM]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Plus there are additional costs as they would need a separate applicatiin

[Kevin1908]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Do you actually think that they will get one to one tuition. You are living in cloud cuckoo land.

[MrZM]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Do you actually think that they will get one to one tuition. You are living in cloud cuckoo land.

I don't believe it is the thought of Teresa May.

But if you have a child who speaks 2 words of English, then the instant thought would be for your child to learn English, as it would prove difficult if they were thrown straight into school.

[Kevin1908]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Do you actually think that they will get one to one tuition. You are living in cloud cuckoo land.

I don't believe it is the thought of Teresa May.

But if you have a child who speaks 2 words of English, then the instant thought would be for your child to learn English, as it would prove difficult if they were thrown straight into school.

When I enquired at the school that my wife's son would have gone to if he had got a visa they said that he would be given a dictionary and told to get on with it.

[Bladefire]

My thai step-daughter, 8 years old, speaks thai/english/ chinese. I dpnt think u will find too many 8 year olds in the uk can. Ask them about Jeremy Kyle and they know everything.

[Jay Sata]

I'm not sure where you live Kevin but in East Anglia it is pretty much one to one when the kid first arrives.

I have to say I was mighty impressed with the skills of the teachers and the kids abilities when I first encountered friends children

who arrived with zero English. The teachers are wonderful and the children are amazing in the way they adapt.

There are schools across the UK with dozens of different languages spoken at home. The challenge for the staff are to get them all up to speed.

I'd like to know which county you live in Kevin.

As for the extra money per child you'll never get the bargain that is state school education in the UK, in Thailand.

[MrZM]

My thai step-daughter, 8 years old, speaks thai/english/ chinese. I dpnt think u will find too many 8 year olds in the uk can. Ask them about Jeremy Kyle and they know everything.

How is that relevant.

You pretty much answered your own remark.

Ps: get her learning more languages she obviously has the knack for it

[Kevin1908]

I'm not sure where you live Kevin but in East Anglia it is pretty much one to one when the kid first arrives.

I have to say I was mighty impressed with the skills of the teachers and the kids abilities when I first encountered friends children

who arrived with zero English. The teachers are wonderful and the children are amazing in the way they adapt.

There are schools across the UK with dozens of different languages spoken at home. The challenge for the staff are to get them all up to speed.

I'd like to know which county you live in Kevin.

As for the extra money per child you'll never get the bargain that is state school education in the UK, in Thailand.

I am not sure where I am is relevant. Let's just say home counties. What about the schools in inner London that have high numbers of kids who can't speak English, do you think there parents have to earn £18600 per year?

[MrZM]

I'm not sure where you live Kevin but in East Anglia it is pretty much one to one when the kid first arrives.

I have to say I was mighty impressed with the skills of the teachers and the kids abilities when I first encountered friends children

who arrived with zero English. The teachers are wonderful and the children are amazing in the way they adapt.

There are schools across the UK with dozens of different languages spoken at home. The challenge for the staff are to get them all up to speed.

I'd like to know which county you live in Kevin.

As for the extra money per child you'll never get the bargain that is state school education in the UK, in Thailand.

I am not sure where I am is relevant. Let's just say home counties. What about the schools in inner London that have high numbers of kids who can't speak English, do you think there parents have to earn £18600 per year?

Again another irrelevant comment.

Jay Sata comment was wrong, but if affordable the parent would pay for one and one tuition.

It is know different to a football player from Spain having private tuition to learn English.

Fact is.

Everyone lingers on the subject of £18,600, £18,600, £18,600.

There is nothing wrong with this figure.

It the ways to meet the financial requirement if you earn less, which is the problem.

If you are earning £15,000 a year you would need £30,000+ in savings to meet the requirement, of which you are only £3,600 out of reach.

That doesn't make sense.

But everyone ignores the savings requirement and carries in moaning about the £18,600.

Does anyone know what the difference of successful applicants year 2012/2012 is to the year 2012/2013?

I bet there's not much difference.

[Kevin1908]

I'm not sure where you live Kevin but in East Anglia it is pretty much one to one when the kid first arrives.

I have to say I was mighty impressed with the skills of the teachers and the kids abilities when I first encountered friends children

who arrived with zero English. The teachers are wonderful and the children are amazing in the way they adapt.

There are schools across the UK with dozens of different languages spoken at home. The challenge for the staff are to get them all up to speed.

I'd like to know which county you live in Kevin.

As for the extra money per child you'll never get the bargain that is state school education in the UK, in Thailand.

I am not sure where I am is relevant. Let's just say home counties. What about the schools in inner London that have high numbers of kids who can't speak English, do you think there parents have to earn £18600 per year?

Again another irrelevant comment.

