Our PEO experience - ILR
Author : Steve
A few days ago we had an interview for Indefinite Leave to Remain SET M (spouse of a married person) at PEO Solihull (PEO = public enquiry office, also called premium service centre). I'm happy to say straight off that we got ILR.
This brings to a close a long, stressful and expensive chapter in our lives. Of course, it's much worse now for the people currently going through the process. Our application was under the old rules and furthermore was as strong as these things can be, but it still felt like a trial by ordeal at times. This note is shared to be useful to those currently going through this and hopefully to point people in the right direction.
In due course, I'll tot up the total expense of the whole process from the initial fiancee visa through to ILR (which in our case I estimate ran to several thousand pounds - that's including solicitor's fees to guide us through the initial process for a fiancee visa - expensive but reassuring if you're new to this; language test etc. costs; travel costs; and lost earnings - as I'm self-employed). I'll also do a comparison with at least one other country, to provide an international perspective.
These are our experiences :
Showing posts with label steve. Show all posts
Showing posts with label steve. Show all posts
Wednesday, 22 October 2014
Monday, 4 November 2013
An interview with Steve Green of britcits.com!
http://immigrationinsight.co.uk/2013/11/04/families-torn-apart-by-immigration-rules-interview-with-steven-green-co-founder-of-britcits-com/
http://immigrationinsight.co.uk/2013/11/04/families-torn-apart-by-immigration-rules-interview-with-steven-green-co-founder-of-britcits-com/
Sunday, 22 September 2013
Steve and Yoko
'I'm Steve, from Tunbridge Wells. My wife, Yoko, our one year old daughter and I are all stuck 6,000 miles away from home, despite having more than the required funds in a current account. Here's my background and how the Home Office's anti-family rules have affected me and my family:
'I was born and raised in the Conservative heartland of south east England. As it happens, my grandfather was a close colleague of Winston Churchill during WWII, my great-grandfather was a viscount, and if you look further back in my family tree, you'll find Robert the Bruce and a few other well-known figures. Those are my credentials for Britishness, if anybody needs to know.
'I moved to Japan in early 2007, shortly after I completed my masters' degree. Very soon after I arrived in Japan, I reconnected with a friend of a friend who I had met once in London. That friend of a friend was Yoko. We started dating shortly after meeting, and were engaged and living together less than a year after that.
'Now, as much as I love the place, I never intended to spend my life in Japan and I always intended to return to the UK at some point. Meanwhile, Yoko, a fluent English speaker and a great admirer of British culture, was also keen to move to the UK. Because of this, we kept our future visa application in mind, and we were careful to keep records of living together right from the moment we signed our first tenancy agreement.
'In 2012, a little while after our little girl was born, we decided that the time was right to move to the UK and settle down, figuring that it would be easier to move while she was still small rather than uprooting her when she was at school. We started looking into the UKBA's immigration rules. We had records of having lived together for five years, we had countless photos, we could get testimonies from friends and family, we had our marriage documents, we even have a daughter who shared our DNA! We could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have a genuine marriage. I imagined that we'd have some trouble filling in the paperwork, and that we might have to answer some very invasive questions, but I thought that our application would really just be a formality. Prior to July 2012, it would have been.
'As we dug further into the UKBA website, we came across the financial requirement. OK, £18,600. It was a lot of money, but we could cover that. I'm just a schoolteacher, but I have savings. Then we came across the Home Office's formula for determining how much money they think you have: savings minus £16,000, divided by 2.5. The £62,500 minimum is a lot more money. Thankfully, my wife works in international investment banking, and also has savings. Pooling our resources together, we could raise over £62,500. What's more, thanks to Japan's low interest rates, we'd never bothered investing our savings. Our savings were in cash, just as the Home Office was demanding. So here's why we still couldn't come home:
'After realising that we had next to no chance of navigating the immigration rules ourselves, we spent a lot of money on hiring a solicitor. Our solicitor looked through all of our documents, and said that an application at the time could succeed, but that a UKBA caseworker might ask for my wife's previous six months' payslips as proof of the source of our savings. Yoko had been on maternity leave. We could not supply those payslips. If a UKBA caseworker asks for extra evidence and the applicant is unable to supply it within two weeks, the application is refused. We couldn't risk that. We'd lose the application fee, and at the time, my employer was asking me if I would sign up for another year or not. A refused application would have left me unemployed in Japan and unable to return to the UK. For this reason, we decided to delay our application until Yoko had been back at work for six months, just so she could get six payslips.
