Life in the uk test

[Rob180]

Yes Steady there are some benefits to studying anything. The point is that our wives should not have to study such obscure things as a CONDITION OF BEING GRANTED ILR.

Possibly it could be justified as a condition for citizenship but not ILR.

My Brunel comment was, as I think you know, tongue in cheek. The bigger picture is that if this country had discouraged immigration then in the same way as it seems to now then maybe people of the calibre of Brunel would not have bothered coming here to the detriment of this country's progress.

Your last point about Brunel is an excellent one, sums it up really.

[Jay Sata]

I suspect most Brits on here would not pass this test first time.

However it is there to test understanding of the English language and culture and to that end some questions are aimed at those from a more restricted lifestyle.

Pakistan is a good example of a nation where women are not as free as Thailand.

Integration is the keyword for any migrant wherever they choose to settle. That includes those of us with partners from South East Asia.

Language and understanding are key points for any migrant to a successful life in the UK.

[aland2012]

My wife is at this stage now learning LifeinUK 3rd edition , we practice everynight before bed with the ipad, she has an app on her ipad, and I must say it works really well.

She has been a few time to do the test, but has failed, hopefully next time she will get it.

She has ILR, so she needs it for British Citizenship.

fingers crossed to all you guys and girls in the same boat as us, good luck everybody.

Alan Day

[Rob180]

My wife is at this stage now learning LifeinUK 3rd edition , we practice everynight before bed with the ipad, she has an app on her ipad, and I must say it works really well.

She has been a few time to do the test, but has failed, hopefully next time she will get it.

She has ILR, so she needs it for British Citizenship.

fingers crossed to all you guys and girls in the same boat as us, good luck everybody.

Alan Day

I thought this test has to be passed to be granted ILR?

[durhamboy]

I think it depends when ILR was granted. Before there wasn't a LITUK test for ILR so I think aland2012's wife probably got ILR some time ago.

[7by7]

If memory serves, the KOLL requirement for citizenship was introduced in 2004 and for ILR in 2005.

My wife obtained her ILR and then her British citizenship before the introduction of the KOLL requirement, which means that some may think I am unqualified to hold an opinion.

But, one of the first things she did upon arrival in the UK was enrol on an English course to improve her, already fairly competent, English speaking and listening and learn to read and write English. Had she not done so, then finding anything except the most menial, low paid work would have been nearly impossible.

Prior to the introduction of KOLL, many immigrants from non Anglophone countries, especially women, didn't, for one reason or another, take such courses; which left them isolated and unable to cope outside their own community or without the help of their English speaking spouse/partner/children, if any.

Some of the questions in the LitUK test may seem somewhat irrelevant; but they are geared towards providing immigrants with some knowledge of the history, culture, institutions etc. of the UK. Also, as said before, learning the material helps the student improve their English ability as well and these days people do have at least 5 years to reach the required standard.

But trying to memorise the book is not the answer; Yes, one has to study the material; but one also has to understand it; which requires a basic understanding of English. The questions in the test are not the same as those on the many websites which offer 'practice tests!'

Such tests are nothing new in other countries. I remember reading in a biography of Humphrey Bogart that during breaks in filming on the set of Casablanca that he helped Ingrid Bergman study for the American equivalent; and that was in 1942!

I have no problems with immigrants having to learn this stuff; my problem is that British schoolchildren don't!

[durhamboy]

7 by 7 - I agree that there is nothing wrong in people studying. I would even go so far as that there should be a "reasonable" test for citizenship (i.e. one where the average Brit would pass comfortably). My main issue is that it has to be passed for ILR and, in the meantime, whilst people fail (because even an average Brit can't pass it) they have to fork out c. £600 extra each 2 1/2 years for FLR.

We seem to have an arrogance in this country that foreigners are required to do this and that but, in most cases, where Brits go and live abroad they are not required to do any tests in the countries they go to live in. I personally lived in 4 Asian countries without any need for a test. Again I ask how many Brits would pass an equivalent LITUK test in Thai script?

