UK Settlement Visa Financial Proof Credit File Seen ?

[crazydrummerpauly]

Hello all. Please, no guesses or mere opinions - i can make enough of those up all on my own! Does anyone actually have EXPERIENCE of being asked for a sight of their Credit File (Experian, Equifax etc...) during the course of applying for a Settlement Visa for a Thai partner ? OR, has anyone seen reliable documentary references to this possibility online ? Why the question ? Well, simple - in trying to accumulate the Cash and/or Cash + Income needed to meet the post-July 2012 financial requirement - the idea of bashing a couple of credit-cards hard to acquire some readies must occur to a few people. The funds acquired could be 'seasoned' in a savings account etc...say no more. If anyone's thinking : well the payments to the credit cards will show up in the compulsory statements for one's bank current-account - there would be ways around that - many folks have more than one bank account. Payments would be processed through a second or third account, not the main one copied to ukba. So, having to show one's Credit-File would be the only foolproof way of blocking this little tactic. Anyone been forced to do it ? Or heard of anyone else being required to ?

[KNJ]

Not a requirement when I applied. AS to whether they do that independently, somehow I doubt as there would be additional cost on them

[7by7]

As far as I am aware, UKVI do not carry out credit checks on applicants nor sponsors.

Additionally, one of the ridiculous aspects of this financial requirement as it currently stands is that outgoings, including loan repayments, are ignored.

Which leads to the absurdity that a sponsor who earns £18600 p.a. and has multitudinous debt repayments meaning they struggle to meet their monthly commitments meets the requirement, but a sponsor who earns £18599 p.a. and has no debts, not even a mortgage, doesn't!

However, regarding your suggestion; section 4.2. "Sources that are not permitted" of the financial appendix incudes "Loans and credit facilities."

Also, 7.5.1( b ) says that "A declaration by the account holder(s) of the source(s) of the cash savings" is required.

So, as loans or credit facilities cannot be used and as the source of cash savings must be declared then the course of action you are suggesting would require making a false declaration.

If this is discovered at the time of the application, that application will be refused and the applicant could be banned from the UK in any capacity for life.

If the deception is discovered at a later stage, even after the applicant has been granted ILR, then their current leave to remain could be cancelled and they could be deported and banned from entering the UK again in any capacity for life.

Even if they have managed to hide the deception until after they have obtained British citizenship, their application for same could be deemed to be based upon deception and so their British citizenship could be removed, they then deported and banned from entering the UK in any capacity for life.

Want to take the risk?

[crazydrummerpauly]

As far as I am aware, UKVI do not carry out credit checks on applicants nor sponsors.

Additionally, one of the ridiculous aspects of this financial requirement as it currently stands is that outgoings, including loan repayments, are ignored.

Which leads to the absurdity that a sponsor who earns £18600 p.a. and has multitudinous debt repayments meaning they struggle to meet their monthly commitments meets the requirement, but a sponsor who earns £18599 p.a. and has no debts, not even a mortgage, doesn't!

However, regarding your suggestion; section 4.2. "Sources that are not permitted" of the financial appendix incudes "Loans and credit facilities."

Also, 7.5.1( b ) says that "A declaration by the account holder(s) of the source(s) of the cash savings" is required.

So, as loans or credit facilities cannot be used and as the source of cash savings must be declared then the course of action you are suggesting would require making a false declaration.

If this is discovered at the time of the application, that application will be refused and the applicant could be banned from the UK in any capacity for life.

If the deception is discovered at a later stage, even after the applicant has been granted ILR, then their current leave to remain could be cancelled and they could be deported and banned from entering the UK again in any capacity for life.

Even if they have managed to hide the deception until after they have obtained British citizenship, their application for same could be deemed to be based upon deception and so their British citizenship could be removed, they then deported and banned from entering the UK in any capacity for life.

Want to take the risk?

