U.K. Settlement visa chances

[daniel2183]

Hello,

My wife went for a 1 month holiday to Spain in 2007 . She overstayed by a couple of weeks . This was before we met

We met each other in 2008 and married in 2011

We applied for a UK visitors visa in 2011 and again in 2012 . Both visa were denied .

Basically the wife didn't tell me about overstaying in Spain and ripped the pages out of her passport before handing it when applying for the visa's when interviewed over the phone. she lied and said her son ripped it out . When pressed by the ECO to tell the truth she did come clean. This was the main reason for refusing her visa s

We are now looking to apply for a settlement visa . All the requirements are met. What do you think are chances are of it being granted ?

Thanks in advance

Dan

[sunnyjim5]

You and I both realise that she has little or no chance.

By not telling the truth about the Spanish overstay and deliberately damaging a passport in a fraudulent attempt to hide fact I suspect she has destroyed any chance of obtaining a UK visa of any description.

[manxninja]

No hope forget it.

[cheesestick]

usually a five year ban for such things but as it was in spain i would chance it, There is probably no record of it and I wouldnt mention it.

[Richard W]

If you mention all the offences - overstay, hiding it, and being refused twice, I'd say the chances were fair to good. At least, a few years ago, immigration offences that led to bans were being ignored for settlement applications. If you hid the offences or refusals, I'd say the chances were poor.

[theoldgit]

The deliberate lying when applying for the visit visa is going to be hard to overcome, as has been pointed out attempts at deception like this more often than not result in a ban, of up to ten years, from applying for any kind of UK Visa, are you sure she didn't receive a ban.

The deliberate attempt at deception will be regarded as more serious that the actual overstay.

That said, the criteria for a settlement visa is very different to a visit visa, so she could be lucky, whilst I have to agree with previous posters that it's unlikely that an application would succeed, the fact that it's a different type of visa and being open and honest, she could be lucky.

She would need to be open and honest when submitting an application, it really depends if you want to spend in the region of £2,000 for such an application, much of which would be lost if the application didn't succeed.

I don't think that any of us can give a definitive answer to your question.

[daniel2183]

Thanks for the replies,

When building the application. We have been completely open and honest .I included both her refusal letters from the ECO and made reference to it in my supporting letter . Basically saying that she made a silly mistake and panicked . She knows what she did was done wrong and would hope as fact this is a settlement application the ECO wouldn't hold it against her .

She didn't receive a ban of any kind

[daniel2183]

I'm also using a solicitor for the UK to help me build the best application I can . There's not much else we can do really .

[theoldgit]

I'm also using a solicitor for the UK to help me build the best application I can . There's not much else we can do really .

Unless that solicitor is particularly skilled in UK Immigration Law and has relevant experience in cases such as yours, it wont necessarily help. If you do need professional help you might be better using an OISC registered advisor.

[daniel2183]

Yes he is . They have been very good.

[Tony M]

The ECO will likely decide the application on whether he thinks there was any intent to deceive in her actions, and if he believes that he can support a refusal decision (see below). The minor overstay, on its own, would not lead to refusal of a settlement visa. You really need to look at paragraph A320 of the immigration rules, and the only relevant sections of that paragraph ( where family applications are concerned) are paragraph 320 and sub-paragraphs 3,10 & 11. You need to be looking at sub-paragraph 11. It's possible she overstayed in Spain, but it would be hard to prove (unless she admitted it at interview), and it's possible that she used deception :

"(11) where the applicant has previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Rules by:

(i) overstaying; or

(ii) breaching a condition attached to his leave; or

(iii) being an illegal entrant; or

(iv) using deception in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application (whether successful or not); and

there are other aggravating circumstances, such as absconding, not meeting temporary admission/reporting restrictions or bail conditions, using an assumed identity or multiple identities, switching nationality, making frivolous applications or not complying with the re-documentation process."

Note that there must be "aggravating circumstances" in addition to the deception, etc, for the ECO to be able to argue that she is contriving to frustrate the intentions of the immigration rules.

Edited March 11, 2016 by Tony M

[sunnyjim5]

The ECO will likely decide the application on whether he thinks there was any intent to deceive in her actions, and if he believes that he can support a refusal decision (see below). The minor overstay, on its own, would not lead to refusal of a settlement visa. You really need to look at paragraph A320 of the immigration rules, and the only relevant sections of that paragraph ( where family applications are concerned) are paragraph 320 and sub-paragraphs 3,10 & 11. You need to be looking at sub-paragraph 11. It's possible she overstayed in Spain, but it would be hard to prove (unless she admitted it at interview), and it's possible that she used deception :

"(11) where the applicant has previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Rules by:

(i) overstaying; or

(ii) breaching a condition attached to his leave; or

(iii) being an illegal entrant; or

(iv) using deception in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application (whether successful or not); and

there are other aggravating circumstances, such as absconding, not meeting temporary admission/reporting restrictions or bail conditions, using an assumed identity or multiple identities, switching nationality, making frivolous applications or not complying with the re-documentation process."