In the past we colonised the world and moved millions of people from country to country without any thought for local culture e.g. Malaya. In fact many Brits went to other countries to live without learning a single word of the local language e.g. India.

[7by7]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this; but a couple points I would like to challenge.

You say that the average Brit could not pass the LitUK test. Even if true, it would be more accurate to say that, like any test or exam, the average Brit could not pass it unless they first studied for it!

There may very well be countries who do not require foreigners applying for permanent residence to pass a basic language test; but they are getting fewer and fewer.

Certainly obtaining ILR in the UK is easier than obtaining PR in Thailand; which, even once someone qualifies, is not certain as it is granted to only 100 applicants per country per year!

[Waterloo]

7 by 7 - I agree that there is nothing wrong in people studying. I would even go so far as that there should be a "reasonable" test for citizenship (i.e. one where the average Brit would pass comfortably). My main issue is that it has to be passed for ILR and, in the meantime, whilst people fail (because even an average Brit can't pass it) they have to fork out c. £600 extra each 2 1/2 years for FLR.

We seem to have an arrogance in this country that foreigners are required to do this and that but, in most cases, where Brits go and live abroad they are not required to do any tests in the countries they go to live in. I personally lived in 4 Asian countries without any need for a test. Again I ask how many Brits would pass an equivalent LITUK test in Thai script?

In the past we colonised the world and moved millions of people from country to country without any thought for local culture e.g. Malaya. In fact many Brits went to other countries to live without learning a single word of the local language e.g. India.

The problem with this is you can stay permanently in the country on ILR with no need to progress to citizenship, Indeed some people consciously make the decision not to as it means in some cases surrendering citizenship from there home country.

As I said previously don't agree with the way this has been implemented the standard is clearly set higher than the average citizen can achieve and you get the impression it is being implemented to keep people out.

This really should be implemented in a way to help people integrate, admittedly not an accusation that can be leveled at Thai immigrants to this country.

In my experience with most Thai's in this country are fully integrated due to marriage.

[durhamboy]

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this; but a couple points I would like to challenge.

You say that the average Brit could not pass the LitUK test. Even if true, it would be more accurate to say that, like any test or exam, the average Brit could not pass it unless they first studied for it!

There may very well be countries who do not require foreigners applying for permanent residence to pass a basic language test; but they are getting fewer and fewer.

Certainly obtaining ILR in the UK is easier than obtaining PR in Thailand; which, even once someone qualifies, is not certain as it is granted to only 100 applicants per country per year!

I'm not exactly sure what we are agreeing to disagree on - is it that you think that it is ok to have a test that the average Brit couldn't pass for a foreign spouse to obtain ILR and if the applicant doesn't pass then they fork out c.£600 for FLR every 2 1/2 years? If that is your position then most certainly we must agree to disagree.

To answer your challenges - it is not just me that is saying the average Brit can't pass it. Looking through this thread quite a few people have posted as such and so far you are the only one to challenge it. When I did a sample test (and yes I only did one test and it was just sample questions) there were a number of questions that most Brits could not answer in addition to the 2 ridiculous ones that I highlighted in a previous post. The passmark is 75% i.e. 18 out of 24 which I think is unrealistically high.

As I understand it, the purpose of these tests is such that foreigners living here permanently can integrate into society. So the level of knowledge they should have is that of the average Brit who has NOT studied for it because the average Brit is never going to study it. So what are you saying? Either you are saying Brits aren't fit to live in their own country or foreigners should be some sort of elite class that know more than the average Brit does about their own country. Either way your position does not make sense.

As for you saying that fewer and fewer countries do not require a basic language test for permanent residence. Well firstly I would dispute that. I think the majority of countries do not have a language test. Secondly we are talking here about a LITUK test not a language test. I think there are even fewer countries having such tests especially ones that most of their own citizens couldn't pass!

Finally your point about Thailand being harder to obtain PR. That may be so. However it is a hell of a lot easier to obtain a spouse visa for a foreigner to live in Thailand than it is for a Thai to live in the UK. As I understand it, there are no tests and they just pop into a local immigration office about once a year I think.

