UK visitor visa.

[7by7]

You seem to have difficulty in understanding the difference between "going to" and "entering."

I have several times been to Downing Street; but I have never entered!

I accept that you have entered the VAC office to collect your wife's passport; but that is not the same as submitting an application. Particularly as anyone can collect an applicant's passport, provided they have permission from the applicant to do so.

You have still to say when your last experience with VFS was; before or after mine in February?

It is not the use of VACs which precludes contact with ECOs; that was on the cards before the widespread use of VACs and would be the same today even if applications were submitted at the embassy and the clerical side handled exclusively by UKVI staff.

For example, the switch to the premium rate enquiry line, with it's 'cut and paste' style of answers, rather than being able to talk to a UKVI employee direct is a disgrace; I have never said otherwise.

But my experience of the old, UKVI staffed service was disappointing, to put it mildly; having asked the same question of three different people three separate times and been given three different answers!

You seem to think that I am some sort of government apologist who is prepared to defend the whole system to my dying breath; my record speaks for itself in showing that is way off the truth.

I stand by my original comment; if one is subjected to inappropriate questioning, or any other behaviour which is outside their remit, by staff at VFS; make an official complaint.

I fail to understand why you and sandyf feel that is poor advice and would rather just moan about it on here.

If no one complains, nothing will be done and future applicants will be subjected to the same poor treatment.

Edited May 4, 2015 by 7by7

[sandyf]

<snip>

The Canada visitor visa can be obtained without leaving home, a real bonus for those living some distance from BKK.

Many countries, the UK, the Schengen states, the USA etc., require visa applicants to submit biometrics; obviously this can only be done in person. Canada does not yet require biometrics from all applicants.

If you are exempt from giving biometrics you can complete the whole Canadian visa process via the post; otherwise you do have to attend the Canadian VAC in person to have biometrics taken.

Temporary Resident Visa / Permits and Travel Documents Application Process (Canada call a visit visa a temporary resident visa.)

To start quoting links in reference to something I have been through is the height of arrogance. I suggest the mods close the thread.

[durhamboy]

I agree sandyf. But before the mods do close the thread let me respond to 7by7. Thanks.

7by7 - I'm glad you finally admit that I have been to VFS. That was just over 2 years ago (at their old offices). You seem to be making a big point that your experience in February this year is more recent. Fact is that experience was from your armchair in the UK wasn't it? I repeat you have never been there.

Yes, I went there to pick up my wife's passport and, as you say, only the applicants are allowed in to submit applications. So, if you really think about it, that is another reason why the third party VAC system does not give a good enough service. In the "good old days" the sponsor could accompany the applicant to the embassy to submit applications and any minor problems could be ironed out on the spot. I know because I did this.

Btw, I do think that you are a government apologist in many ways. Not every way. You have been quite vociferous against the level of the financial requirements and cost of visas. On most other things you seem to toe the party line.

If sandyf, myself and others want to moan about things in this forum then that is our right and partly what this forum is all about. If you don't like my posts then please feel free not to read them.

[MaprangHolmes]

I agree sandyf. But before the mods do close the thread let me respond to 7by7. Thanks.

7by7 - I'm glad you finally admit that I have been to VFS. That was just over 2 years ago (at their old offices). You seem to be making a big point that your experience in February this year is more recent. Fact is that experience was from your armchair in the UK wasn't it? I repeat you have never been there.

Yes, I went there to pick up my wife's passport and, as you say, only the applicants are allowed in to submit applications. So, if you really think about it, that is another reason why the third party VAC system does not give a good enough service. In the "good old days" the sponsor could accompany the applicant to the embassy to submit applications and any minor problems could be ironed out on the spot. I know because I did this.

Btw, I do think that you are a government apologist in many ways. Not every way. You have been quite vociferous against the level of the financial requirements and cost of visas. On most other things you seem to toe the party line.

If sandyf, myself and others want to moan about things in this forum then that is our right and partly what this forum is all about. If you don't like my posts then please feel free not to read them.

It is fine to moan about something but how is that going to change anything? if everyone does just like you and moans nothings will ever get changed, people need to complain in droves to bring about change if nobody complains how on earth does anyone know that there is something wrong. If got sent a bill and they where going to be charging you too much are you going to just sit there and pay it?