'We'll get there. Once Yoko has her six payslips, the UKBA will have absolutely no legal reason to refuse our application (which is no guarantee, of course!) But the bizarre inflexibility of the rules has meant that we've had to put our daughter into daycare, and put our plans on hold for a year just to satisfy utterly pointless bureaucratic requirements. And in the meantime, our daughter still hasn't met most of her family, and Yoko and I have to cope with raising a kid without any family support for another year. And when we finally get to the UK, we won't be able to buy a house or invest our savings in any way, because we'll have to keep them in a current account for the next five years.
'I fully recognise that my family and I are some of the luckier victims of the family immigration rules. We haven't been separated, and we will be eligible for a visa in the near future. What I think our case shows though, is that you can be self-sufficient, you can satisfy all of the requirements, you can prove beyond a doubt that your marriage is legitimate, and still fall foul of the rules, just because of pointless, unnecessary bureaucracy.
'And just in case anyone's wondering why we want to move to the UK:
1. I'm British. It's my home.
2. My wife still loves the UK, British people and British culture, even after the way she's been treated.
3. My family can help us raise our daughter; Yoko's family is much smaller and less able to help.
4. Mixed race children almost always face racist bullying from their peers and discrimination from teachers at school in Japan. Bullying of haafu ('half') children often starts in preschool and continues into adult life. While racism is still a big problem in the UK, being half Japanese in the UK is more likely to be viewed as something positive.
5. My wife and I survived the Great Earthquake of 2011 and the subsequent Fukushima nuclear disaster. Another major earthquake has been predicted within the next four years. Fukushima is making headlines again with further radiation leaks and risks of another meltdown. It's time to come home.
'I'm Steve, from Tunbridge Wells. My wife, Yoko, our one year old daughter and I are all stuck 6,000 miles away from home, despite having more than the required funds in a current account. Here's my background and how the Home Office's anti-family rules have affected me and my family:
'I was born and raised in the Conservative heartland of south east England. As it happens, my grandfather was a close colleague of Winston Churchill during WWII, my great-grandfather was a viscount, and if you look further back in my family tree, you'll find Robert the Bruce and a few other well-known figures. Those are my credentials for Britishness, if anybody needs to know.
'I moved to Japan in early 2007, shortly after I completed my masters' degree. Very soon after I arrived in Japan, I reconnected with a friend of a friend who I had met once in London. That friend of a friend was Yoko. We started dating shortly after meeting, and were engaged and living together less than a year after that.
'Now, as much as I love the place, I never intended to spend my life in Japan and I always intended to return to the UK at some point. Meanwhile, Yoko, a fluent English speaker and a great admirer of British culture, was also keen to move to the UK. Because of this, we kept our future visa application in mind, and we were careful to keep records of living together right from the moment we signed our first tenancy agreement.
'In 2012, a little while after our little girl was born, we decided that the time was right to move to the UK and settle down, figuring that it would be easier to move while she was still small rather than uprooting her when she was at school. We started looking into the UKBA's immigration rules. We had records of having lived together for five years, we had countless photos, we could get testimonies from friends and family, we had our marriage documents, we even have a daughter who shared our DNA! We could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we have a genuine marriage. I imagined that we'd have some trouble filling in the paperwork, and that we might have to answer some very invasive questions, but I thought that our application would really just be a formality. Prior to July 2012, it would have been.
