₦airaland Forum

ReesheesuKnack:
Australia had problems with illegal arrivals on boats.
How did the Aussies solve it?
The UK Labour Govt should use the Australian model. It worked before, it can still work for the UK.

All this talk about ‘smashing the gangs’ and 1-in-1-out is nonsense.

While in opposition, David Lammy uses EVERY single opportunity he has to cry out and advocate for SAFE LEGAL ROUTES for asylum seekers. What happened to that?

Now, most of the illegal boat arrivals come in from France, right? The UK has a consulate in France don’t they? Can the UK not open small consulate office annexes in Calais? Then the UK post their officials there. All prospective asylum seekers go to the UK-manned posts in Calais to apply for asylum. Any successful applicants are granted asylum visas and the UK facilitates their travel via Eurostar.

With this firmly established, No ‘asylum’ seeker can arrive in a boat and be expected to not be treated as an illegal.

With that firmly established, the UK now applies the Australian model. Infact, if they can’t get a 3rd country (like Rwanda), they can place huge ‘Bibby Stockholm’s’ at sea. Any dinghy arrivals are put in the Ships and taken back to their home countries, without their feet touching the ground.

The EcHR cannot accuse the UK of breaking the law, since the UK can point at the consulate/embassy annexes in Calais.

Problem solved.
Nigel no longer has a small boats argument.
Labour succeeds where the Tories failed.

Labour becomes the darling of the UK.
Everyone is happy.
Even our previous Nairaland Labour Party chairwoman will return to this thread.

Happy Days!

You nailed it. I wonder why their think tanks haven’t thought of this solution. The Rwanda approach is even more feasible than this 1 in one out plan.

ReesheesuKnack:
Australia had problems with illegal arrivals on boats.
How did the Aussies solve it?
The UK Labour Govt should use the Australian model. It worked before, it can still work for the UK.

All this talk about ‘smashing the gangs’ and 1-in-1-out is nonsense.

While in opposition, David Lammy uses EVERY single opportunity he has to cry out and advocate for SAFE LEGAL ROUTES for asylum seekers. What happened to that?

Now, most of the illegal boat arrivals come in from France, right? The UK has a consulate in France don’t they? Can the UK not open small consulate office annexes in Calais? Then the UK post their officials there. All prospective asylum seekers go to the UK-manned posts in Calais to apply for asylum. Any successful applicants are granted asylum visas and the UK facilitates their travel via Eurostar.

With this firmly established, No ‘asylum’ seeker can arrive in a boat and be expected to not be treated as an illegal.

With that firmly established, the UK now applies the Australian model. Infact, if they can’t get a 3rd country (like Rwanda), they can place huge ‘Bibby Stockholm’s’ at sea. Any dinghy arrivals are put in the Ships and taken back to their home countries, without their feet touching the ground.

The EcHR cannot accuse the UK of breaking the law, since the UK can point at the consulate/embassy annexes in Calais.

Problem solved.
Nigel no longer has a small boats argument.
Labour succeeds where the Tories failed.

Labour becomes the darling of the UK.
Everyone is happy.
Even our previous Nairaland Labour Party chairwoman will return to this thread.

Happy Days!

Funny how they had all the answers until they got into government, then they became clueless.

Cyberknight:
Sadly, I think (while hoping that this will not be the case) Labour's goose might be pretty much cooked in '29, whatever they do. Reform is taking on the same aura of inevitability that Trump had - the Overton window's shifted so much to the right that an increasing number of people will just vote for whoever will sort out the immigration issue and don't care about anything else.

💯

It's not even just the immigration issue, the Zeitgeist is one of growing anger at a perceived 2 tier system - taxes, law and order, freedom of speech etc- which is being symbolised online by cases like Lucy Connolly, the pulling down of the St George's flag, grooming gangs etc

The new proposals are welcome and sound very reasonable, but I agree with you that once again Labour appears reactive. It looks like they lacked the political will until their hands were forced by the asylum protests and the court injunction on the Epping hotel.

There are still some roadblocks ahead though even if they manage to fast track the asylum appeals process (which is much needed). The top countries for asylum claims e.g. Afghanistan, Iran, Eritrea, have no returns agreement with the UK. Even Pakistan!! currently refuses to take back its citizens. So even if the claimants exhaust their appeal rights, what next if they can't be removed to their countries of origin? They might lose their asylum accommodation, but will they then be detained indefinitely, turfed out into the underground world on the streets?