[7by7]

<snip>

The Canada visitor visa can be obtained without leaving home, a real bonus for those living some distance from BKK.

Many countries, the UK, the Schengen states, the USA etc., require visa applicants to submit biometrics; obviously this can only be done in person. Canada does not yet require biometrics from all applicants.

If you are exempt from giving biometrics you can complete the whole Canadian visa process via the post; otherwise you do have to attend the Canadian VAC in person to have biometrics taken.

Temporary Resident Visa / Permits and Travel Documents Application Process (Canada call a visit visa a temporary resident visa.)

To start quoting links in reference to something I have been through is the height of arrogance. I suggest the mods close the thread.

You may call posting that Canada seems to be alone amongst Western states in not requiring biometrics from all visa applicants, and that they do require them from some, arrogant; others would call it informative.

Made your complaint to UKVI yet?

[7by7]

Durhamboy, I never denied that you had been to VFS; you are putting words into my mouth; something you have done before.

Glad that you finally admit you have not been involved in a UK visa application for over two years, whereas my involvement was only 3 months ago!

I may have completed the application form for my sister-in-law from my armchair and not entered the VAC in February with her, but I believe her when she says that she had absolutely no problems with submitting her application at VFS, no interrogation and was, in fact, treated with politeness and respect.

You seem to be implying that she is lying! Perhaps you owe her an apology.

I have, as said before, never attempted to "toe the party line" and convince others that the system is perfect; far from it.

But, as I said in another topic:

....... it is important for prospective applicants and sponsors to be made aware of the possible malpractice to which they may be subjected.

It is just as important for them to be told what to do if they are subjected to that malpractice........

If people complain about poor treatment; something might be done; if enough complain, something will be done.

If no one complains, nothing will be done.

The system is as it is; we can lobby to have it changed and can disagree on what needs changing; but as far as the subject of this topic's OP is concerned, I stand by the above quote and what I have repeatedly said in this topic along the same lines.

Yes, you have every right to moan about poor service on this or any other forum; but I simply cannot understand why you and Sandyf both fail to get your head around the simple fact that doing so will achieve absolutely nothing.

Why you both fail to comprehend that to have poor service investigated and changed you need to make an official complaint to UKVI.

Why you both feel attempting to prove me wrong in everything I post will be more effective than making that official complaint.

[wooloomooloo]

Yes, I went there to pick up my wife's passport and, as you say, only the applicants are allowed in to submit applications.

Erm, well, sort of. When my wife applied for settlement visa at Regent House back in 2010 only the applicant was allowed in then as well, but, where there's a will there's a way and I got in through a great desire to ensure that the submission of my wife's application went without a hitch. I presented the application myself at the counter and my wife merely translated between the admin officer and myself. As it turned out we both got on famously.

Rules are there to be bent when it suits.

[sandyf]

You may call posting that Canada seems to be alone amongst Western states in not requiring biometrics from all visa applicants, and that they do require them from some, arrogant; others would call it informative.

Made your complaint to UKVI yet?

You really do not have a clue, it is nothing to do with biometrics. You brought that up because you are unaware of the process.

The link you put up has nothing to do with online submission.

[Jip99]

Yes, I went there to pick up my wife's passport and, as you say, only the applicants are allowed in to submit applications.

Erm, well, sort of. When my wife applied for settlement visa at Regent House back in 2010 only the applicant was allowed in then as well, but, where there's a will there's a way and I got in through a great desire to ensure that the submission of my wife's application went without a hitch. I presented the application myself at the counter and my wife merely translated between the admin officer and myself. As it turned out we both got on famously.

Rules are there to be bent when it suits.

You seem to have been on the wrong side of the rules on a few occasions.

[wooloomooloo]

You seem to have been on the wrong side of the rules on a few occasions.

Really? My wife and I followed the settlement visa process through to citizenship without a hitch.

Strangely, you seem to know more about us than we know ourselves.

Please feel free to enlighten me of my habitual deceitfulness.

[Jip99]

You seem to have been on the wrong side of the rules on a few occasions.

Really? My wife and I followed the settlement visa process through to citizenship without a hitch.

Strangely, you seem to know more about us than we know ourselves.

Please feel free to enlighten me of my habitual deceitfulness.

