Refusal rate for UK family visit visas after appeals abolished

[Jay Sata]

There seems to be a presumption here that many of the refused are from Thailand which I doubt very much.

As I have previously stated 75% of all applications are granted.

There has to be a failure rate as I expect inside the 25% are people trying to enter the UK through the back door.

We are probably just looking at a few dozen refusal of family visit visas from Thailand per annum.

The bulk will be from areas where there is a high chance of fraud.

[Donutz]

Anyone here that has the refusal rate per country and visa type?

As for stopping access via the back door: make it less attractive to do so. Fight illegal employement by pretty much ruining any company who knowingly hires such people. Not many employers would wish to risk that I'd think. So people from abroad would have very little chanche of finding an income via the backdoor, and thus such attempts should be very low in numbers.

[7by7]

There is an alternative if the applicants visa to visit family and friends for a three or four week trip is refused.

The family or friends can visit him or her in their own country.

Problem solved.

Remember it is FAMILY visit visas we are talking about; general ones have never had a right of appeal.

Why should, for example, the spouse of a British citizen living in, for example, Thailand with their British spouse be denied the ability to visit their spouse's family in the UK, or be subjected to the cost and hassle of another application, merely because an overworked official has made a mistake?
 

You refer to visitors from Thailand but of course this rule applies to all applicants who require a visa and not just Thailand.

Indeed; but that doesn't make it right!
 

In the past 6 month visit visa's have been used as a method of getting cheap labour in to work in takeaways and restaurant's.

People using visit visas to enter the UK and then overstay and work illegally has always been a problem. But please explain:

• How abolishing the right of appeal for family visitors will solve this problem.
• Where you got your figures for the last 6 months from. Not that it would prove anything as this appeal right was abolished 12 months ago! If your assertion is correct the abolition of this right has made the situation with illegal workers worse!

BTW, your MoT analogy is incorrect; MoT failures CAN be appealed; see here.

 

If you checked your facts before posting, maybe you wouldn't post so much rubbish.

Edited August 2, 2014 by 7by7

[7by7]

There seems to be a presumption here that many of the refused are from Thailand which I doubt very much.

As I have previously stated 75% of all applications are granted.

There has to be a failure rate as I expect inside the 25% are people trying to enter the UK through the back door.

We are probably just looking at a few dozen refusal of family visit visas from Thailand per annum.

The bulk will be from areas where there is a high chance of fraud.

There is no presumption here that many were from Thailand. We are discussing a general, not Thailand specific, injustice which effects innocent people worldwide, not just in Thailand.

As Seekingasylium said earlier, up to 70% of appeals WERE UPHELD!

Of course some refusals were correct; no one is denying that. But such a high rate of appeals being upheld shows that most were not.

To abolish the right of appeal because most appeals were upheld is totally unjustifiable, no matter how hard you and the government try.
 

[bkk_mike]

If you read Colin Yeo's site he makes the following point.

 

 

For immigration lawyers, the effects of the Immigration Act 2014 are profound. The Government has predicted a 67% fall in the number of immigration appeals. This may be an overestimate and it may well be counterbalanced to some extent by an increase in applications for judicial review, but it will nonetheless have an important impact on the everyday work of lawyers. 

By everyday work of lawyers he of course means their revenue stream.Which means a substantial reduction in the publicly funded legal aid industry which exists at the taxpayers expense.

 

I am no fan of the legal industry which has mushroomed in recent years.

 

The USA and Thailand offer no right of appeal against the issue of visa's so why should the UK be any different.

 

 

Tourist visa for Thailand - £25 single entry, £50 dual-entry.

Tourist visa for USA - $160 (about £95) - note: last time I applied, wife got 10yr multi-entry...

Tourist visa for UK - From £85 (single entry) to £737 (10yr multi-entry)

 

For the single entry, the cost of an appeal is maybe not justified, but if you apply for a 5/10yr visa, either of which cost over £500, I think you should be entitled to an appeal (or most of your money back).

[Jay Sata]

Whatever the rights or wrongs the right to appeal has been closed and the option remains to make a new application.

As for the suggestion of people visiting for funerals or other crisis situations a normal family visit visa cannot be obtained in a very short timespan.

As I said in a previous post 75% of applications are granted which is a reasonable success rate.

[Tony M]

Whatever the rights or wrongs the right to appeal has been closed and the option remains to make a new application.

