New visa to allow UK nationals bring non-EEA family to Ireland

'A Department of Justice statement said UK citizens would continue to enjoy existing arrangements under the Common Travel Area including the freedom to live and work in the State after the transition period following the UK’s exit from the EU ends later this month.' Erin go bragh. Hopefully an option for some impacted by the horrible UK spousal and ADR visa rules.

Digging into this there is an MIR of about 20k euros attached to this, plus a waiting time of up to 6 months, so it's not as good as the Irish Times article makes it sound. However it may be particularly useful for those seeking to sponsor elderly dependent relatives (for example) which is subject to a 'ban masquerading as a rule' in the UK, albeit attached to a minimum income requirement with restrictive conditions.

BritCits Divided Family of the Week - Christian & Marcia

“We just want to spend Christmas as a family, with our family.”

Christian is a British citizen currently living in New York City.  His wife, Marcia, is a citizen of Trinidad & Tobago.  They are expecting their first child together.

In October 2013, when the couple was visiting UK to spend time with Christian’s family, Marcia was refused entry even whilst travelling with Christian.  This was to be their first Christmas with the whole family together.

The couple arrived at Gatwick Airport on October 15^th for what was to be the beginning of their honeymoon.  After some preliminary questions at the border control – which they answered fully and truthfully, the couple was made to wait in a pen for further questioning, without being told why.  After another hour, alternating between being held and questioned, Marcia’s luggage was searched and several items removed.  

Christian was then told he could not wait for his wife – and sent out to airport arrivals alone.  Marcia was then bodily searched, locked in a prison-like environment, fingerprinted and interrogated.  In total, Marcia wife was incarcerated and interrogated for eight hours.

Marcia’s leave to enter the UK was refused, although she was granted “Temporary Admission to a Person Who is Liable to be Detained” since they had already booked a wedding reception for their friends and family on October 26^th.  The Immigration Officer repeatedly told Marcia this means she could be detained at any time.  Unsurprisingly, Marcia came out of the interrogation in tears and fearful of arrest and further detention.  As of now, she is scheduled to be removed from the UK on flight BA2159 at 10am on October 31st.  The couple is trying their utmost to have that date postponed.

Christian believes the immigration officers were wrong to refuse her entry and to treat Marcia in the manner they did.  As a citizen of Trinidad & Tobago, Marcia is a "non-visa national".  So just as British citizens can visit many countries in the world without applying for a visa, so can those from this nation.  Marcia shouldn’t require a visa to visit the UK, and therefore should in theory be allowed entry on her own passport, even if not travelling with Christian.

The Notice of Refusal of Leave to Enter stated “You have asked for leave to enter the United Kingdom as a visitor for three months but I am not satisfied that you are genuinely seeking entry as a visitor for the limited period as stated by you.

This is because, although you hold a return ticket dated 19th January 2013, I cannot be satisfied that you will be able to fly at that time.  This is because you are at present 22/23 weeks pregnant and if you were to remain in the United Kingdom for the period you have stated you will then be approximately 35/36 weeks, and as such British Airways will not carry you."

British Airways' pregnancy regulations* clearly say "For uncomplicated single pregnancies, we restrict travel beyond the end of the 36th week."  The primary reason for refusal is therefore shown to be completely false.

"In addition, you have made no provisions for your medical care whilst you are in the United Kingdom, and you have been unemployed by your own admission since 2011 and living off savings and I cannot therefore be satisfied that you will not be of recourse to public funds."

Marcia was in possession of bank statements and stock portfolio, examined by the Officer, which show that, although she had indeed been "living off savings", they were far from used up.  She also had letters of invitation, from Christian and his mother.  These letters made it clear that Christian and his family would be responsible for any and all expenses incurred by Marcia during her visit.  These letters were also backed by bank statements from both Christian and his mother clearly showing sufficient funds.  The secondary reason for refusal is therefore shown to be invalid.