'As we dug further into the UKBA website, we came across the financial requirement. OK, £18,600. It was a lot of money, but we could cover that. I'm just a schoolteacher, but I have savings. Then we came across the Home Office's formula for determining how much money they think you have: savings minus £16,000, divided by 2.5. The £62,500 minimum is a lot more money. Thankfully, my wife works in international investment banking, and also has savings. Pooling our resources together, we could raise over £62,500. What's more, thanks to Japan's low interest rates, we'd never bothered investing our savings. Our savings were in cash, just as the Home Office was demanding. So here's why we still couldn't come home:
'After realising that we had next to no chance of navigating the immigration rules ourselves, we spent a lot of money on hiring a solicitor. Our solicitor looked through all of our documents, and said that an application at the time could succeed, but that a UKBA caseworker might ask for my wife's previous six months' payslips as proof of the source of our savings. Yoko had been on maternity leave. We could not supply those payslips. If a UKBA caseworker asks for extra evidence and the applicant is unable to supply it within two weeks, the application is refused. We couldn't risk that. We'd lose the application fee, and at the time, my employer was asking me if I would sign up for another year or not. A refused application would have left me unemployed in Japan and unable to return to the UK. For this reason, we decided to delay our application until Yoko had been back at work for six months, just so she could get six payslips.
'We'll get there. Once Yoko has her six payslips, the UKBA will have absolutely no legal reason to refuse our application (which is no guarantee, of course!) But the bizarre inflexibility of the rules has meant that we've had to put our daughter into daycare, and put our plans on hold for a year just to satisfy utterly pointless bureaucratic requirements. And in the meantime, our daughter still hasn't met most of her family, and Yoko and I have to cope with raising a kid without any family support for another year. And when we finally get to the UK, we won't be able to buy a house or invest our savings in any way, because we'll have to keep them in a current account for the next five years.
'I fully recognise that my family and I are some of the luckier victims of the family immigration rules. We haven't been separated, and we will be eligible for a visa in the near future. What I think our case shows though, is that you can be self-sufficient, you can satisfy all of the requirements, you can prove beyond a doubt that your marriage is legitimate, and still fall foul of the rules, just because of pointless, unnecessary bureaucracy.
'And just in case anyone's wondering why we want to move to the UK:
1. I'm British. It's my home.
2. My wife still loves the UK, British people and British culture, even after the way she's been treated.
3. My family can help us raise our daughter; Yoko's family is much smaller and less able to help.
4. Mixed race children almost always face racist bullying from their peers and discrimination from teachers at school in Japan. Bullying of haafu ('half') children often starts in preschool and continues into adult life. While racism is still a big problem in the UK, being half Japanese in the UK is more likely to be viewed as something positive.
5. My wife and I survived the Great Earthquake of 2011 and the subsequent Fukushima nuclear disaster. Another major earthquake has been predicted within the next four years. Fukushima is making headlines again with further radiation leaks and risks of another meltdown. It's time to come home.
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
Sheila McKechnie Foundation
Yesterday the annual Sheila McKechnie Foundation awards ceremony was held at St. Martin-in-the-Fields, central London. The Sheila McKechnie Foundation was set up to support campaigners and the right to campaign. The Foundation was set up in honour of Sheila McKechnie, a Scottish trade unionist, housing campaigner and consumer activist; indeed organisations such as Shelter and Which? were prominent at the ceremony.
The ceremony was hosted by Alan Rusbridger of the Guardian, and awards were presented by a number of prominent campaigners, such as Jonathon Porritt and Peter Tatchell.
So it was a nice surprise to receive a Special Recognition in the 'Campaigner of the Year' award, for the work over the past year with BritCits and the Divided Families Campaign.
Obviously many people have worked their hair off on this campaign, so they all deserve recognition too. I see it as recognition for the whole campaign, which has come a long way in a short period of time. I have less hair than most, as you can see. :)
You can see the full list of recognition awards here :
http://www.smk.org.uk/recognition-awards-2013/
It was a memorable event and wonderful to meet so many inspiring campaigners, and I'm very grateful to SMK.
Yesterday the annual Sheila McKechnie Foundation awards ceremony was held at St. Martin-in-the-Fields, central London. The Sheila McKechnie Foundation was set up to support campaigners and the right to campaign. The Foundation was set up in honour of Sheila McKechnie, a Scottish trade unionist, housing campaigner and consumer activist; indeed organisations such as Shelter and Which? were prominent at the ceremony.
The ceremony was hosted by Alan Rusbridger of the Guardian, and awards were presented by a number of prominent campaigners, such as Jonathon Porritt and Peter Tatchell.