As for the suggestion of people visiting for funerals or other crisis situations a normal family visit visa cannot be obtained in a very short timespan.

As I said in a previous post 75% of applications are granted which is a reasonable success rate.

 

You talk your usual rubbish.   "75% of applications are granted which is a reasonable success rate."   Reasonable to who ?   I don't think the 25% who have been refused visas would agree with you.

 

Are you saying that the UKVI should be allowed to have a 25% error rate, and that this should be acceptable to someone who has paid a fee for a service ?  Your posts become harder for you to justify with each one you make. Please give it up, and find another forum to post your untenable statements.

[bkk_mike]

Whatever the rights or wrongs the right to appeal has been closed and the option remains to make a new application.

As for the suggestion of people visiting for funerals or other crisis situations a normal family visit visa cannot be obtained in a very short timespan.

As I said in a previous post 75% of applications are granted which is a reasonable success rate.

 

People said wedding, wedding, wedding, funeral.

 

You heard funeral..., or are weddings in your family crisis situations also?

Edited August 2, 2014 by bkk_mike

[Jay Sata]

Most of the refusals probably centre around brother in law,wife cousins etc who often used this route in the past to spend six months working in a Leicester sweat shop or a takeaway.

I have never met anyone who has had a genuine visit refused.

Those refused usually have no reason to return if admitted and the ECO's must have seen similar applications many times in their time doing the job.

As I have said before the days of appeals are behind us so let's move on. Edited August 2, 2014 by Jay Sata

[7by7]

As for the suggestion of people visiting for funerals or other crisis situations a normal family visit visa cannot be obtained in a very short timespan.

It used to be possible to have a visit visa application expedited due to compassionate circumstances. I suspect, though, that since the introduction of the fast track 'service' UKVI have done away with this so that they can extract even more money from people.

Even so, processing times depend on demand and I have personal experience of a non urgent, non fast tracked family visit visa being issued within 24 hours of the application being submitted!
 
But we are discussing appeals, not processing times.
 

Most of the refusals probably centre around brother in law,wife cousins etc who often used this route in the past to spend six months working in a Leicester sweat shop or a takeaway.

Pure conjecture based upon nothing but your own prejudices.

If such was the case, tell us why on average 70% of appeals were upheld.
 
"I have never met anyone who has had a genuine visit refused."

I have, and if you regularly read forums such as this you will have come across many posts from people who are genuine visitors, been refused and, when it was possible, had that refusal overturned on appeal; either by the ECM in post or at a hearing in the UK.
 
"Those refused usually have no reason to return if admitted and the ECO's must have seen similar applications many times in their time doing the job."

Reason to return is, probably, the most common reason for refusal of general visit applications; but family ones where the applicant and their British sponsor live together in the applicants home country? Even you must accept that is ludicrous.

The problem is that the ECO's aren't doing their job properly; they are rushing it. Probably due to performance pressures placed upon them by their masters which concentrate on quantity rather than quality. Because they are rushing it, they are making more and more mistakes; mistakes that can no longer be rectified.
 
"As I have said before the days of appeals are behind us so let's move on."

If governments act unjustly and the people don't complain, the next injustice will be worse.

You are, of course, perfectly at liberty to 'move on' and stop reading and posting in this topic.

You wont be missed.

Edited August 2, 2014 by 7by7

[Jay Sata]

You appear to want the option to challenge every decision immigration officers make or have a totally open border system.

I was merely pointing out that our democratically elected government have made adjustments to the visa system to enter the UK.

There are many decisions by this and past governments I do not agree we however we live in a democracy and that it how things work.

A well presented visa application supported by the correct documents and proof of funds and reason to return will never be refused. Why is the blame always placed on 'an overworked' ECO?

They have a job to do and. I am sure most are highly skilled in weeding out the genuine from the fraudsters.

It is pure conjecture to talk about the 25% who fail to get a family visa but they have the option of submitting a new application which frankly is more cost effective for everyone.

These numbers do not apply to Thai nationals but are across the world refusals.

Let me reminds you of what the minister said when he introduced the new rules.

'Family visitor appeals make up more than a third of all immigration appeals going through the system, with many applicants using it as an opportunity to submit information that should have been included in the first place.

Removing the right of appeal will save £107 million over the next decade, making the process faster and cheaper for applicants and allowing officials to focus on more complex cases, such as asylum claims and foreign criminal deportations.' Edited August 2, 2014 by Jay Sata

[7by7]

I am not saying I want a completely open border; but yes, I do think that decisions made by ECOs should be open to challenge. As should be all decisions made by officials which effect people's lives, and in most other government departments are.