This secondary reason appears to be intentionally worded to exclude Marcia’s financial statements and the supporting family letters and bank statements examined by the officer.  The refusal selectively refers to the fact that Marcia has "been unemployed" and "living off savings" which says nothing whatsoever about her access to private funds.  

"Furthermore, you have previously resided in the United States of America, and during further examination you admitted that you overstayed your visa there, this causes me to doubt that you will comply with any restrictions attached to a grant of leave to enter the United Kingdom."

This third reason gives the impression that Marcia attempted to abuse a short-term US visitor's visa by overstaying in an attempt to become an illegal immigrant.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  As Marcia informed the Immigration Officer during her interrogation, she had been living in the US in continuous legal status for almost 14 years.  She had official USCIS paperwork in her possession to prove this, which was examined by the Immigration Officer.  Until May of this year, her entire life was US-based and she had good reason to believe she would continue to live there up until the last days of her final visa.  She had been a graduate (F-1) student for many years, then worked under OPT for a company who subsequently sponsored her for H1-B status.  The security requirements for her position were later changed by the US military to exclude non-citizens, so she was unable to continue in that position.  

She was advised that in order to remain in non-immigrant status she would have to change to B2 visitor status. This is a long process Marcia went through, however by the time the B2 status was processed, the US sequester had been put in place and her prospective employer was subjected to a hiring freeze.  

Her B2 status was due to expire on 27^th March and she was not informed of the freeze until only 10 days earlier.  At this time she made arrangements to leave the US as quickly as was reasonably possible given that she'd lived there for nearly 14 years and thus had a lot of roots to sever (car, house lease) not to mention the prospect of being separated from her fiancé for an indeterminate time.  

Although Marcia did stay briefly beyond the end of that visa, this is considered normal by US immigration and carries no penalty up to a 6 month overstay.  "If you overstay but not more than 180 days you must leave the US but you can apply for a visa to return immediately."  Marcia never faced removal proceedings in the US.  Instead, she voluntarily chose to leave less than two months into the six-month grace period.  

These are hardly the actions of a person recklessly ignoring immigration laws.  The third reason for refusal is therefore also shown to be invalid.  Indeed, given the US has not penalised Marcia for her very slight over-stay it is bizarre that the UK does.

In addition, the Officer made no mention Marcia being married to a British citizen travelling with her – presumably because clear family connection may mitigate the flimsy grounds for refusal.  

This is a pair of newlyweds, intending to only stay with their British family through Christmas and New Years.  It should not be a function of a government agency to tear citizens apart from their families.

Christian understands there is pressure on the UK Border Agency to appear to be tough on immigration.  It is probable that officers have targets for refusing applications, with the UKBA website brags about cutting migrant numbers. 

Christian can’t help but wonder why his wife was picked out for further questioning in the first place.  A British citizen travelling with his Commonwealth citizen wife would seem on the surface to be one of the most straightforward possible cases.  Marcia is extremely intelligent and highly articulate.  She comes from an English-speaking country and English is her first language.  She holds three university degrees, a BSc in Biochemistry, an MSc in Agricultural Diversification/Sustainable Rural Development and a US MSc in Food Science and Nutrition.  Had the immigration officer at the initial encounter spoken with her, she would have been able to ascertain this for herself.  

However, throughout all the questioning where Christian was present, the officer addressed all questions, whether pertaining to Christian or Marcia, directly to him, speaking of Marcia in the third person, effectively treating her as if she were a young child or a foreigner with no grasp of the English language.  Even when Christian re-addressed questions to his wife, and received clear, concise answers in perfect English, the officer waited for Christian to "translate" the answers.  It felt to this couple like racial profiling playing a major part.

BritCits Divided Family of the Week - Rachel & Ahmed

“We haven’t applied for a spouse visa yet.  The new rules have left us fearful and in a kind of limbo.”

Rachel is a 23 year old British citizen, a university student reading Arabic and Art History.  She is married to Ahmed, from Egypt. 

As part of her degree Rachel had the option of spending a year abroad in Egypt, Palestine or Jordan.  She opted for Egypt as three years previously she had visited Cairo to assess the suitability of her degree, where she met Ahmed during a flat search.