Note that there must be "aggravating circumstances" in addition to the deception, etc, for the ECO to be able to argue that she is contriving to frustrate the intentions of the immigration rules.

In addition to the overstay and the possible attempt at deception wouldn't deliberately defacing a passport by "ripping out pages" be seen as an "aggravating circumstance" ? Or would removing pages from a passport be lumped in with the possible attempt at deception?

[Tony M]

The ECO will likely decide the application on whether he thinks there was any intent to deceive in her actions, and if he believes that he can support a refusal decision (see below). The minor overstay, on its own, would not lead to refusal of a settlement visa. You really need to look at paragraph A320 of the immigration rules, and the only relevant sections of that paragraph ( where family applications are concerned) are paragraph 320 and sub-paragraphs 3,10 & 11. You need to be looking at sub-paragraph 11. It's possible she overstayed in Spain, but it would be hard to prove (unless she admitted it at interview), and it's possible that she used deception :

"(11) where the applicant has previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of the Rules by:

(i) overstaying; or

(ii) breaching a condition attached to his leave; or

(iii) being an illegal entrant; or

(iv) using deception in an application for entry clearance, leave to enter or remain or in order to obtain documents from the Secretary of State or a third party required in support of the application (whether successful or not); and

there are other aggravating circumstances, such as absconding, not meeting temporary admission/reporting restrictions or bail conditions, using an assumed identity or multiple identities, switching nationality, making frivolous applications or not complying with the re-documentation process."

Note that there must be "aggravating circumstances" in addition to the deception, etc, for the ECO to be able to argue that she is contriving to frustrate the intentions of the immigration rules.

In addition to the overstay and the possible attempt at deception wouldn't deliberately defacing a passport by "ripping out pages" be seen as an "aggravating circumstance" ? Or would removing pages from a passport be lumped in with the possible attempt at deception?

The rules give examples of "aggravating circumstances" as shown above. As I said, I think the ECO will have to make case for refusing under paragraph 11. He probably can, but he will need to be able to justify it at any appeal against the refusal.

[theoldgit]

Post giving totally inaccurate information removed.

If you have meaningful advice to give then your views are very much appreciated, but please don't make it up as you go along.

[wooloomooloo]

We are now looking to apply for a settlement visa . All the requirements are met.

Not quite, by your own admission.

You've got two choices, go for it and hope for the best or don't bother.

Throwing additional monies at an immigration lawyer isn't guaranteed to help at this juncture. If it were me, I'd wait to find out what the answer is to the initial settlement application and go from there.

[bobrussell]

I cannot see why there would be aggravating circumstances. The ECO may try to use this as a means to refuse but a settlement visa is a very different animal to a visit visa. There are no rights to visit but more to travel to live with a spouse.

If it is tackled head on and openly disclosed with suitable contrition then I would expect an ECO to consider it fairly. It will be on record so keeping quiet might just suggest that attempted deception is ongoing. If the previous ECO's had considered it that seriously why did they not impose a time limited ban then?

"The original 'crime' was minor and the tearing out of the page was just silly. Your wife has learnt a good lesson!"

Edited March 12, 2016 by bobrussell

[7by7]

Had it merely been a matter of overstaying in Spain and had she declared it in her previous UK visit applications, then I believe there would not be a problem. Indeed, she may very well have been granted those visit visas.

But not only did she not declare her Spanish overstay, she tore the relevant pages out of her passport in an attempt to hide it and when questioned about this, lied that her son had torn those pages out!

That does, I think, places her firmly under the terms of para 320(11)(iv) of the immigration rules as quoted by Tony M above.

Her actions are definitely grounds for refusing a visit visa, and even imposing a 10 year ban on her visiting the UK; but is it also grounds for refusing a settlement application?

The answer depends on whether or not her actions, especially deliberately damaging her passport, which is probably an offence in Thailand just as it is in the UK, would be considered aggravating circumstances.

Unfortunately, the only way to find out for sure is to apply and see what happens!

[daniel2183]

Thank you everyone for your feedback .

We are planning to submit the online application on the 16th (just before the price increases ) I will keep you updated .

[daniel2183]

I forgot to update his thread . My wife's settlement visa got approved. She's flying to the uk in a couple of weeks time :-)

I used this forum a few times when building my wife's application . So thanks to all those that have helped .

Cheers

Dan

Edited May 21, 2016 by daniel2183

[bobrussell]

Good to see! As I suspected the ECO seems to have accepted that a settlement visa is a different beast to a visit and that people can be very foolish without being bad!

[theoldgit]

Nonsense, inaccurate, post removed.