Well said 7by7. Plainly laid out for all to understand and make their own decision vis a vis the risk. However, i think it could be very difficult indeed for them to prove that debts on specific credit-cards were directly linked to any particular savings account. I have 8 credit-cards, 4 savings accounts, 4 bank accounts...i can't keep track sometimes so good luck some IO ! 'Follow the money' the detectives say - but it could be made very difficult - not that i am recommending it to anyone ! Being 100% truthful, i myself could not identify every £ sitting in every account, and some of it must have originated from a credit-card cash transfer many years ago. However, as you say, the requirement to identify the SOURCE of every £ could be quite tricky. I will just mention one personal example - i sold a house in 2005 that paid out over £50K profit which went into a current account. Then it got separated and moved around for years, and deposited in many savings accounts/premium bonds etc...after all, that's 10 years ago - much of that cash remains in my name, but the paper-trail is a nightmare. In fact i cannot even lay it out for myself as it traveled from account to account... Your main point stands though - there is definite RISK involved if any loan-money had (even unintentionally) got mixed in with the general money-flow.

Your other point about the non-means-tested aspect of it all is familiar and i agree is daft. I wrote to ukba years ago with an example to draw out the daftness of it. I asked : 'If i let out my own UK house for £1,000 a month, (which would bring in £12,000 of the £18,600 required), and then i rented a house in the UK for £1,000 a month rent (meaning i'd just cancelled out the £12,000), would i be allowed to quote the £12,000 Income as part of my financial requirement ?' Answer : YES. That's the best illustration i know to show the illogical and unfair nature of the whole process post-July 2012.

Edited December 29, 2015 by crazydrummerpauly

[bobrussell]

Somewhere in one of the reports by the Independent Inspector of Borders, there is mention of Experian being used as a fraud prevention method. I cannot tell you which report it was but the answer is yes they do!

I suspect they only have the most basic of reports that confirm address and credit activity. Not sure they would go as far as getting a full report as I doubt they have staff to read it!

These reports tend to be done automatically (ie by machine) for many applications we do today. Only if there is an inconsistency does a human become involved.

[crazydrummerpauly]

Somewhere in one of the reports by the Independent Inspector of Borders, there is mention of Experian being used as a fraud prevention method. I cannot tell you which report it was but the answer is yes they do!

I suspect they only have the most basic of reports that confirm address and credit activity. Not sure they would go as far as getting a full report as I doubt they have staff to read it!

These reports tend to be done automatically (ie by machine) for many applications we do today. Only if there is an inconsistency does a human become involved.

Thanks for those points - really helpful. I guess (without recommending it to anyone) that if a bod found themselves 5 grand short of the required lump of money for a desperate attempt to get their loved-one in the country, there would always be ways to make the funds covert. One thought comes immediately to mind - buy an expensive item with credit-card / make the monthly payments / sell said item for cash at one's front door....job done, untraceable...obviously not a vehicle, traceable...but a high-end camera, guitar...the list is long

[bobrussell]

I have failed to find the section regarding credit reference agencies in the reports so UKVI/Home Office may not actually be using them. One report says:

"The Chief Inspector made 12 recommendations for improvement. These included that the Home Office ensures that the Home Secretary approves the overall approach concerning the use of discretion in cases where applicants do not meet the statutory requirements; ensures that good character checks are always undertaken in cases involving evasion of immigration control; ensures that, when there are serious doubts about the credibility of an application, caseworkers have the ability to call applicants in for a face-to-face interview; and introduces random checking procedures with other government departments and credit reference agencies to ensure that decision-making is not reliant solely on an applicant’s declaration."

My italics but it is not clear whether they do use these agencies or they might! Sorry if I have got it wrong!!

[crazydrummerpauly]

I have failed to find the section regarding credit reference agencies in the reports so UKVI/Home Office may not actually be using them. One report says:

"The Chief Inspector made 12 recommendations for improvement. These included that the Home Office ensures that the Home Secretary approves the overall approach concerning the use of discretion in cases where applicants do not meet the statutory requirements; ensures that good character checks are always undertaken in cases involving evasion of immigration control; ensures that, when there are serious doubts about the credibility of an application, caseworkers have the ability to call applicants in for a face-to-face interview; and introduces random checking procedures with other government departments and credit reference agencies to ensure that decision-making is not reliant solely on an applicant’s declaration."