My apologies wooloomooloo - PM sent, mistaken identity - sorry

[wooloomooloo]

No worries, Jip99. And thanks for your kind PM.

[7by7]

You may call posting that Canada seems to be alone amongst Western states in not requiring biometrics from all visa applicants, and that they do require them from some, arrogant; others would call it informative.

Made your complaint to UKVI yet?

You really do not have a clue, it is nothing to do with biometrics. You brought that up because you are unaware of the process.

The link you put up has nothing to do with online submission.

If you seriously believe that applicants having to give their biometrics has nothing to do with the need for them to attend a VAC or embassy in person then you really are beyond hope.

The link to the VFS office acting as agents for Canada in Thailand has a lot to do with online submission; read it.

It also contains

As of 4 September 2013, you may need to give your biometrics (fingerprints and photograph) when applying for a visitor visa, study permit or work permit.

How do you suggest those who need to give their biometrics do so without attending in person?

Cut their fingers off and post them to the embassy?

I honestly fail to see what your beef with me is.

In your OP you described the treatment your wife received at the UKVAC. I agreed that treatment was unacceptable and the staff member(s) who interrogated your wife was acting way beyond VFS's remit and outside the terms of their contract with the UK.

I showed you how to make an official complaint about that interrogation.

I fail to understand why you prefer picking a silly fight with me to actually doing something to try and ensure that the UKVAC staff act properly in future!

[durhamboy]

Durhamboy, I never denied that you had been to VFS; you are putting words into my mouth; something you have done before.

Glad that you finally admit you have not been involved in a UK visa application for over two years, whereas my involvement was only 3 months ago!

I may have completed the application form for my sister-in-law from my armchair and not entered the VAC in February with her, but I believe her when she says that she had absolutely no problems with submitting her application at VFS, no interrogation and was, in fact, treated with politeness and respect.

You seem to be implying that she is lying! Perhaps you owe her an apology.

I have, as said before, never attempted to "toe the party line" and convince others that the system is perfect; far from it.

But, as I said in another topic:

....... it is important for prospective applicants and sponsors to be made aware of the possible malpractice to which they may be subjected.

It is just as important for them to be told what to do if they are subjected to that malpractice........

If people complain about poor treatment; something might be done; if enough complain, something will be done.

If no one complains, nothing will be done.

The system is as it is; we can lobby to have it changed and can disagree on what needs changing; but as far as the subject of this topic's OP is concerned, I stand by the above quote and what I have repeatedly said in this topic along the same lines.

Yes, you have every right to moan about poor service on this or any other forum; but I simply cannot understand why you and Sandyf both fail to get your head around the simple fact that doing so will achieve absolutely nothing.

Why you both fail to comprehend that to have poor service investigated and changed you need to make an official complaint to UKVI.

Why you both feel attempting to prove me wrong in everything I post will be more effective than making that official complaint.

7by7 - sometimes you really go beyond the Pail in your desperate attempts to make a point. I never made any comment whatsoever about your sister-in-law's treatment at VFS. So to suggest that I did and then to further say that I seem to be implying that she is lying is totally ludicrous and yet another example of how disingenous you are. Rather than me give her an apology I think you owe me one. However, I wont hold my breath before getting it!

Now you and others keep telling anyone who has a problem with the system to complain or nothing will be done to improve the situation. That's fine for people whose partners already have citizenship and are not subject to immigration control such as your wife. However, the people who are mainly complaining here (and are at the sharp end of what is going on) are those who require visas and/or have partners who are subject to immigration control. They are dealing with a monopoly. So they have to be a bit cautious and pragmatic. Their thinking (and mine) is that a single complaint is highly unlikely to achieve anything and may put a black mark against them in future visa applications. They also just want to just get on with their lives and so they put up with the nonsense in order to achieve their family objectives. So they vent their spleen here and that is not entirely futile as, on rare occasions, some things have been sorted out by this forum e.g. expired English test certificates.

So 7by7 instead of criticising those that complain here (especially when you have very little practical knowledge of what they are experiencing) do what you are good at and just stick to telling people what the immigration rules are.

[7by7]

Durhamboy; making a complaint about poor treatment by VFS, the UKVI or any other agency involved with UK immigration will not 'put a black mark' against the complainant for future applications; and you are really paranoid if you think it will.