After Rachel left Egypt they kept in touch via Skype and three months later, she was visiting him in Egypt once again. Three months after that, he came to stay with Rachel and her family in Cornwall for Christmas.  Since then, they haven't gone for longer than 3 months without seeing each other, be it in Cairo, during term-time in London or with Rachel’s family in Cornwall.  

When they got engaged, they planned to marry during Rachel’s year abroad because a lot of her friends from university would be able to attend and balance out Ahmed’s big family at the wedding!

Rachel had heard about some new changes to the rules at the time, but didn't really think anything of it – she assumed it would be higher application fees or the like.  She never expected they would raise the income threshold to £18,600 p.a. and restrict financial support.  Indeed, a friend who had married an Egyptian was allowed to have her parents as providers of third party support for his visa (this was before July 2012).   As they knew Rachel would have her final year at university to complete, Rachel was also relying on her parents to do the same (and they were happy to), with Ahmed staying with Rachel during her last year in London.

Rachel is on course for a first-class degree and fairly confident of her earning potential after she graduates – however she firmly believes it should not just be her capacity to work and earn a decent salary which should count.  She finds it frustrating that neither the spouse's earning potential nor his financial situation are taken into account.  

If the government is so keen to ensure no burden on taxpayer, then given Ahmed will already have a clear ‘no recourse to public funds’ in his passport – surely it’s his financials which should be taken into account?  The same company that Ahmed works for in Egypt are currently advertising for the same job in England, with an annual salary of £36,000 - this is obviously much, much higher than the company pays their employees in Egypt.

Ahmed is qualified, has a good command of English and therefore good job prospects, which would be of great help to Rachel as a final year university student, in terms of rent and other expenses which Ahmed would help out with.

Rachel has never claimed benefits and has no interest in doing so, either.  Both their families are be able to help them out should they find themselves in a difficult situation – so no reason why third-party support should not count.

After three years of going back and forth -  though their relationship is more than worth all the travel they have endured – they are tired. They want to be able to plan their future but at the moment, in addition to the political instability in Egypt, everything seems so uncertain.

At present they’re applying for Ahmed’s family visit visa so at least he can come and visit Rachel while she is at university.  

Rachel considered putting off her studies to go down the Surinder Singh route, but that would pose an unnecessary financial burden – without much of a time saving on her completed her degree and going straight into employment.

She has however postponed her decision to do a Masters!

Political instability in Egypt aside, Rachel needs to be in the UK.  Her dad passed away, and she is the only child and grandchild.  While the government claim she can exercise her right to a family life with her husband elsewhere, what about her mum and grandma’s right to a family life especially when her grandma is not able to travel?

It seems to this couple that in their aim to bring down net migration, not only is the government keeping foreigners out of the country, but trying to encourage British citizens to leave too.

Rachel and Ahmed married in March 2013.  After spending an amazing nine months in Egypt, it's been hard readjusting to life back in the UK without her husband.  She barely feels like a newly-wed!

She considered staying back in Egypt for the summer, but thought it would be best to come back and work and try to earn as much money as possible to put aside for the future.  Ahmed is doing the same in Egypt.  

It really is demoralising to know that despite the no recourse to public funds, the couple may not be able to start to build their lives together until at least a year from now.  

It has put pressure on Rachel to find a job immediately after she graduates, which in the current climate of internships and focus on the importance of gaining experience (i.e. an acceptable form of unpaid employment) it is difficult for her to remain optimistic - but it's all they can do in the face of these new rules.

Fees


Inspired by Mark's post a few days ago on how British citizens are forced to pay at least £5012.29 in fees for visas through the process, our very own David has produced this poster illustrating the point!

 ... Lest anyone imagine that spouses and partners of non-EEA citizens aren't taxpayers, these fees are a tax too - and a very heavy one!

Related Freedom of Information request by @5K4R

British Citizens forced to pay £5015.29 in fees to be allowed to live in the UK with their spouse as a British family!