ReesheesuKnack:
Now, most of the illegal boat arrivals come in from France, right? The UK has a consulate in France don’t they? Can the UK not open small consulate office annexes in Calais? Then the UK post their officials there. All prospective asylum seekers go to the UK-manned posts in Calais to apply for asylum. Any successful applicants are granted asylum visas and the UK facilitates their travel via Eurostar.

With this firmly established, No ‘asylum’ seeker can arrive in a boat and be expected to not be treated as an illegal.

With that firmly established, the UK now applies the Australian model. Infact, if they can’t get a 3rd country (like Rwanda), they can place huge ‘Bibby Stockholm’s’ at sea. Any dinghy arrivals are put in the Ships and taken back to their home countries, without their feet touching the ground.

The EcHR cannot accuse the UK of breaking the law, since the UK can point at the consulate/embassy annexes in Calais.

Problem solved.
Nigel no longer has a small boats argument.
Labour succeeds where the Tories failed.

Labour becomes the darling of the UK.
Everyone is happy.
Even our previous Nairaland Labour Party chairwoman will return to this thread.

Happy Days!

Lol @ the bolded.

A France processing centre could work in theory as we did something very similar for Ukrainian refugees where we processed them in mainland Europe before they were given visas to the UK.

However I suspect that France would veto any such plans as it's in their interest for more migrants to transit through France en route to Dover, instead of France bearing the responsibility and costs to house and provide for them while their claims are being processed. Also, if this system worked, then other EU countries could establish similar processing centres further up the migrant travel route - most likely in Greece or Italy where they begin their EU journey- to prevent them making their way on to Germany, France etc.
I wonder if there is a legal reason why EU countries haven't yet done this - or perhaps it's just a case of western Europe being too "soft".

The Tories already tried Bibby Stockholm and the human rights groups and lawyers had a field day - their case strengthened by an outbreak of Legionella and the death of an asylum seeker on board. I don't think Labour would be brave enough to try this again.

Furthermore, what happens to the failed asylum seekers in France? France won't be able to return them to Afghanistan for example, nor would they want them to remain in France. The migrants will be more desperate to risk it all to cross the channel to the UK - so what do we do - detain them indefinitely? We will ultimately need a system like the US where we can remove them to a 3rd country like Rwanda, (US is sending migrants to Uganda, El Salvador, and any country that will accept them in return for cash/favours) - but that won't work here due to the ECHR.

99 problems....🥴

@cyberknight

Great quote! And that’s what US voters are realising with Trump’s falling ratings and increasing unpopularity. After the overly aggressive immigration policies, what else can they offer? Where’s the real substance? Tariffs? Cancelling DEI? Lol

Western liberals need to wake up and smell the coffee. They are fighting a losing issue. Starmer needs to smarten up; ECHR or not, no one is buying it. Just stop the flow. Desperate times call for desperate measures. And he has exercised extreme measures in the past. Last year during the riots, to his credit, the far right thugs got convicted in a matter of days. Did courts not open over the weekend to expeditiously hear cases? Where there is a will there is a way!

Even if not for the average UK citizen or legal resident who are facing an affordability crisis, NHS waiting lists, and rising unemployment, then do it for self-preservation. The far right is on the march and will take over power in next general election. Why not blunt that attack by addressing the majority of voters’ concerns about the boats, and then fight the remaining battles on growing the economy, foreign policy, and other issues, instead of letting the far-right dominate with their one trick pony of immigration? (Granted reversing the tide of legal immigration is still another hot button issue, but that is separate from the boats and far less popular than stopping the boats).

There is nothing immoral or wrong in saying the country can no longer take in new people crossing the Channel. It is not possible to take care of every starving person in the world. People in Nigeria are suffering with all the APC shenanigans (hyperinflation, kidnappings & killings, brazen corruption etc.) but unfortunately not everyone can japa to UK or be helped in one way or another. The same logic should be applied here. Focus on the citizens and legal residents who are struggling with rising costs instead of housing new arrivals in hotels. The ECHR cannot force a government to house people if there is no money.

Wake up, Labour Party. You’re our only hope because I cannot vote Conservative or Reform.

Zahra29:
Can't say, or can't be bothered to respond to your childish comments?🙄

Lol, but I just remembered when you played the racism card when a gentleman from your town asked you where you were from.