My italics but it is not clear whether they do use these agencies or they might! Sorry if I have got it wrong!!

Thanks again. As so often with matters immigration - it is a rather grey area ! But i do think that your section in italics and the passage around it makes it very clear that officers can go wherever they want if they smell a rat. This is a pretty tough all-inclusive approach - "random checking procedures with other government departments and credit reference agencies to ensure that decision-making is not reliant solely on an applicant’s declaration."

[theoldgit]

Credit reference agencies are often used to check addresses by a number of government departments, rather than check the actual financial status.

I don't know to what level UKVI decision makers use the services of these agencies, if at all.

[7by7]

Surely this is all a bit moot, anyway?

With the application evidence must be provided to show that the money has been in the possession and control of the applicant, sponsor or both jointly for at least 6 months prior to the application.

Having had a quick look via Google, it seems that with most UK credit cards you are looking at an interest rate of 18% or more; which if my maths is right for a cash advance of £62,500 means annual interest of £11,250. So even if you paid it all back immediately the visa had been granted that's still an additional £5625 at least to find.

If one can afford that, then the chances are one's income is high enough to meet the minimum income requirement anyway.

Also, what responsible lender, be it bank, building society, credit card company etc., would lend that amount of money to someone whose income is less than £18,600p.a.?

According to Money Saving Expert* that income could get you a mortgage of up to £60500 easily enough, but the more above that you go, the less likely it is that you'd get one.

Obviously, for an unsecured loan such as a cash advance on a credit card you'd get a lot less.

*I am using this site purely as an example of what could be borrowed; I am not recommending their services nor commenting on the accuracy or otherwise of their information and/or advice.

Edited December 31, 2015 by 7by7

[Richard W]

Surely this is all a bit moot, anyway?

With the application evidence must be provided to show that the money has been in the possession and control of the applicant, sponsor or both jointly for at least 6 months prior to the application.

Having had a quick look via Google, it seems that with most UK credit cards you are looking at an interest rate of 18% or more; which if my maths is right for a cash advance of £62,500 means annual interest of £11,250. So even if you paid it all back immediately the visa had been granted that's still an additional £5625 at least to find.

If one can afford that, then the chances are one's income is high enough to meet the minimum income requirement anyway.

Also, what responsible lender, be it bank, building society, credit card company etc., would lend that amount of money to someone whose income is less than £18,600p.a.?

According to Money Saving Expert* that income could get you a mortgage of up to £60500 easily enough, but the more above that you go, the less likely it is that you'd get one.

Obviously, for an unsecured loan such as a cash advance on a credit card you'd get a lot less.

*I am using this site purely as an example of what could be borrowed; I am not recommending their services nor commenting on the accuracy or otherwise of their information and/or advice.

The relevance would be in topping up income and cash savings near the threshold with borrowed cash. Bridging a £5,000 shortfall might be doable, and would certainly be better than laundering the proceeds of post office robbery.

[crazydrummerpauly]

Surely this is all a bit moot, anyway?

With the application evidence must be provided to show that the money has been in the possession and control of the applicant, sponsor or both jointly for at least 6 months prior to the application.

Having had a quick look via Google, it seems that with most UK credit cards you are looking at an interest rate of 18% or more; which if my maths is right for a cash advance of £62,500 means annual interest of £11,250. So even if you paid it all back immediately the visa had been granted that's still an additional £5625 at least to find.

If one can afford that, then the chances are one's income is high enough to meet the minimum income requirement anyway.

Also, what responsible lender, be it bank, building society, credit card company etc., would lend that amount of money to someone whose income is less than £18,600p.a.?

According to Money Saving Expert* that income could get you a mortgage of up to £60500 easily enough, but the more above that you go, the less likely it is that you'd get one.

Obviously, for an unsecured loan such as a cash advance on a credit card you'd get a lot less.