Author : LondonMark (Mark Stokes)

The Government published last year that the cost per decision for all permanent and temporary migration applications is £182

Yet when presenting information to justify the recent increases in fees in Parliament, they stated that the actual unit cost of processing a spouse Visa is £278 (FLR) - but they now want to charge £649.

This is very misleading.

Anybody unfamiliar with the spouse visa system (including most MPs) would reasonably think that the cost of the visa for a British Citizen to live with their wife/husband or partner is only £649.

What they fail to realise is the process now takes over 5 years and has to be applied for several times providing relatively the same information with a new fee each time!  This is a disproportionate and gross interference in people's lives by the State. During this time couples are in a state of limbo know as the 'probation period'.

The word 'probation' emphasises that they are being treated like criminals in what the Independent Inspector has called 'a culture of disbelief at the Home Office'. This has effects including: not being able get mortgages if both incomes are needed, companies being reluctant to give long term contracts because the visas are only 2.5 years long, travel is restricted due to the requirements if the spouse wishes to be naturalised later, couples living in fear of what might happen if they are between jobs when the next application is due. At a time that should be filled with joy, and that should be a couple's honeymoon period and building plans for the future, instead their world is turned upside down with often unbearable levels of stress.

This April has seen the fees rise disproportionately yet again. This is causing many families immigration fee poverty, that is if they first can earn enough to be even allowed to apply.

So why do I say the visa cost is £5015.29?

As a British citizen you have to now pay the following in stages for your spouse to stay here:

In Country Applications

1. LTR (£649) the first in country application after being married, (£48 increase)
2. Health surcharge at £200 per year of validity for a visa of 30 months (£500) (new this year)
3. Biometric Fee (£19.20), 

= £1168.20

1. FLR (£649) at the 2.5 year mark (£48 increase)
2. Health surcharge at £200 per year of validity of the 30 month visa  (£500)
3. Biometric Fee (£19.20) at each application the same biometrics are taken again with a fee paid to the Post Office

= £1168.20

1. Life in the UK test (£50)  Life in the United Kingdom: A Journey to Citizenship Book (£12.99)
2. ILR (£1,500) at the 5 year mark, a £407 or 37% increase in one year
3. Biometric Fee (£19.20) yet again

= £1582.19

Sub Total £3918.59

1. Naturalisation (£925) after receiving ILR, a £19 increase 
2. Arrangement of a Citizenship Ceremony (£80)
3. Biometric Fee (£19.20)
4. Passport fee (£72.50) (optional but needed for travel on an equal basis as the rest of your family)

= £1096.70

Total £5015.29

But for some people it costs more:

In Person Applications

If you need to travel because of work or family and can not have your passport kept by the Home Office for sometimes over 6 months at a time then you have no choice but to do an in person application each time which costs £400 each time. So that would be (£1200) extra

Total £6215.29

Overseas Application

If you are applying from outside of the UK then it is more as the first application is Settlement instead of LTR for overseas initial applications and costs (£956) which is £307 more 

As the initial visa issued to overseas applications is for 33 months then the health surcharge is then (£600) which is £100 more. even though this is just 3 months extra the Home Office is charging people 6 months extra!

and if you are not in a country that has a visa centre then a (£115)receiving fee

and an outside of the UK visa application centre fee of (£70)

(£150) for IELTS to take an approved english test at an approved centre if you are not already exempt for the english language requirement

Some countries will need to pay to have a TB test that is about (£65) 

so would give 

Total £5822.29

Additionally fees can vary in different countries due to how exchanges rates are implemented and variations in exchange rates can even be 20% for more unstable currencies.

10 Year Route Applications

Anybody who has been forced onto the 10 year route then the fees would be as they need to make two more applications for FLR

Total £7351.69

If you need a Transfer of conditions to a new passport when the old one expires (this will be more common now that the probation period is 5 years) you will be charged £183 or £260 if you have ILR

This does not include the increased complexity of the forms etc that Brits have to wade through. The complexity is so bad now that even the well educated need the help of solicitors just to fill them in, or the solicitors fees, extra English Test fees, validation fees of qualifications, translation fees or court, legal and judicial review fees we have to go through when the H.O. get things wrong.