[durhamboy]

7 by 7 - I agree that there is nothing wrong in people studying. I would even go so far as that there should be a "reasonable" test for citizenship (i.e. one where the average Brit would pass comfortably). My main issue is that it has to be passed for ILR and, in the meantime, whilst people fail (because even an average Brit can't pass it) they have to fork out c. £600 extra each 2 1/2 years for FLR.

We seem to have an arrogance in this country that foreigners are required to do this and that but, in most cases, where Brits go and live abroad they are not required to do any tests in the countries they go to live in. I personally lived in 4 Asian countries without any need for a test. Again I ask how many Brits would pass an equivalent LITUK test in Thai script?

In the past we colonised the world and moved millions of people from country to country without any thought for local culture e.g. Malaya. In fact many Brits went to other countries to live without learning a single word of the local language e.g. India.

The problem with this is you can stay permanently in the country on ILR with no need to progress to citizenship, Indeed some people consciously make the decision not to as it means in some cases surrendering citizenship from there home country.

As I said previously don't agree with the way this has been implemented the standard is clearly set higher than the average citizen can achieve and you get the impression it is being implemented to keep people out.

This really should be implemented in a way to help people integrate, admittedly not an accusation that can be leveled at Thai immigrants to this country.

In my experience with most Thai's in this country are fully integrated due to marriage.

Yes I agree with you although I don't really see any problem with people living permanently here with ILR status rather than go on to citizenship. As you say, there are a number of countries that do not recognise dual nationality - I think Malaysia is one. I think there are probably quite a number of foreign nationals who are married to Brits who would like to return to their original countries in the event of their marriage ending e.g. by death or divorce. Obviously they do not want to lose their original citizenship through obtaining UK citizenship.

[Waterloo]

7 by 7 - I agree that there is nothing wrong in people studying. I would even go so far as that there should be a "reasonable" test for citizenship (i.e. one where the average Brit would pass comfortably). My main issue is that it has to be passed for ILR and, in the meantime, whilst people fail (because even an average Brit can't pass it) they have to fork out c. £600 extra each 2 1/2 years for FLR.

We seem to have an arrogance in this country that foreigners are required to do this and that but, in most cases, where Brits go and live abroad they are not required to do any tests in the countries they go to live in. I personally lived in 4 Asian countries without any need for a test. Again I ask how many Brits would pass an equivalent LITUK test in Thai script?

In the past we colonised the world and moved millions of people from country to country without any thought for local culture e.g. Malaya. In fact many Brits went to other countries to live without learning a single word of the local language e.g. India.

The problem with this is you can stay permanently in the country on ILR with no need to progress to citizenship, Indeed some people consciously make the decision not to as it means in some cases surrendering citizenship from there home country.

As I said previously don't agree with the way this has been implemented the standard is clearly set higher than the average citizen can achieve and you get the impression it is being implemented to keep people out.

This really should be implemented in a way to help people integrate, admittedly not an accusation that can be leveled at Thai immigrants to this country.

In my experience with most Thai's in this country are fully integrated due to marriage.

Yes I agree with you although I don't really see any problem with people living permanently here with ILR status rather than go on to citizenship. As you say, there are a number of countries that do not recognise dual nationality - I think Malaysia is one. I think there are probably quite a number of foreign nationals who are married to Brits who would like to return to their original countries in the event of their marriage ending e.g. by death or divorce. Obviously they do not want to lose their original citizenship through obtaining UK citizenship.

Yes that is the point I am making for the reasons you have stated there are legitimate reasons for people staying permanently on ILR, hence if the intention is to encourage integration the test needs to be at the ILR stage and not at citizenship.

[bobrussell]

With a bit of study I believe almost anybody can pass the test. It takes work, may need some input from experienced teachers for some.

I don't think it is designed to help with integration directly (but could be made to do so) but makes sure the applicant has sufficient English skills to study and learn as necessary. If proper tuition is required then what is wrong with doing a formal course?

There are cultures within the UK that would allow individuals to live isolated lives because there was little motivation to allow study. This has been seen as one way to ensure there are fewer people unable to interact with the country at large because they cannot communicate in basic English.