It certainly didn't when I complained about the treatment my wife and I were subjected to at the embassy when she was making her first visit application; subsequent settlement, LTR and citizenship applications all approved first time.

You say I have had no 'direct' involvement with the UKVAC. Well, other than once collecting your wife's passport, which any person authorised by the applicant can do, neither have you!

You dismissed my comments on my sister-in-laws recent experiences, hence my remark about you implying she was lying.

You are correct that one single complaint is unlikely to make a difference; I said as much long before you.

But, as I also said, if enough people complain about the same thing happening in the same VAC, then the chances are that something will be done.

That will not only help rectify the situation for future applicants, who you don't seem to care about, but also future applications from the complainants.

That is all I have to say on the matter as we are, again, going round and round in circles until we risk disappearing up our own fundaments!

Edited May 6, 2015 by 7by7

[durhamboy]

What I said about your sister-in-law's application was that your involvement was from your armchair in the UK. You know and fully understand that. So you are just twisting things to suit yourself. It's a great pity that you resort to doing something like that when you have so much to offer to this forum in other respects. You are a sad man.

Paranoid we may be about HMG. That's what happens when people lose trust in a government.

[wooloomooloo]

You are a sad man.

Paranoid we may be about HMG. That's what happens when people lose trust in a government.

Point 1 is totally unwarranted, my friend.

Point 2 should be taken up with your local MP. It's also election day tomorrow.

My wife [Thai] and I have both voted, have you? I could say more, but I won't, other than you should hang your head in shame for the comment at point 1.

[theoldgit]

OK, let's reign this is now, let's stop the bickering and return to the original post which is about sandyf's wife's alleged treatment/interrogation by the staff at VFS, we all know that if this is true, and we have no reason to doubt otherwise, they are exceeding their brief which is to receive applications, capture biometric details and forward the applications the UKVI for processing.

Like others I have not been inside the Visa Application Centre for anything other than collecting a passport, but the stories of VFS exceeding their remit are too well noted to be ignored, the treatment of applicants might be a perception or it might be true, none of us really know for sure.

What I will say is that every time my partner has submitted an application she is fully briefed and confident and has not encountered any hint of interrogation, it might be a perception, I really don't know.

The main issue here seems to be whether to complain or not, I would say that if you think that a member of the VFS staff has exceeded their remit then a complaint should be made, it wont help you but it could possibly help others.

In a previous life I was a senior manager in a UK Government Department, which is part of the Home Office, one my roles was to let and manage contracts for an outsourced service of interaction with members of the public, very similar to the role of VFS. I had a contract manager onsite and I visited the sites, 12 in the UK, to ensure compliance with the contract. Clearly if I was on site, or one of my managers was around, the contractors would work by the book, if we weren't then we had to use other methods to ensure compliance in the customer interaction part of the delivery.

I relied heavily on complaints from our customers, general members of the public, the level of recorded complaints was an important KPI, if we had too many we delved deeper and the contractor was liable for financial penalties, which I did impose with the aim of getting full compliance of the contract.

[sandyf]

I would have thought that you would have realised that Thai people do not complain about Thai people. There is no way that my wife would make or support a complaint against VFS. They just tolerate incompetence and injustice from their own.

I just find it scandalous that after 7 years of living together and 3 previous visits to the UK that we still have to face this kind of scenario. At the end of the day it is down to the UK government, we got the visitor visa for Canada without leaving home.

The majority of Europe, 26 countries, agree that an EU national and spouse travelling together should be treated as a special case.

"Family members of EU citizens must be treated more favourably than other third country nationals“. (Part III Section 3.4)

David Cameron preaches family values, but if the the family members are foreign nationals they have no value.

Some people are just not prepared to accept what they read. One instance does not mean we sit back and do nothing. How many noticed the error in the travel history section of the new UK form and reported it?

BTW The quote is from the Schengen handbook not the EU directive.

As I said previously, I suggest the thread be closed.

[7by7]

<snip>

The majority of Europe, 26 countries, agree that an EU national and spouse travelling together should be treated as a special case.

"Family members of EU citizens must be treated more favourably than other third country nationals“. (Part III Section 3.4)

<snip>

The quote is from the Schengen handbook not the EU directive.