 

A well presented visa application which shows that the applicant meets the requirements of the immigration rules for that visa SHOULD never be refused.

 

Unfortunately, they were and still are.

 

How else do you explain the fact that 70% of appeals were allowed? Explain that if the ECOs are getting it right all the time!

 

If you call the ECOs 'highly skilled' then, with respect to certain members here who have done the job, you know nothing of the current level of them. Highly skilled is not a word anyone would use; cannon fodder would be closer!

 

Submitting a new application is more cost effective for the UKVI, for sure. Doing away with courts and sending anyone accused of a crime straight to prison would be very cost effective as well. After all, like ECOs, the police never get it wrong; do they!

 

Why do you keep being obsessed with just Thailand? We are discussing a UKVI and British government decision whish effects all family visit visa applicants, everywhere.

 

Thank you, but I am aware what the minister said. Doesn't mean he was right, though; he wasn't!

 

Edited August 2, 2014 by 7by7

[Jay Sata]

We are talking here about foreign nationals requiring a visa for the UK.

They require permission to enter the country and in requesting a visa they have to satisfy a number of requirements.

Unlike those of us born or naturalised here they have no rights. The cost of defending appeals was considered excessive and many were granted simply because there was insufficient funds or manpower to turn up or process the paperwork for all the appeals.

As a result some foreign nationals were entering the country on default.

As I have previously said if the paperwork is correct and all the boxes ticked the visa will be granted.

However someone's sister or brother working on the farm or in a factory with little or no income asking for a six month visit to the UK is not going to find the going easy.

You appear to question the ability of the immigration service to do the job .

I refer to Thailand because this is a Thai visa forum but I suspect most of the refusals are from certain parts of
Africa,Asia and the Caribbean.

As for summary justice I guess you don't know about parking and speeding tickets? Edited August 2, 2014 by Jay Sata

[loppylugs1]

We are talking here about foreign nationals requiring a visa for the UK.

They require permission to enter the country and in requesting a visa they have to satisfy a number of requirements.

Unlike those of us born or naturalised here they have no rights. The cost of defending appeals was considered excessive and many were granted simply because there was insufficient funds or manpower to turn up or process the paperwork for all the appeals.

As a result some foreign nationals were entering the country on default.

As I have previously said if the paperwork is correct and all the boxes ticked the visa will be granted.

However someone's sister or brother working on the farm or in a factory with little or no income asking for a six month visit to the UK is not going to find the going easy.

You appear to question the ability of the immigration service to do the job .

I refer to Thailand because this is a Thai visa forum but I suspect most of the refusals are from certain parts of
Africa,Asia and the Caribbean.

As for summary justice I guess you don't know about parking and speeding tickets?

 

Without doubt the most prolific posters here seeking visas or giving advice are on the utter bones of their arse, no jobs or poorly paid ones at that Yes, seen other comments from posters and ain't life hard (no?) because it is. If you cannot manage £16.500 ,or £23.000 for a tribe, whatever it is you should not get into the UK.

 

   Yes Yes Yes,no public money etc. but charity extends itself more generously in the UK than anywhere.  Just hoping the crackdown extends itself,and yes gets more punishing.  Have seen first hand Thai kids struggle in the UK and it is no place for them..period
 

[Seekingasylum]

I suspect more confidence on the part of ECO's knowing the applicant can no longer appeal and cost the service money defending the decision.

To get the figures in context 75% of applications are approved.

Incidentally Anotherone what about the USA and it's refusal rate?

The ignorance of the subject upon which you would wish to express an opinion is evidently as profound as your arrogance. Quite why you wish to troll is a matter for you but really, you add little.

Historically, 3 - 6%, was the refusal rate for many posts outside the subcontinent and West Africa. The statistics revealed a trend which demonstrated most applications were well founded and quite legitimate. Of those refused at least half won appeals. Thai have not figured significantly in enforcement statistics for nigh on 30 years. There is no perceived problem with Thai in immigration terms other than they contribute to legitimate migration in the numbers that reflect the British association with the Kingdom.