Whether this test works or not I cannot fully judge but when my wife did her ESOL course there were many there only because they had to be to get ILR. I support the test generally but would like to see some modification to teach more day to day skills. I don't think it has been placed there as a barrier at all. Why should tax payer pay massive amounts to provide information in lots of languages? Most Thais are already streets ahead in language skills than a lot of other immigrant groups!

It is inconvenient but then life can be!

[durhamboy]

7 by 7 - I agree that there is nothing wrong in people studying. I would even go so far as that there should be a "reasonable" test for citizenship (i.e. one where the average Brit would pass comfortably). My main issue is that it has to be passed for ILR and, in the meantime, whilst people fail (because even an average Brit can't pass it) they have to fork out c. £600 extra each 2 1/2 years for FLR.

We seem to have an arrogance in this country that foreigners are required to do this and that but, in most cases, where Brits go and live abroad they are not required to do any tests in the countries they go to live in. I personally lived in 4 Asian countries without any need for a test. Again I ask how many Brits would pass an equivalent LITUK test in Thai script?

In the past we colonised the world and moved millions of people from country to country without any thought for local culture e.g. Malaya. In fact many Brits went to other countries to live without learning a single word of the local language e.g. India.

The problem with this is you can stay permanently in the country on ILR with no need to progress to citizenship, Indeed some people consciously make the decision not to as it means in some cases surrendering citizenship from there home country.

As I said previously don't agree with the way this has been implemented the standard is clearly set higher than the average citizen can achieve and you get the impression it is being implemented to keep people out.

This really should be implemented in a way to help people integrate, admittedly not an accusation that can be leveled at Thai immigrants to this country.

In my experience with most Thai's in this country are fully integrated due to marriage.

Yes I agree with you although I don't really see any problem with people living permanently here with ILR status rather than go on to citizenship. As you say, there are a number of countries that do not recognise dual nationality - I think Malaysia is one. I think there are probably quite a number of foreign nationals who are married to Brits who would like to return to their original countries in the event of their marriage ending e.g. by death or divorce. Obviously they do not want to lose their original citizenship through obtaining UK citizenship.

Yes that is the point I am making for the reasons you have stated there are legitimate reasons for people staying permanently on ILR, hence if the intention is to encourage integration the test needs to be at the ILR stage and not at citizenship.

I can see your point and, in an ideal world, I would support that. Unfortunately I think we have lost sight of the original laudable objectives of integrating foreigners by :-

1. Having to allow so many non-English speakers into the country (mainly from eastern Europe) through EU rules without any need for tests or visas.

2. Making the test unrealistically difficult to the extent that it has become something of a joke. If the average Brit cannot pass it then we run the risk of alienating foreigners rather than making them feel welcome. If they feel welcome then they are much more likely to embrace British culture in their everyday lives.

3. We add insult to injury by charging an extortionate visa fee of £600 every 2 1/2 years for FLR for those that can't pass the test.

[durhamboy]

With a bit of study I believe almost anybody can pass the test. It takes work, may need some input from experienced teachers for some.

I don't think it is designed to help with integration directly (but could be made to do so) but makes sure the applicant has sufficient English skills to study and learn as necessary. If proper tuition is required then what is wrong with doing a formal course?

There are cultures within the UK that would allow individuals to live isolated lives because there was little motivation to allow study. This has been seen as one way to ensure there are fewer peoples unable to interact with the country at large because they cannot communicate in basic English.

Whether this test works or not I cannot fully judge but when my wife did her ESOL course there were many there only because they had to be to get ILR. I support the test generally but would like to see some modification to teach more day to day skills. I don't think it has been placed there as a barrier at all. Why should tax payer pay massive amounts to provide information in lots of languages? Most Thais are already streets ahead in language skills than a lot of other immigrant groups!

It is inconvenient but then life can be!

Bob, I think a lot of your points are correct if we are living in an ideal world which we are not.