So it was a nice surprise to receive a Special Recognition in the 'Campaigner of the Year' award, for the work over the past year with BritCits and the Divided Families Campaign.
Obviously many people have worked their hair off on this campaign, so they all deserve recognition too. I see it as recognition for the whole campaign, which has come a long way in a short period of time. I have less hair than most, as you can see. :)
You can see the full list of recognition awards here :
http://www.smk.org.uk/recognition-awards-2013/
It was a memorable event and wonderful to meet so many inspiring campaigners, and I'm very grateful to SMK.
Wednesday, 27 February 2013
Steve & Galina
“They don’t see people behind the figures and so they turn our lives into hell..”
Steve is a British citizen and 57 years old.
In March 2010, he married Galina, a Russian and 50 years old. Together, they live in Bristol.
Galina arrived in the UK as the bride of a British citizen and had a residence permit for two years, as is the norm for spouses. They followed the rules and ensured UKBA was aware of the purpose of Galina’s journey here all those years ago.
During this time, Steve and Galina lived happily. They lived together, rescued a dog from the pound, and paid their taxes. They weren’t high-earners. But they earned enough for themselves to not need to ask for any help from the state. They were happy.
At the end of the residence permit, Galina went to apply for a continuation of her residence. But the rules had changed and Steve and Galina came to face the nightmare which is the UKBA.
The rules were now such that they required a Cambridge certificate. Galina is not a young girl any
more..while she has been learning English (and well enough to send in this story to BritCits), it takes her longer to pick up things. Her memory isn’t what it once was, her life isn’t as carefree and she is just older.
The UKBA refused the extension of Galina’s visa and have made the decision to force her to leave the UK despite her ties to this country. Only because she does not have a Cambridge certificate in the English language. Galina speaks fluent Spanish. However, they feel that just because Steve is British, they are being discriminated against. They feel it’s unfair.
Indeed, it’s clear that this evident of yet further incompetency from the UKBA as Steve and Galina fall under the pre-9th July rules..however UKBA insists on applying the new rules to them, even though they submitted their applicant a month before the new rules came into play.
(To quote directly from the Statement of Intent prior to 9th July 2012 http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/news/soi-fam-mig.pdf
Page 34 - 'Transitional arrangements' :
A fiancé(e), proposed civil partner, spouse, civil partner, unmarried partner, same sex partner, child or adult dependant with leave to enter or remain in the UK on the family route granted before 9 July 2012 will remain subject to the rules in force prior to that date. Likewise, those with leave granted before 9 July 2012 as a partner of a migrant with leave under the Points Based System, or as an adult dependant or post-flight family member of a refugee or person granted humanitarian protection in the UK, will also remain subject to the rules in force prior to that date.
Clearly Steve and Galina should be covered under the old rules. This isn't the first time we've heard of this happening :
http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/aroundthecounty/articles/2012/10/18/437955-newlyweds-facing-exile-under-new-immigration-laws-/
There is no answer to give to Steve and Galina, as to why after three years of marriage they are now being told there are yet further hurdles to jump over, else their marriage will be considered worthless by the government.
The UKBA has generously offered that for them to not breakup their marriage, Steve could leave the UK too. However, there is no understanding for the fact that Steve and Galina look after Steve’s 90 year old mother. If Steve were to do as the government wants and leave his home, who will look after this 90 year old British woman?
“They don’t see people behind the figures and so they turn our lives into hell..”
Steve is a British citizen and 57 years old.
In March 2010, he married Galina, a Russian and 50 years old. Together, they live in Bristol.
Galina arrived in the UK as the bride of a British citizen and had a residence permit for two years, as is the norm for spouses. They followed the rules and ensured UKBA was aware of the purpose of Galina’s journey here all those years ago.
During this time, Steve and Galina lived happily. They lived together, rescued a dog from the pound, and paid their taxes. They weren’t high-earners. But they earned enough for themselves to not need to ask for any help from the state. They were happy.
At the end of the residence permit, Galina went to apply for a continuation of her residence. But the rules had changed and Steve and Galina came to face the nightmare which is the UKBA.