Poor man - getting accused of all sorts over an innocent question.

Another attempt at deviation.

So you said most opposition to your views here is angled on you being a woman and when asked to expatiate, you try everything to deviate it.

It's not difficult to see how people paint narratives and lean into stereotypes.

jedisco:
Another attempt at deviation.

So you said most opposition to your views here is angled on you being a woman and when asked to expatiate, you try everything to deviate it.

It's not difficult to see how people paint narratives and lean into stereotypes.

It is funny, isn’t it?

It was surprising to see someone who was so adamant about not seeing/understanding why people were speaking out against being targeted during the riots on the basis of their race (instead choosing to shift the issue entirely to “underlying causes” despite all the evidence that race was the core driver of the riots), suddenly begin to hallucinate about being targeted on the basis of her gender despite the lack of any of evidence of that, despite repeated calls to provide such evidence.

I guess the people who frequently pat themselves on the back about being ‘objective’ and attack others as ‘emotional’, often really are just projecting.

Jamesclooney:
...
Wake up, Labour Party. You’re our only hope because I cannot vote Conservative or Reform.

Hehe... so much ado. It'd be alright in the end
Labour dropped the ball on this and it wasn't difficult to predict. They believed their electoral narrative. The opposition speaks against anything the ruling party does- the ultimate downside of tribal politics . However, they should have a clear-headed team working on policy.

It's quite clear to anyone who has seen immigration from both ends that the tide would only continue (and get larger) if there was no deterrent. They could have piloried the conservatives but still used the Rwanda scheme while creating safe means to apply.
With the cost if living crises, it's virtually impossible to convince anyone to accept tax rises when they feel those coming via boats are given a free pass.

The next quagmire awaiting them is their inability to raise government revenue while also rapidly cutting legal migration (and likely growth). Ultimately, Rachel would break some of her pledges.

All said, in a system like the UK, I'd much rather Farage as PM than be influencing policy on the sidelines.

Goodenoch:
It is funny, isn’t it?

It was surprising to see someone who was so adamant about not seeing/understanding why people were speaking out against being targeted during the riots on the basis of their race (instead choosing to shift the issue entirely to “underlying causes” despite all the evidence that race was the core driver of the riots), suddenly begin to hallucinate about being targeted on the basis of her gender despite the lack of any of evidence of that, despite repeated calls to provide such evidence.

I guess the people who frequently pat themselves on the back about being ‘objective’ and attack others as ‘emotional’, often really are just projecting.

True... the way people create narratives in their head and act based on those stereotypes.

If you're going to accuse a group, then have some evidence at least. People have even asked- just point to posts of folks disagreeing with you cos you're a woman, yet nothing. It's just multiple attempts at deviation or one stereotype after another.

jedisco:
Hehe... so much ado. It'd be alright in the end
Labour dropped the ball on this and it wasn't difficult to predict. They believed their electoral narrative. The opposition speaks against anything the ruling party does- the ultimate downside of tribal politics . However, they should have a clear-headed team working on policy.

It's quite clear to anyone who has seen immigration from both ends that the tide would only continue (and get larger) if there was no deterrent. They could have piloried the conservatives but still used the Rwanda scheme while creating safe means to apply.
With the cost if living crises, it's virtually impossible to convince anyone to accept tax rises when they feel those coming via boats are given a free pass.

The next quagmire awaiting them is their inability to raise government revenue while also rapidly cutting legal migration (and likely growth). Ultimately, Rachel would break some of her pledges.

All said, in a system like the UK, I'd much rather Farage as PM than be influencing policy on the sidelines.

This issue about those coming via boat is much deeper than what we all know and the politicians including those on the sidelines know it’s not as direct as everyone thinks. I just laugh at all the ideas being thrown here and there. This country can’t survive without those coming via boats and it’s a whole very long value chain that’s a different conversation altogether. The day any govt irrespective of party truly finds a way without those folks, in just hours it will cease but for now it’s a nice political tool for anyone eyeing Downing Street! For me as a tax payer I just look away! This country is too large even if they remove those folks from the hotels they will always find a way or place to house them so is it that wherever they place them people will continue to go wherever they are to protest? It remains to be seen.

jedisco:
Another attempt at deviation.

So you said most opposition to your views here is angled on you being a woman and when asked to expatiate, you try everything to deviate it.

It's not difficult to see how people paint narratives and lean into stereotypes.