I know 2 other Thai ladies (apart from my wife) who are currently studying (or trying to study) for this LITUK test - one has a little boy just turned 3 years old and the other sadly has a husband recently diagnosed with leukemia and has a 25% chance of survival. The practicalities for them and others to study for LITUK are really quite onerous and could easily place a great strain on relationships.

I also agree with you that the government should not have to put resources into providing information (and a lot of other things!) in foreign languages. However, I don't think the answer is a LITUK test - especially when so many non-English speakers are excluded from the test (e.g. EU immigration). The answer is, as far as possible, the government should not provide foreign translations. That would force all foreigners that live here to use English.

[Waterloo]

With a bit of study I believe almost anybody can pass the test. It takes work, may need some input from experienced teachers for some.

I don't think it is designed to help with integration directly (but could be made to do so) but makes sure the applicant has sufficient English skills to study and learn as necessary. If proper tuition is required then what is wrong with doing a formal course?

There are cultures within the UK that would allow individuals to live isolated lives because there was little motivation to allow study. This has been seen as one way to ensure there are fewer people unable to interact with the country at large because they cannot communicate in basic English.

Whether this test works or not I cannot fully judge but when my wife did her ESOL course there were many there only because they had to be to get ILR. I support the test generally but would like to see some modification to teach more day to day skills. I don't think it has been placed there as a barrier at all. Why should tax payer pay massive amounts to provide information in lots of languages? Most Thais are already streets ahead in language skills than a lot of other immigrant groups!

It is inconvenient but then life can be!

there is very little in your statement that I would disagree with Bod.

My Wife passed on her second attempt whilst looking after our 2 year old at the time whilst being heavily with our second child.

[7by7]

Durhamboy,

You keep bringing up EU immigration; so some points on that.

Firstly, despite propaganda spread by certain newspapers, EU immigrants to the UK cannot simply waltz in. They have to be exercising an economic treaty right. That is, either working, self employed, self sufficient, a student or job seeking. For the latter, if they don't find work within three months they usually have to leave. Obviously they could also be qualifying family members of any of the above.

Secondly, whilst EU migrants can access more public funds than a non EU immigrant prior to ILR, they do have to be able to support themselves without same. Indeed, if they become an unreasonable burden upon the state they have to leave. The myth of EU immigrants entering the UK and being given council houses and unlimited benefits spread by certain papers is just that; a myth.

Thirdly, and perhaps most relevant to this topic, there are hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of British citizens exercising the same rights to live in other EU countries; also without having to take whatever language or other tests those countries impose upon non EU immigrants.

You also say that most Brits could not pass the test. I am not, unfortunately, surprised. People do forget what they have been taught if they don't routinely use it; and sometimes even if they do.

Take as an example the driving theory test. I was an Approved Driving Instructor when this test was first introduced. I passed the sample paper I had been sent by the DSA around friends and relatives, all of whom had been driving for many years and should know the answers; they would have learned it all before taking their practical test, even though there was no theory test at the time. How many passed it? None! But all my pupils who studied properly for it passed first time.

The LitUK test is the same. Even though you never learned, or more likely have forgotten, the answers and so failed the sample test you took, with a little bit of study you would have passed it.

As said, the purpose of the test is twofold.

First, to teach immigrants something of the history, culture, traditions, institutions etc. of the UK and even their rights.

Second, to aid in their learning and understanding of English while they study for the test. For many people this will mean that they have to attend an ESOL, or equivalent, course first. But if the LitUK test encourages them to do so, then in my opinion that can only be a good thing.

To be blunt, the only reason I can see why someone would not be able to gain sufficient English ability to study for and then pass the LitUK test would be if they had some form of learning disability which prevented them from learning English. In which case they would be exempt from it.

There are other exemptions as well. For example: if they had a disability which prevented them from attending English classes, if over 65, if applying for ILR as a bereaved spouse/partner or under the domestic violence rules.

It is true that to live in Thailand without PR if the spouse of a Thai citizen one just has to renew ones' non immigrant visa periodically; and, of course, 90 day reporting to show that you are still worthy of living in the kingdom!