The rules were now such that they required a Cambridge certificate. Galina is not a young girl any
more..while she has been learning English (and well enough to send in this story to BritCits), it takes her longer to pick up things. Her memory isn’t what it once was, her life isn’t as carefree and she is just older.
The UKBA refused the extension of Galina’s visa and have made the decision to force her to leave the UK despite her ties to this country. Only because she does not have a Cambridge certificate in the English language. Galina speaks fluent Spanish. However, they feel that just because Steve is British, they are being discriminated against. They feel it’s unfair.
Indeed, it’s clear that this evident of yet further incompetency from the UKBA as Steve and Galina fall under the pre-9th July rules..however UKBA insists on applying the new rules to them, even though they submitted their applicant a month before the new rules came into play.
(To quote directly from the Statement of Intent prior to 9th July 2012 http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/news/soi-fam-mig.pdf
Page 34 - 'Transitional arrangements' :
A fiancé(e), proposed civil partner, spouse, civil partner, unmarried partner, same sex partner, child or adult dependant with leave to enter or remain in the UK on the family route granted before 9 July 2012 will remain subject to the rules in force prior to that date. Likewise, those with leave granted before 9 July 2012 as a partner of a migrant with leave under the Points Based System, or as an adult dependant or post-flight family member of a refugee or person granted humanitarian protection in the UK, will also remain subject to the rules in force prior to that date.
Clearly Steve and Galina should be covered under the old rules. This isn't the first time we've heard of this happening :
http://www.eastlothiancourier.com/news/aroundthecounty/articles/2012/10/18/437955-newlyweds-facing-exile-under-new-immigration-laws-/
http://ukimmigrationstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/finally.html#sthash.aSpHdI6q.dpuf
http://ukimmigrationstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/finally.html#sthash.aSpHdI6q.dpuf
http://ukimmigrationstruggle.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/finally.html#sthash.aSpHdI6q.dpuf
http://thailand-uk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-14991.html )There is no answer to give to Steve and Galina, as to why after three years of marriage they are now being told there are yet further hurdles to jump over, else their marriage will be considered worthless by the government.
The UKBA has generously offered that for them to not breakup their marriage, Steve could leave the UK too. However, there is no understanding for the fact that Steve and Galina look after Steve’s 90 year old mother. If Steve were to do as the government wants and leave his home, who will look after this 90 year old British woman?
Sunday, 24 February 2013
Error in 'Life in UK' book??
The image below is from page 18 of the new 'Life in the UK' book :
The caption reads 'An Anglo-Saxon helmet found at Sutton Hoo - currently at the British Museum'.
The text begins: 'The Anglo-Saxons were not Christians when they first came to Britain but, during this period, missionaries came to Britain to preach about Christianity...'
Au contraire. The famous Sutton Hoo helmet is this :
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sutton_hoo_helmet_room_1_no_flashbrightness_ajusted.JPG - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Hoo ).
It's not the same helmet as the one in the 'Life in the UK' book - and in all my googling, I haven't come across a helmet found at Sutton Hoo which looks like the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' book.
For starters, the Sutton Hoo helmet has a full face mask; the 'Life in the UK' book's helmet doesn't.
I believe that the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' image is actually a Vendel helmet - maybe even this helmet :
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Helmet_from_a_7th_century_boat_grave,_Vendel_era.jpg )
In fact, the image of the Vendel helmet above is linked to from the Wikipedia page on Sutton Hoo ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Hoo ) with the caption 'Helmet from the 7th century ship burial at Vendel'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendel is a location in Sweden which is also the site of ship burials and the graves of medieval kings who shared a similar culture to the early English - but it's not Sutton Hoo, and while the famous Sutton Hoo helmet does bear some resemblance to the Vendel helmet, they aren't the same object.
Surely the authors of the 'Life in the UK' book haven't just copied and pasted an image from Wikipedia (or somewhere) without understanding the underlying context or history? Because that would be wrong.
If of course the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' book does come from Sutton Hoo (another helmet??) - I'd like to see evidence of this, and am willing to be corrected. But on the face of it it's not the same object.
---
"The new book rightly focuses on values and principles at the heart of being British," Harper said. "Instead of telling people how to claim benefits it encourages participation in British life."