Lol, I literally didn't say that, but it's okay, I know you and BadEnoch live for twisting my words. You'll be alright, I hope.

I don't have to deviate, I'm simply not compelled to oblige your fatuous,negative comments. I don't go on and on about you, prodding you weeks later to "expatiate", e.g. Why you stereotyped the local man as racist. The same way you went on and on, interrogating me about my apparent Windrush heritage, not because you were genuinely interested, but because you were desperate to find an attack angle.

It's a bit obsessive tbh, try and find something else to occupy you.

brine:
It's 10 working day(2 weeks) for priority service and it's 8 weeks for the standard process. Also, they can change an existing priority to standard application(without refund) if the application is not straight forward......

Hey bro. Sorry for sending this here, PM doesn’t seem to be working.

Just to update you. I’ve opened my company, created the business address, appointed a director, created work emails and phone number, and also registered for PAYE and Corporation Tax. Also, will start receiving payments for services very soon.

I wanted to ask you a couple of important questions:

- How did you handle the application for a sponsor licence? Did they come to visit your place? I’m using a virtual address, so I’m wondering how to deal with verification checks if they want to visit.
- About the business plan, how should I go about writing one at this stage?

Thanks in advance for your help brother.

oluwaleokey:
Gurus in the house please i need guidance regarding my insurance policy issue, i know this might not be the right thread however its still boils down to investment.

Five years ago, I subscribed to the Flex Edu Insurance Policy with First Bank Insurance for my daughter’s education, which was due to mature this year. Along the way, the policy management was moved to Sanlam Nigeria (a partner company, as I was informed). Despite the transition, everything seemed smooth until recently.

A few weeks before the maturity date, I contacted the company to confirm that all was in order. They responded promptly, acknowledged the upcoming maturity, and provided me with a statement of account. (Also note I had exchange several mails before and they responded swiftly)

Five days before maturity, I was forwarded a form & asked to complete a payment voucher for the full benefit. However, it has now been several weeks since maturity, and I am yet to receive any payment. To make matters worse, I even noticed an over-debit on my account, which I raised with the company, but my emails have since gone unanswered. I have sent multiple follow-ups to every contact I have, including those I previously engaged with, but there has been no response.

Currently, I can no longer access my account online, which raises even more concern. After diligently saving monthly for five years for my daughter’s education, I feel deeply frustrated and disappointed by this experience.

I kindly seek your advice on how best to call out these people?
How I can recover my funds after years of committed savings.

Is First Bank Insurance is still directly involved in this matter? and What formal steps I can take to escalate this issue if Sanlam Nigeria continues to be unresponsive

This situation feels unfair and distressing, and I would appreciate any support, guidance, or escalation channels you can provide to help resolve it.

I will appreciate every single help I could get on here
Thanks

For the record:
I followed some of the advice shared here, and honestly, it worked like magic. They are now reaching out to me. several calls, apologies, and even prompt responses to my emails from different quarters.

I can’t help but wonder what went wrong initially, but I’ll leave that to mystery. What matters is that I’ve now been assured I’ll be credited within 10 working days.

I’m tempted to commend their services, but I’ll hold off until the funds actually hit my account, since the process is still ongoing.

I just thought to update everyone here. Thank you all for the inputs, it were truly helpful.

Now, let me sit back with an iced Coca-Cola and some Gala while waiting for the funds.

.

Zahra29:
Lol, I literally didn't say that, but it's okay, I know you and BadEnoch live for twisting my words. You'll be alright, I hope.

I don't have to deviate, I'm simply not compelled to oblige your fatuous,negative comments. I don't go on and on about you, prodding you weeks later to "expatiate", e.g. Why you stereotyped the local man as racist. The same way you went on and on, interrogating me about my apparent Windrush heritage, not because you were genuinely interested, but because you were desperate to find an attack angle.

It's a bit obsessive tbh, try and find something else to occupy you.

Hopefully his minion tells him not to derail the thread any further

gabiomoesu:
Hey bro. Sorry for sending this here, PM doesn’t seem to be working.

Just to update you. I’ve opened my company, created the business address, appointed a director, created work emails and phone number, and also registered for PAYE and Corporation Tax. Also, will start receiving payments for services very soon.