Why is the comment irrelevant. It was stated that a sponsor of a child has to pay more because of the one to one teaching. There are plenty of schools in London that are majority with English not the first language. Those parents are not expected to have an earning requirement.

[Jay Sata]

There is nothing wrong with my comment regarding English language tuition in East Anglia. Some area's such as Wisbech have had to cope with large scale migration from Poland and the former Eastern Bloc countries.

In the case of a Thai speaking child with no English ability entering a Norfolk primary school they are assigned a Peripatetic English teacher.

In many cases there is no other non English speaking child in the school so it's one to one.

The results are startling and the children learn the language so quickly.

I'm commenting on the requirement for the child supplement on the visa requirements.

7by7 maintains there is no extra cost to the UK taxpayer. I say there is.

He has still refused to answer my challenge on the applicants funding for the court case that started this thread.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Jay Sata

[7by7]

Mr Sata, you can repeat your ridiculous accusation that I am refusing to answer your 'challenge' as much as you like.

It will not hide the fact that it is you who refuses to answer questions put to you.

Anyone who reads this topic, if anyone can be bothered now that you have sown so many red herrings, will see that I have answered all questions put to me and justified all my statements and opinions.

You have done neither.

If you want my answers; go back and re read my posts; assuming you read them in the first place!

I'm done with you and your childish trolling.

I'm happy to discuss this very important issue with sensible adults, but you are neither.

[MAJIC]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Agreed! I personally know of a Thai child who has been in the UK for 5 years,can speak reasonable English, but is Educationally far behind his English counterparts of the same age.the English Stepfather is trying hard to bring him up to the level of English classmates. Of course his Thai wife is unable to help much in this instance,due to her own problems with English skills.

Edited July 10, 2013 by MAJIC

[mrpalasade]

As far as I can see, the findings relate only to the applicant and sponsor who made the legal challenge. Here is a little more on the ruling ( from http://www.no5.com/news-and-publications/news/546-high-court-deals-another-blow-to-the-home-secretary-s-rules-on-family-migration-and-the-minimum-income-threshold/: )

Although the court did not strike down the rules as such, its declaratory judgment is a green light to foreign spouses who previously thought they had no prospect of being allowed to live together with their spouses in the UK to apply for permission to enter. After this judgment, many are likely to succeed in being allowed to enter under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights even though they cannot satisfy the harsh requirements of the rules especially if, for example, the UK sponsoring spouse earns above the national minimum wage, there is reliable ‘third party support’, there is reliable evidence that the foreign spouse or partner will be working in the UK, or where children are likely to be affected so that is not in their best interests for the foreign spouse to be refused entry.

Manjit Gill QC, leading counsel for claimants said: “The plight of persons affected by the rules has rightly received publicity. The judgment will be a welcome relief to such persons. The rules have forced significant numbers of British people to go and live in Europe for a reasonable period for time, in exercise of their rights as EU Citizens, before they lawfully come back months later with their spouses under EU law. In other cases, the rules have forced such persons out of the UK and out of Europe altogether, even though they have been lawfully settled in the UK for many years. This is the price in terms of family life that has had to be paid. The impact on young people, part-time workers and women, particularly those from a racial minority background, who are more likely to be in low-paid jobs, has been particularly severe.”

The income threshold rules have received criticism from other quarters too. Last month, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Migration issued a report which concluded that the rules were disproportionate. http://www.appgmigration.org.uk/family-inquiry.

Permission to appeal was granted and the matter is likely to proceed to the Court of Appeal. In the meantime, the Secretary of State will have to consider how to implement the judgment.

It looks like applicants and sponsors will need to go down the "human rights" route until, and if, the government rethink this whole thing.

leading counsel for claimants said: “The plight of persons affected by the rules has rightly received publicity. The judgment will be a welcome relief to such persons. The rules have forced significant numbers of British people to go and live in Europe for a reasonable period for time, in exercise of their rights as EU Citizens, before they lawfully come back months later with their spouses under EU law. In other cases, the rules have forced such persons out of the UK and out of Europe altogether, even though they have been lawfully settled in the UK for many years..... CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS SENTENCE TO ME FROM WHAT i UNDERSTAND IS IT POSSIBLE TO LIVE IN EUROPE SOMEWHERE AND HAVE THE THAI WIFE OBTAIN A VISA FOR A COUNTRY IN EUROPE THEN COME INTO THE UK..

[Jay Sata]

I'm still waiting for 7by7 to justify the appeal.

Meanwhile

As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

Simple. A Thai child will not have the language skills of a UK counterpart therefore will need additional one to one schooling.