Obtaining ILR and then citizenship in the UK may be more expensive than obtaining PR and then citizenship in Thailand; but it's a hell of a lot easier!

But, if anyone would rather spend £600+ every couple of years to renew their partner's FLR rather than enrol them on an English course so they can improve their English ability enough to pass the LitUK test, that is their choice.

[bobrussell]

Studying can actually be fun! It does not have to be onerous and there are lots of learning aids. If there are two of them studying for the same test they can help support each other as well.

For the minority that are not able to cope for whatever reason (including family illness) the FLR option is still available until they are able to deal with the test.

I accept it can be very frustrating for the family of applicants but being made to study was really good for my wife. She improved her understanding of the English language (which was pretty good already), built up confidence because the ESOL course included life skills and she made a number of friends in the process!

Our old practice manager had no patience with grumbles and would reply 'this is not a problem it is an opportunity!'. This is a classic case IMO.

[virgomjh]

I fully agree with everyone here that has voiced their outrage at the level of difficulty of the LIUK test. I don't object to the idea of a having some test to ensure that all people coming to live here in the UK have a basic level of understanding of the history, law and culture of the UK, BUT IT IS PROFOUNDLY WRONG for the government to say that you can only choose a partner that is capable of understanding and memorising 160 pages of highly complex information, including over 200 dates, written in a foreign language. This requires a high level of intelligence by any standards. I wonder how many British adults would be capable of absorbing this amount of information on Chinese history, politics and culture written in the Chinese language, even with 5 years study.

For those of you that claim that it just requires hard work to pass it, Home Office statistics show that ONLY 50% OF APPLICANTS FROM NON ENGLISH SPEAKING COUNTRIES WERE ABLE TO PASS THE TEST in 2009, (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8707152.stm) - and bear in mind that the testable content has been expanded since then, and that the majority of these applicants were attempting to pass it for citizenship and had probably lived in the UK for a number of years.

So the bottom line fact is that many of us will have to accept that our partners will not be able to pass this test no matter how hard they try, and that there is no certainty that we will be able to remain together in the UK on the basis of further leave applications every two years forever. Some may be able to move out to live in Thailand with their partners as an option. Those that cannot afford to do so will eventually be forced apart. This is the harsh reality of the governments decision to impose this requirement for ILR.

It is especially unfair on the great majority of applicants in this current period who started their relationships when the requirement was a simple speaking and listening test at A1 level. These rule changes were first announced in July 2012, after my wife had already entered the UK on a fiancée visa. She has been able to scrape through the B1 test but the LIUK test is well beyond her capability. Had I been aware that she would have to pass a test of this level of difficulty, I could have forseen the distress that taking this path would cause and would have avoided it. It is bad enough that this difficulty of test is being applied to marriage settlement applications at all, but for the government to shift the goalposts for those that have already committed is doubly appalling.

So for those who have not yet embarked on a relationship with a Thai national please be aware that AS OF 28TH OCTOBER 2013, THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT HAS EFFECTIVELY REMOVED YOUR FREEDOM TO CHOSE ANY PARTNER YOU WISH based on your own preferences - it now a pre condition that she has the intelligence to understand and memorise 160 pages of complex information in a foreign language. It was my understanding that freedom of choice of partner is a basic human right as long as they do not pose a threat to society, and I can only hope that someone with the means mounts a legal challenge very soon.

[durhamboy]

Totally agree virgomjh. For those of you here that seem to support this LITUK let me put this to you. You and your partners decide to go and live in Thailand. Thailand says ok no problem but you will have to :-

1. Pay B45,000 for a visa - designated in US$ at a rate specified by the Thai government. No appeal rights or refunds if it is declined.

2. Pass a speaking and listening test in Thai.

3. Take and pay for a TB test.

4. Demonstrate that you and your partner have income of B910,000 p.a. or savings of B3,125,000

5. Show that you and your partner have adequate accommodation.

Thailand will then let come for a period of 2 1/2 years after which you will have to pay another B30,000 to stay another 2 1/2 years. After 5 years you will be able to stay in Thailand permanently after you have passed a Life In Thailand Test. This test must be taken in Thai script and you must achieve a passmark of at least 75%. Sample question of this test - Rama II died in (a) 2361 ( 2364 © 2367 (d) 2374.