That's awesome! Will you be registering for VAT? I registered for VAT and I would suggest registering for VAT if you haven't.

gabiomoesu:
- How did you handle the application for a sponsor licence? Did they come to visit your place? I’m using a virtual address, so I’m wondering how to deal with verification checks if they want to visit.
- About the business plan, how should I go about writing one at this stage?

Thanks in advance for your help brother.

No, they didn't come to visit. I used my house address. I'm not sure if it's advisable to use a virtual address but I guess it depends on the nature of your business. If your application raises any concerns, it could lead to delays, and they may either visit your office location or schedule an online meeting with you and your authorizing officer. If possible, I’d recommend avoiding a virtual address.

Yes, you can start writing the business plan now as you'll need to include that with your application. You'd write the business plan as if you wanted to pitch your idea to investors to invest in your business. Try to include market analysis and financial projection amongst others in your business plan. There are several examples online and here's a guide that you might find useful https://getsling.com/blog/restaurant-business-plan/

Hi Everyone,

I need advise from gurus and well experienced people please.

I currently work in a local NHS with an annual income of £29907 before tax, due to increase to £33000 before tax in few months. I currently do not spend a penny on transportation with free staff bus available to and fro work and i enjoy as much flexibility as i wish to have with a daily commute of about 30 mins to and fro. I save quite a good amount monthly and spend even more less on feeding and housing cost about £700-£800 monthly.

I recently got a job offer in central London with a salary of £42000 before tax (a more senior but similar role as my current). By my rough calculation transportation monthly will cost me roughly £607.42 monthly excluding feeling and other misllc and daily commute of about 3hrs to and fro

Now i am confused if i should take the offer or not. Saying Local or commuting to the city.

Bumzz00:
Hi Everyone,

I need advise from gurus and well experienced people please.

I currently work in a local NHS with an annual income of £29907 before tax, due to increase to £33000 before tax in few months. I currently do not spend a penny on transportation with free staff bus available to and fro work and i enjoy as much flexibility as i wish to have with a daily commute of about 30 mins to and fro. I save quite a good amount monthly and spend even more less on feeding and housing cost about £700-£800 monthly.

I recently got a job offer in central London with a salary of £42000 before tax (a more senior but similar role as my current). By my rough calculation transportation monthly will cost me roughly £607.42 monthly excluding feeling and other misllc and daily commute of about 3hrs to and fro

Now i am confused if i should take the offer or not. Saying Local or commuting to the city.

This is a bit tricky but at the end of the day besides costs what does the new job really offer you? Does it offer better career advancement prospects? Do a cost benefit analysis and decide! Making a decision based on cost alone at times may see you missing out on the bigger picture! I don’t want to be in your shoes honestly and I pray you make the right decision, cheers!

ReesheesuKnack:
Australia had problems with illegal arrivals on boats.
How did the Aussies solve it?
The UK Labour Govt should use the Australian model. It worked before, it can still work for the UK.

All this talk about ‘smashing the gangs’ and 1-in-1-out is nonsense.

While in opposition, David Lammy uses EVERY single opportunity he has to cry out and advocate for SAFE LEGAL ROUTES for asylum seekers. What happened to that?

Now, most of the illegal boat arrivals come in from France, right? The UK has a consulate in France don’t they? Can the UK not open small consulate office annexes in Calais? Then the UK post their officials there. All prospective asylum seekers go to the UK-manned posts in Calais to apply for asylum. Any successful applicants are granted asylum visas and the UK facilitates their travel via Eurostar.

With this firmly established, No ‘asylum’ seeker can arrive in a boat and be expected to not be treated as an illegal.

With that firmly established, the UK now applies the Australian model. Infact, if they can’t get a 3rd country (like Rwanda), they can place huge ‘Bibby Stockholm’s’ at sea. Any dinghy arrivals are put in the Ships and taken back to their home countries, without their feet touching the ground.

The EcHR cannot accuse the UK of breaking the law, since the UK can point at the consulate/embassy annexes in Calais.

Problem solved.
Nigel no longer has a small boats argument.
Labour succeeds where the Tories failed.

Labour becomes the darling of the UK.
Everyone is happy.
Even our previous Nairaland Labour Party chairwoman will return to this thread.

Happy Days!

Sorry to ask
Can immigrant use boat from France to uk
Is that possible
Have not heard of that

Bumzz00:
Hi Everyone,

I need advise from gurus and well experienced people please.