Agreed! I personally know of a Thai child who has been in the UK for 5 years,can speak reasonable English, but is Educationally far behind his English counterparts of the same age.the English Stepfather is trying hard to bring him up to the level of English classmates. Of course his Thai wife is unable to help much in this instance,due to her own problems with English skills.

That's my point and one 7by7 can not understand. It costs money to bring a non English speaking child up to speed with the language and that's before you bring them up to the same level of education as a UK child.

The extra fee charged is a bargain when you consider what you are getting.

7by7 wants the education funded by the UK taxpayer wherever the immigrant child comes from.

[MAJIC]

Mr Sata, you can repeat your ridiculous accusation that I am refusing to answer your 'challenge' as much as you like.

It will not hide the fact that it is you who refuses to answer questions put to you.

Anyone who reads this topic, if anyone can be bothered now that you have sown so many red herrings, will see that I have answered all questions put to me and justified all my statements and opinions.

You have done neither.

If you want my answers; go back and re read my posts; assuming you read them in the first place!

I'm done with you and your childish trolling. Go back under your bridge you sad little man.

I'm happy to discuss this very important issue with sensible adults, but you are neither.

Come on 7by7 you know very well that Immigrants who appeal against Immigration decisions which are not in their favour,are using the British Legal Aid System and Taxpayers money to appeal, in a BIG WAY especially if it reaches High Court of Appeal Status! do you really believe the appellant can afford the huge costs involved?....... no of course not, but if you know otherwise let's see your evidence,there are tens of millions of Taxpayers who would like to know the answer? I doubt you have one. Please stop using never ending Convoluted arguments!

Edited July 10, 2013 by MAJIC

[Jay Sata]

7by7 offers some useful advice on this forum but he has tunnel vision and cannot see the bigger picture.

The court case we are discussing was brought by a refugee from Lebabon married to a spouse he had little contact with and with his relatives in an extended refugee family included as interested parties. The other two plaintiffs were on long term benefits.

The appeal had no chance and the only reason we are discussing this is comments made by the judge who dismissed the claim.

I'll ask again if 7by7 will concede this was an expensive legal action brought by people who were not picking up the bill?

Teresa May stated a couple of days ago she plans to block these appeals that cost a fortune but have no chance of success.

[MAJIC]

7by7 offers some useful advice on this forum but he has tunnel vision and cannot see the bigger picture.

The court case we are discussing was brought by a refugee from Lebabon married to a spouse he had little contact with and with his relatives in an extended refugee family included as interested parties. The other two plaintiffs were on long term benefits.

The appeal had no chance and the only reason we are discussing this is comments made by the judge who dismissed the claim.

I'll ask again if 7by7 will concede this was an expensive legal action brought by people who were not picking up the bill?

Teresa May stated a couple of days ago she plans to block these appeals that cost a fortune but have no chance of success.

Yes it's the usual old story i.e spend the good old hard done by British Taxpayers money who have put up with a torrent of unfair garbage for 3-4 decades,not only put up with it but we have been forced to shut our mouths, as is required by those that consider the UK the softest touch in the World. Well now, things are starting to change,which is what should have been started,at least 30 years ago,and now some people can see the gravy train coming to an end,and don't like it.

Well tough luck,whinging and whining about another Countries limmigration laws,which don't suit your personal Agenda is changing, get used to it,it's going to get much worse! from now on in.

We wouldn't be discussing this subject if we thought Thailand was being hard on Farangs,and making conditions too hard,we would be told this is our new Immigration Laws/Rules,and we don't give a toss if you like them or not! Now run along and take some photos of your wife,your house,your Bedroom,Pickup,and dont forget the Map from Immigration to your house.

£18600 is the entrance conditions,and quite generous in my opinion. The same as Thailand have entrance Stipulations /Conditions for a Retiree,the Visa is 800,000 bahts seasoned for 3 months, Married to a Thai Lady: proof of 400,000 baht income seasoned for 3 months for a Married mans Visa. I won't start on on the unfairness of many other things Farangs have to bear in silence,i'm sure most of you know already,when it comes to Thailand "Silence is Golden"

[MAJIC]

7by7 offers some useful advice on this forum but he has tunnel vision and cannot see the bigger picture.

The court case we are discussing was brought by a refugee from Lebabon married to a spouse he had little contact with and with his relatives in an extended refugee family included as interested parties. The other two plaintiffs were on long term benefits.

The appeal had no chance and the only reason we are discussing this is comments made by the judge who dismissed the claim.

I'll ask again if 7by7 will concede this was an expensive legal action brought by people who were not picking up the bill?

Teresa May stated a couple of days ago she plans to block these appeals that cost a fortune but have no chance of success.

But of course this man made an ambiguous (I'm being polite now) appeal using British Taxpayers Money,on the off chance he was going to get some kind of payout,how many times times have we seen these Bogus Claims?