The increase in refusal rate is simply that. It does not reflect anything other than that. Any post that demonstrates such an increase, from 3 - 6% to 25% would suggest an attack upon the system or some increased imperative to migrate because of other reasons. Neither pertain presently in Thailand since forgeries, impersonations and fraudulent applications founded on bogus sponsorships have not been detected as a trend. The increase is simply attributable to a covert policy of refusal whenever possible by a system which now rewards such performance on political grounds disassociated from the merits of any particular claim.

It is really quite cynical and, in immigration terms, without parallel.

You are evidently a lay person and not particularly intelligent or informed. As others have said, why can't you troll elsewhere?

[Richard W]

As for summary justice I guess you don't know about parking and speeding tickets?

Are you referring to automatic refusal of indefinite leave to remain for recently unsuccessfully challenging a fixed penalty notice?

[Jay Sata]

I suspect more confidence on the part of ECO's knowing the applicant can no longer appeal and cost the service money defending the decision.

To get the figures in context 75% of applications are approved.

Incidentally Anotherone what about the USA and it's refusal rate?

The ignorance of the subject upon which you would wish to express an opinion is evidently as profound as your arrogance. Quite why you wish to troll is a matter for you but really, you add little.

Historically, 3 - 6%, was the refusal rate for many posts outside the subcontinent and West Africa. The statistics revealed a trend which demonstrated most applications were well founded and quite legitimate. Of those refused at least half won appeals. Thai have not figured significantly in enforcement statistics for nigh on 30 years. There is no perceived problem with Thai in immigration terms other than they contribute to legitimate migration in the numbers that reflect the British association with the Kingdom.

The increase in refusal rate is simply that. It does not reflect anything other than that. Any post that demonstrates such an increase, from 3 - 6% to 25% would suggest an attack upon the system or some increased imperative to migrate because of other reasons. Neither pertain presently in Thailand since forgeries, impersonations and fraudulent applications founded on bogus sponsorships have not been detected as a trend. The increase is simply attributable to a covert policy of refusal whenever possible by a system which now rewards such performance on political grounds disassociated from the merits of any particular claim.

It is really quite cynical and, in immigration terms, without parallel.

You are evidently a lay person and not particularly intelligent or informed. As others have said, why can't you troll elsewhere?

You have misread what I have posted. There is no problem with Thai applicants.

The bulk of the refusals most probably come as you say from west Africa and the subcon.

The previous success rate was down to a lack of manpower allowing the appeals on default when government caseworkers and lawyers were unable to process or attend court.

It may upset you to accept that over 50% of the UK population want these loopholes closed hence the trend across all parties to restrict access doors to the country.

All of the recent changes reflect public opinion and are now law.

Can you accept that?

[Seekingasylum]

It wasn't a lack of manpower at all that prevented the Home Office from attending appeal hearings. They were more than content to leave the matter to the Judge on papers alone. In most instances, particularly those in-country appeals, the Home Office were simply refusing applicants without proper consideration and leaving it to the Judge as the caseworker of last resort. If you were involved you would know that but you were not, hence the rubbish you continue to spout. No appeal was allowed by default, as you stupidly term it, they were lost by the Home Office on the grounds that the evidence put forward by the appellant was persuasive and compelling on the facts and the law.

The fact that you equate an appeal process to a loophole indicates the impoverishment of your intellectual acuity and is probably sufficient to render your contribution here as utterly valueless, as indeed is your equally stupid presumption that you know what the people of Britain are thinking.

[7by7]

As for summary justice I guess you don't know about parking and speeding tickets?

 

I have never received a speeding ticket; but I have received parking tickets.

 

Where the parking ticket was justified I paid it. Where I felt it wasn't, I appealed it, sometimes winning the appeal, sometimes not.

 

Yes, parking tickets can be appealed.

 

So can speeding tickets.

 

Your analogy, yet again, is pony.

 

As for your other points; Seekingasylum, who knows the system far better than I, has shown how wrong you are.

Edited August 2, 2014 by 7by7

[Jay Sata]

Well we can discuss the rights and wrongs of this but the decision was made some time ago and there is no going back now.

As I have said before if someone can travel several thousand miles to meet and marry then they have the funds to pay for the ticket so they have to face the inevitable costs involved in having long distance family connections and any problems that arise later. Edited August 2, 2014 by Jay Sata

[7by7]

Laws can be changed if enough people protest; whither the Poll Tax?

 

Once again you are fixated on money. We are not talking about the financial costs of long distance relationships nor of foreign holidays.

 

We are talking about the injustice of removing the only way, other than a lengthy and costly judicial review, of rectifying mistakes made by public servants.