If you don't pass you can pay another B30,000 to stay another 2 1/2 years and so on.

Mmmmmmmmm I can't think that many of you will be jumping on the next plane to Bangkok. Let's hope Thailand doesn't reciprocate and impose the sort of ridiculous, onerous visa requirements that we impose on the Thais.

Edited May 24, 2014 by durhamboy

[7by7]

If that is what it took to live in Thailand with my wife, then that is what I would do.

No onerous visa requirements?

Minimum income required of 40,000 baht per month, and 90 day reporting to show that I still have that income.

Need to renew visa periodically.

Very little chance of gaining permanent residence as it is only granted to 1000 people per foreign nationality per year.

Even less chance of Thai citizenship; therefore very few rights such as owning land.

Not onerous at all (sarcasm)!

[steady]

Durhamboy, everything you have written is what is required to stay in Thailand until the next hoop has to be jumped through. With the regulations in the UK if you jump through the hoops then you are accepted as a permanent resident. Some of us think that is worth a bit of effort. It seems to me that if the applicants that you talk of put in half the effort that you have put into in this thread then they would have passed easily. Your arguments, in my view, seem to miss the point that the benefits for putting in some effort are permanent, and to many, far superior to what Thailand has to offer. I think that those with children, or planning a family quite like the idea that they don't have to keep the immigration police sweet just to get another year living a peaceful, law abiding life.

[thomasteve]

What is very wrong and highlights the unfairness of the so called 'language requirements' is when medical staff, such as GP's, are allowed to come here from overseas and (mal) practice with very poor linguistic skills compared to the more stringent test for spouses.

Edited May 24, 2014 by thomasteve

[Arkady]

Interesting tests. I got 75% and 80% on my two attempts but some answers were reasoned guesses that a foreigner probably couldn't have done and I thought that many of the questions were unfair and irrelevant.

For comparative purposes there is now, believe or not, a Life in Thailand test for those applying for naturalisation as Thai citizens. I think it is somewhat easier than the Life in Britain test but it is not a walk-over and requires an intermediate level of Thai with some knowledge of royal and legal Thai. For those who can't read Thai, questions can be read out to them but those who can't read Thai are unlikely to be able to understand the difficult vocabulary, e.g Royal Gazette. Questions are things like:

At what point will you become officially Thai?

A. When the King signs your application.

B. When your approval is announced in the Royal Gazette.

C. When you obtain your Thai ID card.

D. When the Interior Minister approves your application.

The answer is, in fact, B but many people would plump for A or C, if they have not read the Nationality Act.

The big difference with the Life in the UK test is that you are assessed on a battery of tests and other factors, such as other Thai language tests, your income, how many years residence in Thailand, educational level and can still pass if you fail Life in Thailand, as llong as you get up to 50% overall. Also this is only preliminary testing as you also have to be be vetted by a number of police and security departments, pass an interview in front of a panel of 15 at the Interior Ministry and be approved by the Interior Minister.

For permanent residence in Thailand there is a Thai language requirement but no Life In Thailand test so far. There is no written Thai requirement but applicants have to be interviewed by a panel of senior officials who will ask questions like, " Please explain what you believe is your contribution to Thai society". An intermediate level of spoken Thai is required to understand the questions and answer them. I have known people who either couldn't understand the questions at all or could understand but were unable to answer in Thai.

I am all for testing applicants for ILR in the UK but think questions should be more consistently fair and relevant.

[7by7]

What is very wrong and highlights the unfairness of the so called 'language requirements' is when medical staff, such as GP's, are allowed to come here from overseas and (mal) practice with very poor linguistic skills compared to the more stringent test for spouses.

The above post is rubbish; sorry.

The test is the same for all ILR applicants, apart from those exempt per my post above, regardless of the immigration category one enters under.