Edited July 10, 2013 by MAJIC

[7by7]

7by7 wants the education funded by the UK taxpayer wherever the immigrant child comes from.

You obviously operate on the principle that if you repeat the lie often enough people will start to believe you.

I have said no such thing!

However, it is true that LEAs have a legal obligation to provide a state school place for all children of compulsory school age living in their area; regardless of the child's nationality or immigration status.

However, this obligation is not means tested.

So whether the required income to sponsor a settlement visa for a child is set at £1 p.a. or £1 million p.a., the cost to the state of educating the child will be the same.

Unless the parents decide to educate the child privately, of course.

This education side track is yet another red herring thrown out by Jay Sata because he has no answers to the real questions on this issue.

Like the question of funding this appeal. He has no more idea of how the appeal was funded than I do. Neither does Majic.

They are making assu8mptions based upon their prejudices; I have simply put two other possibilities on the table.

As for why the case was brought when there was no chance of winning; ever heard of test cases?

The government are not going to change these requirements unless forced to do so by the courts.

[7by7]

Still no real answers, so I'll ask them again.

I've added one, too.

1) Do you think it right that third party support is not allowed? If so, why?

2) Do you think it right that when the immigrant spouse has a guaranteed job once in the UK that their earnings from that job are ignored? If so, why?

3) Do you think it right when an ex pat is returning to a guaranteed job in the UK with an income above the required level that they need to have been earning that amount in the UK for at least 6 months before their partner can apply to join them unless they have also been earning above the limit for at least 6 months whilst abroad; regardless of whether or not the UK job is with the same employer? If so, why?

4) Do you agree that the first £16,000 of any savings are ignored? If so, why?

5) Do you think it right that the self employed cannot use any savings to help them meet the financial requirement? If so, why?

6) As it costs as much to look after a British child as a non British one, do you think it right that a couple with non British children need to have a higher income than a couple where the children are British? If so, why?

7) Do you think it right that when assessing income no account is taken of outgoings such as mortgage/rent and debt repayments? If so, why?

So, 7 questions. Will anyone provide 7 answers without brining in irrelevant red herrings and downright lies?

[7by7]

mrpalasade,

Surinder Singh and Family Unity explains the situation you ask about very well..

[ava15]

So it appears thaivisa has trolls in every forum.

[Jay Sata]

mrpalasade,

Surinder Singh and Family Unity explains the situation you ask about very well..

You like to quote that case 7by7 but the route is a difficult one for those having problems with earning over £18600 in the UK.

I'm not sure if you've ever lived and worked in another country but it takes time and costs money. Most people earning under the above figure will not find the streets are paved with gold and jobs in places such as Poland or Lithuania. If they were the local population would not be coming to the UK to do menial work.

Entry clearance officers have to be satisfied the applicant was genuinely working in a EEA country and the applicant has to produce evidence.

For self employed people that will mean signed off accounts.

'You have applied for admission to the United Kingdom in accordance with Regulation 9 of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 as the family member of a British national who has been / was previously working or self-employed in another Member State. However, in view of your failure to provide documentary evidence that the British citizen is / was working or self-employed in another Member State prior to returning to / coming to the United Kingdom, I am not satisfied that the Regulations apply in this case.'

[7by7]

I am not recommending it, indeed if you knew anything at all about my posting history you would know that over a year ago I made very similar points to yours about the costs and difficulties of following this route; and that was before the new requirements were even announced!

However, the option is there, it may suit some people and a question was asked, so I answered it.

Unlike you, I do answer questions rather than make feeble attempts to put people down.

(ok that last sentence is an attempt to put you down, but it's not feeble!)

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Any reasonable human being would agree it is the right of every person to live in their home country with their spouse and children.

Concerns about education, health care, benefits, housing are irrelevant to this basic human right.

Every country should allow free access to a foreign spouse on production of a valid marriage certificate with no limits or restrictions, if the marriage is genuine.

Edited July 11, 2013 by AnotherOneAmerican

[Kevin1908]

Still no real answers, so I'll ask them again.

I've added one, too.

2) Do you think it right that when the immigrant spouse has a guaranteed job once in the UK that their earnings from that job are ignored? If so, why?

3) Do you think it right when an ex pat is returning to a guaranteed job in the UK with an income above the required level that they need to have been earning that amount in the UK for at least 6 months before their partner can apply to join them unless they have also been earning above the limit for at least 6 months whilst abroad; regardless of whether or not the UK job is with the same employer? If so, why?

These are 2 very good points. On the one hand over 100,000 non EU immigrants (can't find the actual figure now) are coming on work permits to a guaranteed job but then the Border Agency is not allowing returing expats or spouses the same right. Seems very unfair