Proving a Parent Held UK ILR

[Richard W]

Except possibly for rules relating to diplomats and foreign armed forces, a person born in the UK is British if a parent holds indefinite leave to remain (ILR). The usual method for newly settled people to prove they have ILR is a Biometric Residence Permit. Expired BRPs are destroyed whyen they are renewed. How, then, if the BRP covering the date of birth has been destroyed, will people prove that they are British because a parent held ILR when they were born? Will they have to appeal to Home Office records?

[7by7]

The usual way of ascertaining whether or not someone is British by birth is by examining the full birth certificate.

See "Confirming national status using a FBC" from Birth certificates and the full birth certificate policy

Of course, if born in the UK and one parent is British then the immigration status of the other parent is irrelevant; one is British.
​
If one is unable for some reason to provide any evidence that one is British, then one can make an application for confirmation of British nationality status

[Richard W]

The usual way of ascertaining whether or not someone is British by birth is by examining the full birth certificate.

See "Confirming national status using a FBC" from Birth certificates and the full birth certificate policy

For someone born in the UK nowadays, a full birth certificate is merely the first step - it generally identifies who the parents are. Passport application forms will soon be asking about great-grandparents.

Much to my surprise given the context, the referenced document actually was helpful. For a claim to citizenship based on the mother's immigration status rather than citizenship, it asks for "mother’s foreign passport showing ILR at the time of the child’s birth". Those newly settled here generally can't have such a passport, unless the date stamps and abbreviations placed in passports on re-entry to the UK count. Those stamps aren't good enough for airlines or for employment.

There is one get out clause:

In the absence of a national passport showing the parent had indefinite leave to remain in the United Kingdom at the time of the child’s birth, we will accept a letter from the UK Border Agency confirming that the parent was granted ILR before the child’s birth.

Does the UKVI still issue such letters? I had the impression that letters confirming the grant of ILR were no longer issued, or, if they were, could not be used as evidence of the grant of ILR.

If one is unable for some reason to provide any evidence that one is British, then one can make an application for confirmation of British nationality status

That, presumably, is for tortuous or otherwise unclear chains of evidence. Perhaps, though, a newborn's parent's BRP counts as such.

[7by7]

Richard, this is yet another example of your making mountains out of molehills; why do you do it?

Even if the difficulties you describe were to occur no member of this forum would be effected simply because one of the parents would be British and so the child would inherit British nationality from their British parent.

Even if neither parent is British although old BRPs are destroyed when new ones are issued; the records are still there and can be checked if necessary.

Even if both parents have since naturalised and so their biometric records have been destroyed, their immigration history will still be on file and can be checked if necessary.

Do you have evidence that passport application forms will soon be asking about great grandparents?

[Richard W]

Richard, this is yet another example of your making mountains out of molehills; why do you do it?

So things are as bad as I feared. I had wondered if my understanding were wrong.

Even if the difficulties you describe were to occur no member of this forum would be effected simply because one of the parents would be British and so the child would inherit British nationality from their British parent.

Ah, I'm all right, Jack. And of course, we don't care about what happens to our widows' and ex-wives' progeny conceived subsequent to our parting.

I hadn't realised that foreigners resident not married to UK citizens were prohibited from taking an interest in migration to the UK.

Even if neither parent is British although old BRPs are destroyed when new ones are issued; the records are still there and can be checked if necessary.

Even if both parents have since naturalised and so their biometric records have been destroyed, their immigration history will still be on file and can be checked if necessary.

Your faith in UKVI is touching. I am not confident that records of today will be available in 2050, even though they ought to be. At present, a UK birth certificate can be used instead of a passport when immigration status is being checked, even though it proves nothing directly for those born after 1983. Remember, 'a passport is a privilege, not a right'. Consequently, it can be a long time between an immigration status being recorded and the record being used.

Do you have evidence that passport application forms will soon be asking about great grandparents?

• teenage pregnancies
• 1983 + 2 × 16 = 2015
• Not all adult UK citizens have had British passports.

[bobrussell]

Of course records today will be available in 2050. I managed to download the whole of my grandfathers WW1 records including copies of his pay book and medical records. We discovered for the first time that he was badly wounded not once but twice, the last time just before war ended.