Furthermore, skilled workers applying under Tier 2 of the points based system, such as doctors, have to have at least B1 in English speaking, listening, reading and writing, or have an academic qualification that was taught in English and is recognised by UK NARIC as being equivalent to a UK bachelor’s degree, to get their initial visa.

Spouses only need A1 in speaking and listening for their initial visa.

[durhamboy]

If that is what it took to live in Thailand with my wife, then that is what I would do.

No onerous visa requirements?

Minimum income required of 40,000 baht per month, and 90 day reporting to show that I still have that income.

Need to renew visa periodically.

Very little chance of gaining permanent residence as it is only granted to 1000 people per foreign nationality per year.

Even less chance of Thai citizenship; therefore very few rights such as owning land.

Not onerous at all (sarcasm)!

So correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to be saying that having to have B40,000 per month (c.£800 pm or less than £10k p.a.) and popping along to a local immigration office every 90 days is onerous? Firstly I would imagine that every westerner in Thailand would want to have at least that income for themselves and their partner so surely that is not onerous. Secondly as there are many immigration offices in Thailand then going to one every 90 days is no hardship especially as it does not involve any additional visa fees.

Ok you do have a point regarding obtaining permanent residence and citizenship but for a couple just to go and live in Thailand and stay as long as they wish is, in my opinion, much less onerous than if they want to live in the UK. Frankly I prefer the Thai system so I suppose that is where we must agree to differ.

[wooloomooloo]

Rules are rules and they're not going to change, so little point being so negative about LitUK test.

My wife arrived in the UK at the end of 2010 and I let her settle in for a few months and then purchased the LitUK handbook. I informed her of the requirement to pass and that it would also benefit her educationally.

My wife studied the book every available evening and I fielded hundreds of questions on the contents of the book over a period of about a year.

In the two months prior to the test she studied the handbook every available minute of the day and for the last few weeks sat tens of mock tests that I found on the internet and was regularly passing them all.

Come the day, my wife passed first time and I was very proud of her and she was, more importantly, proud of herself. Notwithstanding, she had passed about nine months prior to her ILR application which negated any last minute panic over whether she would require FLR.

Overall, I think the LitUK test is one of the more beneficial requirements to settlement in this country.

[thomasteve]

What is very wrong and highlights the unfairness of the so called 'language requirements' is when medical staff, such as GP's, are allowed to come here from overseas and (mal) practice with very poor linguistic skills compared to the more stringent test for spouses.

The above post is rubbish; sorry.

The test is the same for all ILR applicants, apart from those exempt per my post above, regardless of the immigration category one enters under.

Furthermore, skilled workers applying under Tier 2 of the points based system, such as doctors, have to have at least B1 in English speaking, listening, reading and writing, or have an academic qualification that was taught in English and is recognised by UK NARIC as being equivalent to a UK bachelor’s degree, to get their initial visa.

Spouses only need A1 in speaking and listening for their initial visa.

Your reply is rubbish too as it seems he was able to get away with it and ended up killing a patient :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7045267/German-doctor-who-killed-patient-avoided-English-test.html

[7by7]

1) We are talking about immigrants from outside the EU, not inside. Like it or not, different rules apply.

2) From the article linked to, it appears this man somehow managed to by pass language tests required by various NHS trusts and the locum provider he worked for. In other words errors by them, not UK government policy.

3) The information in my post is accurate, and can be confirmed here.

[thomasteve]

1) We are talking about immigrants from outside the EU, not inside. Like it or not, different rules apply.

2) From the article linked to, it appears this man somehow managed to by pass language tests required by various NHS trusts and the locum provider he worked for. In other words errors by them, not UK government policy.

3) The information in my post is accurate, and can be confirmed here.

Let's put it another way :

For ILR you need to pass Life in UK test ....yes ?

Life in UK test is more difficult than just passing a B1 English test .....yes ?

Tier 2 Skilled workers (eg. medical practitioners) only need to pass B1 test .....yes ?

Conclusion : ILR requires more advanced language / comprehension skills than Tier 2 visa ....yes?

Feel free to correct any wrong statements or assumptions above.......