If your spouse has a non-British/non-EU child then the costs will be even higher.

Even the new Helpline now costs £1.37 per Minute  or £4.00 for the webchat

By comparison Residence Documents issued under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations are not mandatory.

EU National Route Applications

For EU Citizens bringing their spouses here using the EU National route

1. EEA family permit (Free)  is normally for 6 months and allows multiple entry to the UK (https://www.gov.uk/family-permit)
2. after 6 months can apply for 5 year Residence card (£65)
3. Permanent Residence Card (£65) after 5 years of residence in the UK

Total £130 (but is technically optional)

The spouse is only allowed outside the UK 6 months a year.

Spouse visas for British Citizens should not cost anything as the British Citizen is already paying for them indirectly through their taxes. Now with the health surcharge, many are paying 3 times for the same thing as often both members of the couple are already paying taxes and national insurance over the 5 years yet the spouse also has the endorsement on their visa not allowing them to have recourse to public funds anyway.

So why are we now being charged 21.5 times (excluding naturalisation costs) what it costs for something we have already paid for through our taxes? 

Why are British Citizens (most of them born and bred in the UK) being ripped off and discriminated against just because their spouses were born in a non-EU country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? This is discrimination and undue prolonged interference in their family and private life.

Even after being ripped off by extortionate above premium fees the level of service offered is lacking with many applications refused with the fees being pocketed,  applications delayed due to staff cutbacks and many mistakes made with them not quickly corrected etc

Even the application forms are still not fit for purpose and treat British Citizens like immigrants. An example is on the spouse application form 

'Question: 7.22 is your sponsor currently living in the UK? 

Put a cross (x) in the relevant box. 

If ‘Yes’ please provide the date of when he/she first arrived in the UK'

Let's put these fees into context:

An application for a visit visa for a period of five years is £588.

The Government say that all applicants should be earning a minimum of £18,600 per year  even though 47% of the working population earn below this.

So now anybody earning £18,600 would have to pay 

27% of their annual income in application and visa fees! 

last year it was 18%  

But Justice Blake in his MM ruling in 2013 suggested to be fair that the minimum income should be £13,400 

So given that any body earning £13,400 would have to pay 

37.5% of their annual income in visa fees!

just in order to exercise their fundamental right of living with their spouse. 

A household used to be considered to be fuel poor if they were required to spend more than 10% of their income on fuel to maintain an adequate standard of warmth. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/319280/Fuel_Poverty_Report_Final.pdf

This is causing many families 'immigration fee poverty', that is if they first can earn enough to be even allowed to apply.

Is it fair that British families now have to pay  27% of their yearly income just to be able to stay together in the UK without restrictions after they get married?

Sources of current fees and costs etc:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visa-regulations-revised-table

Last year's fees:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/279536/Fees_Table_April_2014.pdf

Cost of passport:

https://www.gov.uk/renew-adult-passport

Health surcharge:

https://www.gov.uk/healthcare-immigration-application

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/415129/Surcharge_customer_info_web_v1.2.pdf

English language test:

https://www.ielts.org/test_centre_search/results.aspx?TestCentreID=d887b5c9-6b9c-411d-9b76-05a3d6b70c64

(47% of the working population earn below this)

https://www.gov.uk/family-permit

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/299617/HO_perm_and_temp_migration_applications_-_Annual_Data.pdf

Appointment booking fee (premium service centre)  £100

Application in person (premium service centre) £400 includes £100 appointment booking fee

Passport pass-back £40

Receiving, preparing and forwarding documents £115

Acceptance of application at Visa Application centre outside the UK  £70

Some proposed charges are:-

If you withdraw your application before a decision is issued you will be charged £80

If a mistake is made in the processing of your application you will be charged an Administrative review fee  £80

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/401236/indicative-visa-charges-for-2015-to-2016.pdf