something odd here

[Mrbiggus]

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Brixham-dad-8217-s-fears-wife-faces-deportation/story-25754544-detail/story.html

Why he not apply for spouce visa??????

[7by7]

Indeed; it seems that they tried to use a two year visit visa to by pass the settlement rules and got caught. (BTW, the article and the one linked to within it both contain much 'information' about the rules which is inaccurate; the author hasn't done their research properly!)

Whilst I have every sympathy with this couple, if the reason for so doing was his earnings; there are many in the same plight who do abide by the rules. Whilst one may not like the rules, it is people who abuse them who make it more difficult for those who try and abide by them.

As he seems to now be earning enough to satisfy the income requirement, his wife should simply return to Thailand and apply for settlement.

[Jay Sata]

This topic has been covered many times.

A succession of visitor visas does not give a foreign partner the right to live in the UK.

If I may quote the story....

A Home Office spokesman said: The visitor visa route cannot be used to repeatedly live in the UK for extended periods. Mrs Wades visitor visa was cancelled for this reason.

Those wishing to come to the UK to settle with their British partner should make an application through the spousal visa route. These applications should be made from outside the UK.

Andrew, a UK national, moved back to Torbay in July last year due to his parents failing health.

Kingdao was on a two-year multiple entry family visa which was due to run out in May next year, but the family are hoping she will be able to get a spousal visa enabling her to remain permanently.

Read more: http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Brixham-dad-8217-s-fears-wife-faces-deportation/story-25754544-detail/story.html#ixzz3MkqwOCrK

If she wants a spouse visa then it will have to be done in Thailand.

[bobrussell]

Not really that sympathetic. The family have enough knowledge of the immigration system to get a two year multivisit visa so are like;y to be well aware of the rules.Money wasted on appeals and lawyers could be better spent by the family IMO.

The rest of us have had to live within the immigration rules but why should one family be able to bypass the rules? That would really be grossly unfair.

Poor local rag journalism!

[wooloomooloo]

If it were me, I'd be on the next flight back to LOS to submit a settlement visa application. What they hope to achieve from appealing is beyond me, other than delaying the inevitable.

Sensational, ill-informed reporting.

Good luck to them, but playing by the rules makes for an easier life.

[MAJIC]

Not really that sympathetic. The family have enough knowledge of the immigration system to get a two year multivisit visa so are like;y to be well aware of the rules.Money wasted on appeals and lawyers could be better spent by the family IMO.

The rest of us have had to live within the immigration rules but why should one family be able to bypass the rules? That would really be grossly unfair.

Poor local rag journalism!

Once again the UK is being treated as a soft touch,and is expected to change the immigration rules to give the the right of permant residence to suit those that expect to be given preference,while using an unsuitable Visa. The Husband should have known the likely outcome.And now sadly it is the Thai wife and children who will suffer! And does nothing for those that expect to change the UK immigration rules, once in the country!

[Jay Sata]

Spot on there Majic.

Some people try to cheat and then expect a story in the local newspaper will fix things.

[NanLaew]

... Whilst one may not like the rules, it is people who abuse them who make it more difficult for those who try and abide by them.

...

This 'argument' is also used by foreigners as they look down their nose at their 'less qualified' fellow farangs here in LOS. Immigration rules are enforced on a case-by-case basis and I seriously doubt that Joe Bloggs gets his wife kicked out of the country purely because some Home Office wonk remembers this Andrew Wade chap milking the system with his wife on UK Visit visas.

The guy in the OP refers to his wife doing 'visa runs' which is probably how he eked a living during his previous prolonged stay in Thailand. As you say, he appears to have incorrectly applied his knowledge of manipulating the rather relaxed Thai visa system to his wife's UK Visit visa.

"It seems grossly unfair. Last time she left the country she was told she had not spent enough time out of the country. Next month she has to do her next visa run and I feel very nervous something could go very wrong."

There's been a few threads here where Thai wives and girlfriends have managed to spend a reasonable amount of the time in the UK on UK Visit visas. However, they make the effort to spend almost equal time back in Thailand.

[Basil B]

I can not believe they were not aware of the rule that irrespective of the length of the visas validity, she could not say in the UK for more than six months on any visit.

Again we see distorted journalism, playing on the heart strings of Joe public with factually incorrect reporting, maybe this journalist should have spent their time reporting on those who are law-abiding and separated this Christmas.

Given the changes to the law regarding rented property this year where landlords face prosecution for allowing II's to rent, this law does not go far enough as a landlord can only check the credentials of the persons signing the rental agreement and the law needs to be extended to make the property owner(s) if owner occupiers or those on a rental agreement where the property is rented responsible to ensure they are not providing accommodation to illegals, this guy should be facing a potential £10K fine.

Having said that I see no reason if they meet the income rules that she should be able to obtain a settlement visa back in BKK, further more I feel if a person fails to leave as instructed, they should be arrested taken to court and thus it would be deemed as a criminal conviction which could prohibit them getting any visa in the future.

Another issue is I believe there should be a intermediate settlement visa of 6 months validity which can be extended twice, which would allow route to settlement, this would allow both partners to work (but no recourse to public funds) and thus joint incomes could be considered, it should be made clear that there was no automatic extension of these visas and applicants would have to prove they are likely to meet the financial requirements to get an extension and the holder may have to return to their own country at short notice.

Anyway said my bit...

Wishing everybody a Merry Christmas.

[Briggsy]

A settlement visa used to be able to be obtained in a few days from British Embassy in Bangkok in straightforward cases like this. I do not know the case now.

I suspect the couple did not want to pay the fee.