*I am using this site purely as an example of what could be borrowed; I am not recommending their services nor commenting on the accuracy or otherwise of their information and/or advice.

The relevance would be in topping up income and cash savings near the threshold with borrowed cash. Bridging a £5,000 shortfall might be doable, and would certainly be better than laundering the proceeds of post office robbery.

Yep, you are completely on the same wave-length as me. I was thinking of top-up funds. Everyone's situation is unique anyway, and people have different ways to pay off credit-card or other borrowings - and i rarely pay those high-rates on cards - if i need to i play the 'musical cards' game and shift balances on to long-term 0% deals for the time being. I quite agree with 7 by 7 - it would be ridiculous to try to achieve the whole sum via any kind of loan method - that was never my idea. But really, my main question without going into fine details was Do the immigration control routinely inspect credit-histories (should be called Debt-records!) - and the answer so far seems to be, Yes they MIGHT and probably do, if they feel anything looks a bit fishy.

[7by7]

Remember that for both the initial visa and FLR the first £16000 of any cash savings is discounted and the income shortfall is multiplied by 2.5 to reflect the length of the visa/FLR.

So, for example, if the sponsor has an income of £15000 p.a. then cash savings of at least £25000 would be needed.

(Income shortfall = £3600;

£3600 x 2.5 = £9000;

£9000 + £16000 = £25000.)

But back to my original point that the rules clearly state that loans and credit facilities cannot be used towards the financial requirement and that the source of any cash savings used must be declared.

So whilst this may be more doable than laundering the proceeds of a post office robbery, making a false declaration is still illegal and if (when) discovered could have disastrous consequences.

[nontabury]

Remember that for both the initial visa and FLR the first £16000 of any cash savings is discounted and the income shortfall is multiplied by 2.5 to reflect the length of the visa/FLR.

So, for example, if the sponsor has an income of £15000 p.a. then cash savings of at least £25000 would be needed.

(Income shortfall = £3600;

£3600 x 2.5 = £9000;

£9000 + £16000 = £25000.)

But back to my original point that the rules clearly state that loans and credit facilities cannot be used towards the financial requirement and that the source of any cash savings used must be declared.

So whilst this may be more doable than laundering the proceeds of a post office robbery, making a false declaration is still illegal and if (when) discovered could have disastrous consequences.

So what would happen in your example, if after the wife was admitted into the UK, you then spent £9,000 on a car, informing the authorities that you must have a car, for example to take your child to school or hospital and there was no public transport available. You would then not meet the required amount.

Would the same apply if you had no savings, but we're relying on an annual income of £18600 to bring your wife into the UK,then when you did, you purchased a car on HP at say £2000 a year.

[bobrussell]

You either have the income and/or savings or you don't. Buy a car that means you cannot meet the requirements and you will fail. Take on loads on credit but keep the funds to show UKVI and you are fine.

Affordability does not come into it! Clearly this makes the rules unfair but it still takes families out of income related benefits. This was the purpose of the figure. Are you left without money for food? Not their problem!!

It was made clear that the government were not interested in peoples personal budgets. This is completely unfair on those able to live on smaller sums.

[Richard W]

So what would happen in your example, if after the wife was admitted into the UK, you then spent £9,000 on a car, informing the authorities that you must have a car, for example to take your child to school or hospital and there was no public transport available. You would then not meet the required amount.

If the husband's circumstances didn't otherwise change, he'd have to send the wife out to work so that they met the requirement.

Would the same apply if you had no savings, but we're relying on an annual income of £18600 to bring your wife into the UK,then when you did, you purchased a car on HP at say £2000 a year.

Nothing - that sort of loan is ignored when determining if the financial requirement is met.

[stuartsko]

In relation to the op regarding credit checks, I monitor my credit report rigorously... I have made 2 applications for my wife's settlement visa, there are 2 kinds of searches that can be made against you.. 1 is a full report, the other is what they call a generic identification report, this is when your details only are requested by an agency... Both checks will show on your report no matter who has searched them and ukvi have never done such a search against my name..