Read my FB post on much hated patronymics — so far it’s been child’s play, but I predict that, as things now stand, none of the people who were the recipients of VAC-generated (and therefore patronymic-bearing) entry clearance BRPs post-2015 are getting British passports, pretty much, ever.
Quick update on Worker Registration Scheme: who exactly was exempt and, finally, until when did it last?
I get a lot of questions from people who are confused as to who exactly was exempt from WRS when it was enacted in 2004 — in fact, it seems from UKVI’s own internal documents that many of those confused on this point are its own employees! UKVI does not even have an internal document that lists, or explains, all of the exemptions.
I finally found the primary legislation that set up and explained the WRS and who is exempt from it – enjoy!
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/1219/pdfs/uksi_20041219_en.pdf
You will note of course that originally, as in this document, it was to last until 30 April 2009. This is now AGAIN th ecase, as the legislation extending it to 2011 was found unlawful, as confirmed in Gubeladze v SSWP (TG v SSWP) by the Court of Appeals. Don’t expect UKVI to amend any of its policy, but you can try to rely on it.
My take: EU citizens will be “the new Windrush scandal”
Now that the “Windrush scandal” has claimed the head of the Home Secretary, it is time to reflect on all this. I am no friend of the Tory party, but am always cautious of any Guardian-led immigration hysteria, as well. Now, the Guardian was right to raise this, and of course it is outrageous etc etc. Yet, is there not a cautionary tale within about one’s personal responsibility? An umpteenth article about the so-called “Windrush scandal” in the Guardian recently condemned former immigration minister Damian Green for suggesting, 7 years back, that keeping evidence of one’s immigration status was that … Continue reading →
What good is winning an appeal, if the Home Office responds with sabotage?
Gone are the days when the Home Office presenting officers’ brightest ideas on fudging their appeal statistics were to deliberately misrecord the results on CID as “allowed on human rights grounds” instead of “allowed under the immigration rules”, so that it will look like Home Office was never wrong in the first place (appeals allowed on human rights grounds are not counted in their internal statistics as failures). But imagine winning in the Tribunal, but then waiting MORE THAN A YEAR with UKVI simply stonewalling requests to implement the decision – to later find out that HO had NEVER RECORDED … Continue reading →
ALL FLR(FP)s, incl. Appendix FM routes, might now be kept at (ATOS? Capita?) in Durham to process, where staff can’t tell HMPO from UKVI
The most problematic UK immigration application form FLR(FP) is used for many applications involving so-called “private life claims”, including those under the Immigration rules (Appendix FM 10-year partner routes, 5-year and 10-year parent routes, Private life under para 276 ADE), as well as by anyone who just thinks that they might file an application – called applications “outside the rules”. The position of all of these groups of people is quite different. Applicants under Immigration Rules, if they qualify, are technically entitled to their leave to remain. There is no discretion, although in many cases consideration of those applications will … Continue reading →