[Jay Sata]

Laws can be changed if enough people protest; whither the Poll Tax?
 
Once again you are fixated on money. We are not talking about the financial costs of long distance relationships nor of foreign holidays.
 
We are talking about the injustice of removing the only way, other than a lengthy and costly judicial review, of rectifying mistakes made by public servants.

I can't see the newspapers or the UK population running with this one.

As for being fixated with money the situation is simple.

If you cannot afford to fund a long distance family never go down that road.

An airline ticket to somewhere costs money and the resulting romance and marriage costs a lot more.

Public servants such as ECO's are there to clear visa applicants and if they feel there are problems or underfunding they will reject them.

I have more chance of winning the lottery than a judicial review for rejected foreign applicants for UK visas.

[7by7]

First you say that family visit visas are refused on returnability grounds; now you are saying it's financial!

 

Make your mind up.

 

But, if someone can't afford to visit the UK and therefore their visa is refused on financial grounds then any appeal would fail on those same grounds.

 

As has been repeatedly said, but you choose to ignore as it doesn't fit your argument; 70% of appeals were successful!

 

This has got nothing to do with how well off someone is and what they can and cannot afford. It is about the removal of the main recourse to justice of those who do meet all the requirements but are still wrongly refused.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2014 by 7by7

[Jay Sata]

First you say that family visit visas are refused on returnability grounds; now you are saying it's financial!
 
Make your mind up.
 
But, if someone can't afford to visit the UK and therefore their visa is refused on financial grounds then any appeal would fail on those same grounds.
 
As has been repeatedly said, but you choose to ignore as it doesn't fit your argument; 70% of appeals were successful!
 
This has got nothing to do with how well off someone is and what they can and cannot afford. It is about the removal of the main recourse to justice of those who do meet all the requirements but are still wrongly

 

it is not a case of appeals being allowed but a refusal rate of 25% from July-Sept 2013.

These can not be appealed therefore the successful applications being 75% of the total. There is no recourse to justice as you suggest as appeals are no longer allowed.

The rule are the rules for entering the UK as a foreigner. The relatives of the 25% have the option of visiting the relatives they met when they married the spouse abroad in the first place. They can just as easily jump on an aircraft in the UK and fly back as fund a relative to come to the UK.

How do you know the rejected applicants met the criteria? I have not seen any breakdown of the figures to show individual cases. Edited August 2, 2014 by Jay Sata

[Jay Sata]

The most important point is the appeals were costing the UK government money.

I quote again the Immigration Minister

'Family visitor appeals make up more than a third of all immigration appeals going through the system, with many applicants using it as an opportunity to submit information that should have been included in the first place.

Removing the right of appeal will save £107 million over the next decade, making the process faster and cheaper for applicants and allowing officials to focus on more complex cases, such as asylum claims and foreign criminal deportations.'

He stated there that many appeals were founded on incorrect original applications.

The visitor now has to submit a new application if they are rejected instead of wasting taxpayers money on appeals.

If they cannot afford the visa process then the answer is simple. Get on an aircraft and visit them instead.

[7by7]

I have no idea what you mean when you say "There is no recourse to justice as you suggest as appeals are no longer allowed." My whole point is that as appeals are no longer allowed the victims of ECO error no longer have any recourse to justice!

The most important point is not the estimated savings to the taxpayer; it is that those wrongly refused are being denied proper, lawful redress.
 
I repeat; it is not a question of the British based sponsors of those who can't afford the visa process getting on an aircraft and visiting their family member instead; if sponsor and/or applicant couldn't afford the process or other costs involved in the visit then they wouldn't be applying for a visa in the first place!
 
You can repeat the party line as often as you like; it still wont make it right.
 
It is not often that I agree with Tony Blair, but when he said

When a right of appeal is removed, what is removed is a valuable and necessary constraint on those who exercise original jurisdiction. That is true not merely of immigration officers but of anybody. The immigration officer who knows that his decision may be subject to appeal is likely to be a good deal more circumspect, careful and even handed than the officer who knows that his power of decision is absolute. That is simply, I fear, a matter of human nature, quite apart from anything else.
(Hansard vol 213, col 43, 2 November 1992)

he was absolutely right.
 
There has to be a reason why the family visit refusal rate increased so much once the appeal right was abolished.
 
I doubt that it was due to a sudden deterioration in the quality of applications!
 