Beyond a few errors, which come with the territory, you can be sure that short of a nuclear explosion the records will be there. After nuclear war survivors will have a little more to think about than their immigration status!!

Do you spend much time searching for things that just could be a worry for a few people at some time in the future? Similar to your post about passport office and married/maiden names. My wife and daughter have different names in their passports (Thai and British) and have never had the slightest problem!

[7by7]

7by7 said:

Richard, this is yet another example of your making mountains out of molehills; why do you do it?

So things are as bad as I feared. I had wondered if my understanding were wrong.

You obviously do not understand what "making mountains out of molehills" means!

7by7 said:

Even if the difficulties you describe were to occur no member of this forum would be effected simply because one of the parents would be British and so the child would inherit British nationality from their British parent.

Ah, I'm all right, Jack. And of course, we don't care about what happens to our widows' and ex-wives' progeny conceived subsequent to our parting.

I hadn't realised that foreigners resident not married to UK citizens were prohibited from taking an interest in migration to the UK.

If an ILR holder divorces their British spouse or is widowed then any children they had with that spouse (or partner if not married) will still be British via their British parent.

If the ILR holder subsequently has children with another person and that other person is a British citizen then those children would inherit British citizenship from that parent.

If that person is not a British citizen then those children may at some future date have to prove their British nationality. In which case, see my first post in this topic.

Foreigners resident in the UK and/or their spouse/partners who are not Thai and not married to a British citizen are unlikely to be visiting this forum.

Although it is possible that a Thai married to an EEA national living in the UK under the EEA regulations would do so. But in that case I'm sure they would be more concerned about their claim to the nationality of their EEA national parent's country than any claim to British nationality.

7by7 said:

Do you have evidence that passport application forms will soon be asking about great grandparents?

• teenage pregnancies
• 1983 + 2 × 16 = 2015
• Not all adult UK citizens have had British passports.

None of which answers my question!

BTW, 1983 + 2 x 16 = 31760. 1983 + (2 x 16) = 2015. But what either sum has to do with it, only you know.

This is yet another topic started by you with a hypothetical problem.

I don't know why you do it; and it's a shame that you do as you very often give useful and helpful replies to member's questions about the real world.

Your concerns were dealt with in my original post, so any further participation would be a waste of time.

Edited November 30, 2015 by 7by7

[Richard W]

7by7 said:

Do you have evidence that passport application forms will soon be asking about great grandparents?

• teenage pregnancies
• 1983 + 2 × 16 = 2015
• Not all adult UK citizens have had British passports.

None of which answers my question!

BTW, 1983 + 2 x 16 = 31760. 1983 + (2 x 16) = 2015. But what either sum has to do with it, only you know.

The schools now teach BIDMAS = Brackets, Indices, Division, Multiplication, Addition, Subtraction. You may dimly recall the lesser subset of BODMAS.

People are now being born whose British citizenship derives from a grandparent being born in the UK in or after 1983 and a parent of that grandparent being born in the UK before 1983. The soonness is a deduction, not some early announcement.

It is interesting that when giving notice of marriage, for those born from 1983 onwards, a UK birth certificate on its own is *not* sufficient evidence of British nationality; a British parent's nationality must also be demonstrated. It looks as though UK ID cards for Britons are coming back, in the less handy form of passports. The wording I see suggests that those who are stateless cannot marry! The requirements may be less strenuous at 'designated' registry offices; I can't find their documentary requirements.

[Richard W]

Do you spend much time searching for things that just could be a worry for a few people at some time in the future? Similar to your post about passport office and married/maiden names. My wife and daughter have different names in their passports (Thai and British) and have never had the slightest problem!

When were their British passports issued? Which month? The problem only happened this year. I wonder if the problem is only for first British passports.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Richard W

[bobrussell]

Apparently there has been some confusion for a small number of individuals. If a maiden name becomes a problem then the passport can have additional information under observations including:

For a married woman who maintains she uses both her husband's name and her maiden name, the passport should be recorded with the observation:
THE HOLDER IS ALSO KNOWN AS ............................. (FULL FORENAMES AND SURNAME)

Other things such as titles, stage names etc can be added to the observations page. Only a problem if the person processing the application makes it one.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/118562/observations-passports.pdf