Among these British values are 1/ fair play 2/ accuracy and integrity and 3/ a sense of history.
If indeed the authors of the book have posted the wrong image (the Vendel helmet, while lovely and demonstrating a high level of craftsmanship, isn't the same as the Sutton Hoo helmet), then that's just not cricket.
The Sutton Hoo helmet is remarkable for its sheer attention to detail. From http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pe_mla/h/helmet_from_sutton_hoo.aspx :
The helmet has panels decorated with interlacing Style II animal ornament and heroic scenes, motifs that were common in the Germanic world at this time. One scene shows two warriors, wearing horned helmets, holding short swords and down-turned spears. The other shows a mounted warrior trampling a fallen enemy, who in turn is stabbing the horse, a theme handed down from the Roman Empire.
Yes. Attention to detail. More attention to detail please!
Sutton Hoo is a special part of English history - sacred even. It's just not on to get something so core to the English identity, wrong.
---
I should also add that the apparent error wasn't spotted by me. It was spotted by someone I know who is
1/ Currently studying for the 'Life in the UK' test
2/ From a radically different culture (Japan) and...
3/ Whose native language isn't English.
Fair play.
---
Related post : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/hidden-lives-life-in-uk-comedy-gold.html
The image below is from page 18 of the new 'Life in the UK' book :
The text begins: 'The Anglo-Saxons were not Christians when they first came to Britain but, during this period, missionaries came to Britain to preach about Christianity...'
Au contraire. The famous Sutton Hoo helmet is this :
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sutton_hoo_helmet_room_1_no_flashbrightness_ajusted.JPG - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Hoo ).
It's not the same helmet as the one in the 'Life in the UK' book - and in all my googling, I haven't come across a helmet found at Sutton Hoo which looks like the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' book.
For starters, the Sutton Hoo helmet has a full face mask; the 'Life in the UK' book's helmet doesn't.
I believe that the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' image is actually a Vendel helmet - maybe even this helmet :
In fact, the image of the Vendel helmet above is linked to from the Wikipedia page on Sutton Hoo ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sutton_Hoo ) with the caption 'Helmet from the 7th century ship burial at Vendel'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vendel is a location in Sweden which is also the site of ship burials and the graves of medieval kings who shared a similar culture to the early English - but it's not Sutton Hoo, and while the famous Sutton Hoo helmet does bear some resemblance to the Vendel helmet, they aren't the same object.
Surely the authors of the 'Life in the UK' book haven't just copied and pasted an image from Wikipedia (or somewhere) without understanding the underlying context or history? Because that would be wrong.
If of course the helmet in the 'Life in the UK' book does come from Sutton Hoo (another helmet??) - I'd like to see evidence of this, and am willing to be corrected. But on the face of it it's not the same object.
---
"The new book rightly focuses on values and principles at the heart of being British," Harper said. "Instead of telling people how to claim benefits it encourages participation in British life."
Among these British values are 1/ fair play 2/ accuracy and integrity and 3/ a sense of history.
If indeed the authors of the book have posted the wrong image (the Vendel helmet, while lovely and demonstrating a high level of craftsmanship, isn't the same as the Sutton Hoo helmet), then that's just not cricket.
The Sutton Hoo helmet is remarkable for its sheer attention to detail. From http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/pe_mla/h/helmet_from_sutton_hoo.aspx :
The helmet has panels decorated with interlacing Style II animal ornament and heroic scenes, motifs that were common in the Germanic world at this time. One scene shows two warriors, wearing horned helmets, holding short swords and down-turned spears. The other shows a mounted warrior trampling a fallen enemy, who in turn is stabbing the horse, a theme handed down from the Roman Empire.
Yes. Attention to detail. More attention to detail please!
Sutton Hoo is a special part of English history - sacred even. It's just not on to get something so core to the English identity, wrong.
---
I should also add that the apparent error wasn't spotted by me. It was spotted by someone I know who is
1/ Currently studying for the 'Life in the UK' test
2/ From a radically different culture (Japan) and...
3/ Whose native language isn't English.
Fair play.
---
Related post : http://britcits.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/hidden-lives-life-in-uk-comedy-gold.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)