Far more likely is the point made by Blair above, although he was talking about IOs at ports of entry rather than ECOs the point is still applicable.
 
The cynical in me even wonders whether ECOs have been told to be more strict than the rules and guidance necessitates in order to make more money for the UKVI coffers from those who do apply again.

 

This situation will be even worse if/when the government implement their plans to abolish appeals for settlement refusals. Though you would say that the British based sponsor should move to their spouse/partner's country instead!
 
As for the £107 million of taxpayers money the minister estimates will be saved over the next decade. I wonder how much will be lost to the British economy because of the people who do decide that a second application is not worth the effort so the British family member(s) go to their foreign family members country to spend their money there rather than the foreign family member spending money, or having money spent on their behalf, in the UK!

[loppylugs1]

Laws can be changed if enough people protest; whither the Poll Tax?

 

Once again you are fixated on money. We are not talking about the financial costs of long distance relationships nor of foreign holidays.

 

We are talking about the injustice of removing the only way, other than a lengthy and costly judicial review, of rectifying mistakes made by public servants.

 

You think public opinion will sway what you desire? dream on sunshine.Poll tax was a different ball game to attempting to stuff the UK full unskilled chancers,public opinion is hardening to any and all immigration

 

  Yes, we are talking money,enough of it to fully support yourself and baggage.

 

No injustice,cannot bend the rulings,tough,  "foreign family members spending money in the UK" as you quote. Not much money to spend if you are from Thailand then

[Bernard Flint]

 

We are talking here about foreign nationals requiring a visa for the UK.

They require permission to enter the country and in requesting a visa they have to satisfy a number of requirements.

Unlike those of us born or naturalised here they have no rights. The cost of defending appeals was considered excessive and many were granted simply because there was insufficient funds or manpower to turn up or process the paperwork for all the appeals.

As a result some foreign nationals were entering the country on default.

As I have previously said if the paperwork is correct and all the boxes ticked the visa will be granted.

However someone's sister or brother working on the farm or in a factory with little or no income asking for a six month visit to the UK is not going to find the going easy.

You appear to question the ability of the immigration service to do the job .

I refer to Thailand because this is a Thai visa forum but I suspect most of the refusals are from certain parts of
Africa,Asia and the Caribbean.

As for summary justice I guess you don't know about parking and speeding tickets?

 

Without doubt the most prolific posters here seeking visas or giving advice are on the utter bones of their arse, no jobs or poorly paid ones at that Yes, seen other comments from posters and ain't life hard (no?) because it is. If you cannot manage £16.500 ,or £23.000 for a tribe, whatever it is you should not get into the UK.

 

   Yes Yes Yes,no public money etc. but charity extends itself more generously in the UK than anywhere.  Just hoping the crackdown extends itself,and yes gets more punishing.  Have seen first hand Thai kids struggle in the UK and it is no place for them..period
 

 

AGREE SIR

 

i HAVE HEARD MANY CONVERSATIONS about farang who wants to take lady back, not a clue what to do, some even think they can get the girl to have a job, get paid back pocket, and actualy think it is ok.Some are actualy dole scroungers, who think they can do anything in life, and believe because they earn 20k a year selling dope or illegal cigarettes they can comply, un believable

 

However i do believe there is the odd one,who possibly hasnt filled in paperwrok correct do get refused, not many though.

[Richard W]

i HAVE HEARD MANY CONVERSATIONS about farang who wants to take lady back, not a clue what to do, some even think they can get the girl to have a job, get paid back pocket, and actualy think it is ok.Some are actualy dole scroungers, who think they can do anything in life, and believe because they earn 20k a year selling dope or illegal cigarettes they can comply, un believable

What has this got to do with family visit visas?

[loppylugs1]

 

i HAVE HEARD MANY CONVERSATIONS about farang who wants to take lady back, not a clue what to do, some even think they can get the girl to have a job, get paid back pocket, and actualy think it is ok.Some are actualy dole scroungers, who think they can do anything in life, and believe because they earn 20k a year selling dope or illegal cigarettes they can comply, un believable

What has this got to do with family visit visas?

 

 

Plenty.  come,look,see at what you could get and do in the UK.Once there the great temptation is to stay,work the black economy which many do,then a freebie home if and when caught out.

 

For some people they think 5 years without being caught out is enough reason to stay lawfully in the UK . Family visit to the UK from someone from Issan would be like paradise found,more chance of flogging a dead cat than getting them on a returning 'plane