The freedom of movement directive applies to all EU/EEA member states, whether they are also members of the Schengen area or not.

The directive only applies if the EEA national and their non EEA family member, if any, are moving to or visiting a state other than that of which the EEA family member is a citizen.

So, for example, the Thai wife of a Brit should be 'treated more favourably' by French immigration when travelling to France than the Thai wife of a Frenchman would be; she would not be able to apply under the EU/EEA regulations, but would have to apply under the French immigration rules.

Just as the Thai wife of a Brit has to apply under the UK immigration rules when travelling to the UK.

Unless Surinder Singh applies, of course.

[sandyf]

As is normal practice, 7by7 has digressed from the original context of the post.

When I first posted the quote, 7by7 tried to humiliate me, in a reply that was removed by the mods, over the number of countries I had stated. He made out that the quote applied to all EU states and not just the Shengen area.

To clarify, the quote is from the 'Schengen Handbook for the processing of visa applications'. I was under the impression that only the 26 Schengen countries issued Schengen visas but if 7by7 is correct and that all EU states use the handbook then I stand corrected.

[Donutz]

Why all the bickering?

- If you experience ill threatment from VFS, the ECO or who else: write a formal complaint to UKVI or whichever authority is responsible. One comlpaint won't change much or anything, sufficient complaints will draw attention and can make a difference. They won't put you on a blacklist for complaining!

- 7by7 quoted the Schengenhandbook refering to the Freedom of Movement of EU citizens and their non-EU family as agreed by ALL EU/EEA members in Directive 2004/38/EC. Perhaps there is a fancy general EU quote around from a memo from EU Home Affairs or EU Commission but regardless the UK has to abide Freedom of Movement aswell. It doesn't (ECJ's McCarthey case, december 2014) though but this is an whole other topic. The UK administration should be ashamed of itself though.

[7by7]

As is normal practice, 7by7 has digressed from the original context of the post.

I responded to a specific point; as was made clear.

I did not respond the rest of it as I hade previously made it clear that I had no more to say on that matter.

When I first posted the quote, 7by7 tried to humiliate me, in a reply that was removed by the mods, over the number of countries I had stated. He made out that the quote applied to all EU states and not just the Shengen area.

Humiliate you? How? By pointing out that all member states have to abide by the directive, not just the Schengen ones?

Are you really saying that you find having incomplete information posted by you expanded and clarified humiliating?

IIRC mine was not the only post removed for bickering. Bickering, not attempted humiliation. Unfortunately you and another poste seem to want to continue the bickering rather than deal with the problems your wife encountered at VFS.

To clarify, the quote is from the 'Schengen Handbook for the processing of visa applications'. I was under the impression that only the 26 Schengen countries issued Schengen visas but if 7by7 is correct and that all EU states use the handbook then I stand corrected.

I am not saying that all EU/EEA states use the Schengen handbook. Never have, never will; because to do so would be incorrect.

What I am saying is that all EU/EEA members, including the Schengen states, are subject to the freedom of movement directive.

As for how that directive applies when entering the state of which the EU/EEA national family member is a citizen; see previous post.

I have had insults thrown at me, both in this topic and via a PM from one poster in it, but refuse to sink to that level myself. I simply wont be responding further to your or any one else's baiting.

Edited May 8, 2015 by 7by7

[7by7]

Why all the bickering?

- If you experience ill threatment from VFS, the ECO or who else: write a formal complaint to UKVI or whichever authority is responsible. One comlpaint won't change much or anything, sufficient complaints will draw attention and can make a difference. They won't put you on a blacklist for complaining!

Totally agree.

- 7by7 quoted the Schengenhandbook refering to the Freedom of Movement of EU citizens and their non-EU family as agreed by ALL EU/EEA members in Directive 2004/38/EC. Perhaps there is a fancy general EU quote around from a memo from EU Home Affairs or EU Commission but regardless the UK has to abide Freedom of Movement aswell. It doesn't (ECJ's McCarthey case, december 2014) though but this is an whole other topic. The UK administration should be ashamed of itself though.

Wasn't me who quoted the Schengen handbook, Donutz. See my post above.

I agree that the UK government's refusal to, so far, fully implement the McCarthy judgement is shameful. But other states often play fast and loose with the rules, too.

[Donutz]

Why all the bickering?

