6months Uk 6 months Thailand

[welshboy454]

I am a UK citizen my wife is Thai.

What we want to do every year is spend up to 6 months in Uk April to end Sept and up to 6 months in Thailand Oct to end March.

What is the best visa for my wife to get to achieve this ?

Annual tourist 6 month visa

5 year standard visa

I satisfy the income threshold to get her a UK spouse visa.

Any help or guidance gratefully received

Edited June 9, 2016 by welshboy454

[bobrussell]

Simple answer, there isn't one! This has risen a number of times before. Using a visit visa will probably be seen as trying to bypass settlement rules but spending considerable periods outside the UK may lead the visa authorities to consider she is not settled!

Catch 22!

If you are based in the UK for more than half of the year then I would suggest a settlement visa but be prepared for the shock of cost and NHS charge. if less and your true base is Thailand then see how it goes with a standard visit visa. You may apply for a five year visa, pay the fee but only receive a standard visit visa and no refund.

Advice? Decide where your main base is going to be and where you would end up if things went wrong (health/family etc) and work with that. There are real advantages with taking the route to ILR as your wife will retain the right to live in the UK. It will cost you though! I would recommend the settlement route wherever possible. Rules change and the process never seems to get easier!

[welshboy454]

Many thanks Bob- I guessed it seemed a catch 22

[7by7]

Personally, based upon the information you have given, I see no reason why she cannot use visit visas. There is certainly nothing in the immigration rules to prevent her.

The rules clearly state that, with some exceptions which don't apply to your wife, a visitor cannot spend more than 6 months in the UK per visit.

Your wife does not intend to do so; so I see no problem there.

Whilst not an actual rule, to prevent visit visas being used for de facto UK residence there is a convention that a visitor should not normally spend more than 6 months out of any 12 in the UK. This can be waived if the person has an exceptional need to be in the UK as a visitor more often than this; as long as they don't spend more than 6 months per visit here.

Your wife only intends to spend 6 months per year in the UK; so as long as she can convince the ECO of this when applying for her visa then I don't see a problem there either.

Note, though, that once she has her visa, if immigration at her UK port of entry have reason to believe she will be breaking this convention then they could refuse her entry to the UK.

She can apply for a visa which lasts 6 months, 2, 5 or 10 years. Obviously if applying for longer than 6 months she will need to show a need to visit the UK regularly over that period.

Be aware, though, that the longer the term applied for the higher the fee, currently £752 for a 10 year one, and if the ECO decides to issue a shorter term than that applied for there will be no refund of the difference in fees.

So you may want to consider a shorter term for her first one.

If you go the settlement route, not only will it be vastly more expensive, not just the fees and NHS surcharge but the TB test and language tests as well, she may have difficulties after 2.5 years when she has to apply for FLR and 2.5 years after that when she applies for ILR.

In both instances she will need to show that she is a UK resident; which may be difficult to do if she regularly spends only half the year here.

Also, if she does obtain ILR, then it will lapse if she spends a continuous period of 2 years or more outside the UK. Even if it hasn't lapsed, if immigration at her port of entry to the UK have reason to believe that she is not a UK resident and only using her ILR for visits they could cancel it on the spot; though she would be allowed in as a visitor on that occasion.

Even if she does obtain ILR and keeps it; she would not be able to apply for naturalisation as British as she would not meet the residential requirement. Part of which is that she must not have been out of the UK for longer than 270 days in total during the three years prior to the application, with no more than 90 days out of the UK in the final year.

For those reasons, I believe that, given your stated aim, a long term visit visa is the way to go.

[welshboy454]

Many thanks for your comprehensive response. I think next year we will try a 2 year standard visa for up to 6 months in each year as a test. This lifestyle suits us both- I want to stay over 6 months in UK and she has to stay over 6 months in Thailand. The only downside is for one way we fly separately as there is a time lag to satisfy the rules

[7by7]

One thing to consider is the cost per visit for each term of visa.

Current fees are:-

• 6 months - £87, equals £87 per visit 6 months visit per year;
• 2 years - £330, equals £115 per 6 months visit each year;
• 5 years - £600, equals £120 per 6 months visit each year;
• 10 years - £752, equals £75 per 6 months visit each year.

Note that despite the fees being set by Parliament in Sterling, for reasons which they refuse to explain, giving only feeble excuses instead, the government have decided to charge visa fees in USD at an exchange rate very favourable to them; so add a few quid to each of those figures!

On the face of it, a 2 year one seems slightly better value than a 5 year; but UK visa fees do increase each year, and who knows what the fees will be next year, let alone in 2, 5 and 10 years!

There is no requirement in the rules for a visitor who applies for a long term visa to have held a short term one previously; and, unless they have definite reasons for restricting the term, ECOs should issue the term asked for.

However, practical experience shows that in many instances they don't!

So, if you wife hasn't visited the UK for a while, or ever, then I'd go for a 6 months one to start.

If she has visited before, especially regularly and recently, then I'd skip 2 years and go for 5, maybe even 10.

Although I have heard of one 10 year applicant only being given 5 years because the ECO said they could not know that their circumstances would remain the same over the next 10 years. Which, if common, makes one wonder why a 10 year term is offered at all!

But the decision is yours.