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 →

EU residence documents: what are they good for? Apparently, not much – as ROR and Surinder Singh applicants find out the hard way

The UK government is well-known for grotesque interpretation of those few ECJ rulings that seem to go its way — just think McCarthy 1, the perverse interpretation of which by our government went on to necessitate Lounes. But no case, as I am starting to realise, has been as abused by the UK government as Dias.  Dias simply says that a residence card on its face does not, by itself, grant a right of residence. It is only evidence that conditions for that residence were met at the time the card was issued. Our government, across all its departments, now … Continue reading →

Trump immigration plan vs DACA: what will actually happen? Prediction

As you probably all know folks, US Immigration policy is in its highest pitch fever the last two weeks, that it’s been in almost three decades. Not since the reforms of the 1980s and 1990s has there been so much focus on immigration policy — which currently stands principally unchganged since the 1990s- and so much of a real chance that it will be dramatically overhauled. Something we in the UK experience every day, but the US is not used to. So, what are the proposals, will something actually get done,  and how is it likely to turn out? Trump … Continue reading →

Circus meets Kangaroo court: what is JR in admin court actually like

My friend and client had walked away ealier this month  from a JR application – we both lingered outside for a bit of where his oral renewal of permission hearing, which he paid for, was scheduled —  but decided not to go in. That is, when we found out that the judge assigned was an “employment law lion”, according to his biography. Permission on papers was denied by a medical law solicitor, sitting as a high court judge for unclear reasons. The government was represented by a lawyer qualified in New Zealand. Our JR was on a procedural question of EU … Continue reading →

FOI REQUEST CONFIRMS WORST FEARS: EU PASSPORTS IN DURHAM are [MIS]HANDLED BY ATOS

As a birthday present to me today, the Home Office answered my latest FOI request in time, but alas it confirms our worst fears.  Following the horrifying case of two original EU passports vanishing in Durham without a trace and Home Office STILL doing NOTHING about it, compounded by my suspicions that the passports have been stolen at the Durham facility handled by an external contractor — and, further, my suspicion that HO will use the same or similar contractor to staff the entire new EU documents process,  I requested the details of WHO are the people entrusted with passports in Durham, which is supposed to, currently, constitute copying and returning of all the EU  and British passports. You can read the response in full on the attached link, as well as the job specification they sent. As you can see, the people in question are NOT civil servants,  and are not required to be UK or EEA citizens, which makes a threat to original documents very real. The HO appears to refuse to divulge the precise details and level of background checks needed.

FOI response

Job specification