[Richard W]

Given the changes to the law regarding rented property this year where landlords face prosecution for allowing II's to rent, this law does not go far enough as a landlord can only check the credentials of the persons signing the rental agreement and the law needs to be extended to make the property owner(s) if owner occupiers or those on a rental agreement where the property is rented responsible to ensure they are not providing accommodation to illegals, this guy should be facing a potential £10K fine.

The landlord in the West Midlands is required to check the immigration status of any reasonably forseeable adult occupants. (The law only applies to the West Midlands at present.) The fine is £3k, not £10k. I think you are confusing the fine with the fine for unwittingly employing someone without permission to work, which recently rose from £10k to £20k.

[Basil B]

Given the changes to the law regarding rented property this year where landlords face prosecution for allowing II's to rent, this law does not go far enough as a landlord can only check the credentials of the persons signing the rental agreement and the law needs to be extended to make the property owner(s) if owner occupiers or those on a rental agreement where the property is rented responsible to ensure they are not providing accommodation to illegals, this guy should be facing a potential £10K fine.

The landlord in the West Midlands is required to check the immigration status of any reasonably forseeable adult occupants. (The law only applies to the West Midlands at present.) The fine is £3k, not £10k. I think you are confusing the fine with the fine for unwittingly employing someone without permission to work, which recently rose from £10k to £20k.

1. I thought it was nationwide, it will be next year.
2. Seems it is only £3,000 for failing to carry out the checks, may be it is £10,00 for knowingly allowing?
3. In most cases it is near impossible for landlords (or their agents) to check who will be or is residing at their properties, their checks can only go as far as those signing the tenancy agreement, that why I feel it should be the responsibility of the named person(s) on the tenancy, mortgage, or property deeds to carry out checks on anyone residing with them.

[theoldgit]

I suspect the couple did not want to pay the fee.

Or maybe they didn't meet the financial requirement.

[Jay Sata]

I suspect the couple did not want to pay the fee.

Or maybe they didn't meet the financial requirement.

That is the bottom line OG.

It is not just the financial requirement but the biggest hurdle is the language tests.

[Richard W]

1. I thought it was nationwide, it will be next year.

That depends on the severity of the problems revealed by the pilot in the West Midlands.

2. Seems it is only £3,000 for failing to carry out the checks, may be it is £10,00 for knowingly allowing?

The checks are only relevant if an illegal immigrant is actually found to have been residing. If one's child is making a contribution for board and lodging, and one knows that he is a British citizen, one does not have to carry out the checks.

3. In most cases it is near impossible for landlords (or their agents) to check who will be or is residing at their properties, their checks can only go as far as those signing the tenancy agreement, that why I feel it should be the responsibility of the named person(s) on the tenancy, mortgage, or property deeds to carry out checks on anyone residing with them.

What connection does justice have to the government-imposed denials of service to illegal immigrants?

The landlord is in general required to enquire as to which adults will be living at the property.

[Jay Sata]

The wider issue is access to the NHS.

Pictures of long queues in newspapers suggest the influx of migrants are placing a strain on the infrastructure.

Schools are another problem.

Housing in the UK had now reached a critical stage.

The NIMBY's do not want houses anywhere while there is plenty of land to build on.

I must admit having been tempted to buy a few houses for the return on capital.

If you can cope with the hassle the big money is on cheap houses in run down seaside resorts.

Multiple occupancy is the way to exploit the lack of housing.

[NanLaew]

The wider issue is access to the NHS.

Pictures of long queues in newspapers suggest the influx of migrants are placing a strain on the infrastructure.

Schools are another problem.

Housing in the UK had now reached a critical stage.

The NIMBY's do not want houses anywhere while there is plenty of land to build on.

I must admit having been tempted to buy a few houses for the return on capital.

If you can cope with the hassle the big money is on cheap houses in run down seaside resorts.

Multiple occupancy is the way to exploit the lack of housing.

Possibly regarding the NHS. However, my experience through my ailing but now departed parents in the UK was the ever-declining availability of doctors doing house calls on the aged and infirm. The NHS was top of the class for their reminders of free checks for this that and the other and my folks jumped through all those hoops. But when it came to the odd bronchitis attack or the early onset urinary tract infection on a Friday night, the best they could hope for would be some vaguely qualified person on a phone deciding whether aspirin would 'work until Monday' or get an ambulance to whisk them into A&E. Now I am talking about NHS Scotland that arguably trumps the operation south of the border but are the services being abused by newly arrived immigrants? I mean a doctors surgery in Sparkbrook, Birmingham will 'look' like it is full of immigrants when in reality, they are the locals.

Actual school problems or the dumbing down of examination pass rates?

I agree that housing, especially social housing was destroyed under Thatcher but why didn't Blair's 'New Labour' redress that? They had years to rebalance the ridiculous 'right to buy' precept. My late parents council house was perpetually in a high-pressure' area where the right-to-by was so bound by petty restrictions, it took legal action before the local Council would agree to grant them their right after over 35 years of rent-paid-on-time tenancy.

The example of London's green belt sets the precedent that the Nimby's hold on to. That whole premise was based on some pretty vague environmental planning from beyond 50 years ago but now seems to be buried as inviolate in some unwritten SE England constitution. Thus acres of affordable land for affordable houses are maintained at taxpayer cost as a wasted natural resource.

If you have deep pockets, now is the time to get some UK rental property as more than a few Landlords that overstretched themselves with several houses are now offloading the more problematical ones (dodgy tenants) or older properties that are more expensive to maintain. Keep in mind you will get what you pay for. As you suggest, don't count on being an absentee landlord.

Personally, I am already investing in Morcambe property but didn't think about doing flats. They are great for working singles or couples but there are whole families with a livable but limited income that are desperate for a family home as well.