- If you experience ill threatment from VFS, the ECO or who else: write a formal complaint to UKVI or whichever authority is responsible. One comlpaint won't change much or anything, sufficient complaints will draw attention and can make a difference. They won't put you on a blacklist for complaining!

Totally agree.

- 7by7 quoted the Schengenhandbook refering to the Freedom of Movement of EU citizens and their non-EU family as agreed by ALL EU/EEA members in Directive 2004/38/EC. Perhaps there is a fancy general EU quote around from a memo from EU Home Affairs or EU Commission but regardless the UK has to abide Freedom of Movement aswell. It doesn't (ECJ's McCarthey case, december 2014) though but this is an whole other topic. The UK administration should be ashamed of itself though.

Wasn't me who quoted the Schengen handbook, Donutz. See my post above.

I agree that the UK government's refusal to, so far, fully implement the McCarthy judgement is shameful. But other states often play fast and loose with the rules, too.

I see, thanks for clarifying 7by7.

And yes the other member states who implement the Directive (or other such thing such as in case of Schengen members: the Visacode 810/2009) should be ashamed too. Why agree on certain rules only to cherry pick from legislation after it comes into power? I don't always like the EU (it could be more democratic, the farmer subsidies are much too high etc.) but in cases of visa and movement legislation I'm glad we have EU Home Affairs and the ECJ.

But since I'm going offtopic here I will not go further into this subject here. I think I cannot add anything to the original topic at hand either so this is probably going to be my last post in this topic.

[durhamboy]

OK, let's reign this is now, let's stop the bickering and return to the original post which is about sandyf's wife's alleged treatment/interrogation by the staff at VFS, we all know that if this is true, and we have no reason to doubt otherwise, they are exceeding their brief which is to receive applications, capture biometric details and forward the applications the UKVI for processing.

Like others I have not been inside the Visa Application Centre for anything other than collecting a passport, but the stories of VFS exceeding their remit are too well noted to be ignored, the treatment of applicants might be a perception or it might be true, none of us really know for sure.

What I will say is that every time my partner has submitted an application she is fully briefed and confident and has not encountered any hint of interrogation, it might be a perception, I really don't know.

The main issue here seems to be whether to complain or not, I would say that if you think that a member of the VFS staff has exceeded their remit then a complaint should be made, it wont help you but it could possibly help others.

In a previous life I was a senior manager in a UK Government Department, which is part of the Home Office, one my roles was to let and manage contracts for an outsourced service of interaction with members of the public, very similar to the role of VFS. I had a contract manager onsite and I visited the sites, 12 in the UK, to ensure compliance with the contract. Clearly if I was on site, or one of my managers was around, the contractors would work by the book, if we weren't then we had to use other methods to ensure compliance in the customer interaction part of the delivery.

I relied heavily on complaints from our customers, general members of the public, the level of recorded complaints was an important KPI, if we had too many we delved deeper and the contractor was liable for financial penalties, which I did impose with the aim of getting full compliance of the contract.

Interesting post OG. It is good to know that you took some action when people complained. With regard to VFS I think there may be some problems in making complaints about the sort of treatment sandyf's wife received e.g. :-

1. Did the applicant get the name of the person who interrogated her? Were there any witnesses? Is it just one person's word against another's?

2. The sponsor is not allowed in so I think, in general, Thais find it difficult to think of complaining against a fellow Thai who they may perceive to be a figure of authority.

3. If an investigation is made then the visa application may be held up. This probably isn't true but may be a perception so why take the risk? There may also be a similar perception that the visa may be refused. Again, why take the risk?

4. Many people will think "ah well this is a once only visit to VFS and whilst it was not pleasant it won't happen to us again." (btw, I realise this was the 4th visit for sandyf's wife but in a lot of other cases it is just a one time visit e.g. settlement visas.)

5. There is a perception that a single complaint will not do any good as the applicant doesn't know how many other people have complained about the same thing. 6. When applying for visas (particularly settlement) people are in the middle of changing their lives and are likely to be very busy with other things.

Now in addition to complaints this topic also focused on whether the third party VAC system is a good thing. OG I would like to ask you, if I may, what you think of it from the customer's (i.e. sponsor and applicant) point of view. Do you think it improves the system or makes it worse or is about the same? Thanks.