I currently work in a local NHS with an annual income of £29907 before tax, due to increase to £33000 before tax in few months. I currently do not spend a penny on transportation with free staff bus available to and fro work and i enjoy as much flexibility as i wish to have with a daily commute of about 30 mins to and fro. I save quite a good amount monthly and spend even more less on feeding and housing cost about £700-£800 monthly.

I recently got a job offer in central London with a salary of £42000 before tax (a more senior but similar role as my current). By my rough calculation transportation monthly will cost me roughly £607.42 monthly excluding feeling and other misllc and daily commute of about 3hrs to and fro

Now i am confused if i should take the offer or not. Saying Local or commuting to the city.

Look at the pro and con of the new job compare to the local NHS Job, if the new job have no advantage over the old one, mate stick with the old one. LONDON cost of living no be ur mate oooo. If not for my job that still hold me in London, i for don move to outside London since

Bumzz00:
Hi Everyone,

I need advise from gurus and well experienced people please.

I currently work in a local NHS with an annual income of £29907 before tax, due to increase to £33000 before tax in few months. I currently do not spend a penny on transportation with free staff bus available to and fro work and i enjoy as much flexibility as i wish to have with a daily commute of about 30 mins to and fro. I save quite a good amount monthly and spend even more less on feeding and housing cost about £700-£800 monthly.

I recently got a job offer in central London with a salary of £42000 before tax (a more senior but similar role as my current). By my rough calculation transportation monthly will cost me roughly £607.42 monthly excluding feeling and other misllc and daily commute of about 3hrs to and fro

Now i am confused if i should take the offer or not. Saying Local or commuting to the city.

Stay in your current role, unless there are compelling reasons why that other one is better, beyond finances.

For an increase of 9k salary with added transport cost of 600+, my rough mental back-of-napkin math says you’ll actually be keeping less of your pay when you factor in the incidental expenses that come with working in London. When you factor in the time you’ll spend commuting, you’re definitely earning quite a bit less per hour and losing time you could have spent upskilling and preparing to get a job with a much more substantial salary increase whether in London or out.

I recently had a similar dilemma (also a London role, and while it a substantial increase from what I was earning, when I factored transport + commuting in, the net increase was not worth it for me). Three months later I got my current role; still in London but much substantially higher pay than the previous offer and with a lower commuting requirement.

£607.42 per month on transport is like £7290 per year which when you deduct from your annual salary would almost be equal to what you would get with the increase. If you think the difference in the two salaries after transport is deducted would be worth it, then go for it. Else look at the option of moving closer to your work area or buying a car to see if it cuts down the expense which I doubt it would. Senior role comes with more wahala sha 🤭

Bumzz00:
Hi Everyone,

I need advise from gurus and well experienced people please.

I currently work in a local NHS with an annual income of £29907 before tax, due to increase to £33000 before tax in few months. I currently do not spend a penny on transportation with free staff bus available to and fro work and i enjoy as much flexibility as i wish to have with a daily commute of about 30 mins to and fro. I save quite a good amount monthly and spend even more less on feeding and housing cost about £700-£800 monthly.

I recently got a job offer in central London with a salary of £42000 before tax (a more senior but similar role as my current). By my rough calculation transportation monthly will cost me roughly £607.42 monthly excluding feeling and other misllc and daily commute of about 3hrs to and fro

Now i am confused if i should take the offer or not. Saying Local or commuting to the city.

Hello guy, please help me make sense of this message from my landlord., quoted below, Is he trying to scam us?

.

rock86:
Hi, as you will have seen we have applied for us to be responsible for Council tax for the building

This saves you money

The Local Authority have agreed & have backdated to December 2023

It looks likely YOU will receive a refund on some of your council tax payments from December 2023 (depending on when your tenancy began)

For you it's possible to be at least £1,000 or more for you (we don't know details)

However we are likely to be faced with a significant bill of over £5,000 to pay for the tax back to 2023

Therefore we need the tenants receiving refunds to contribute some of their refunds towards the bill - probably around 35% (you'd still get a big refund)

When we get the information we'll confirm

The refund is backdated to 2023.
In 2023, you had not even applied for a UK visa. Infact, in that 2023, you probably hadn’t considered japa-ing to the UK.

How then are you eligible for refund? A refund covering a period you were in Africa?

Make it make sense

ReesheesuKnack:
The refund is backdated to 2023.
In 2023, you had not even applied for a UK visa. Infact, in that 2023, you probably hadn’t considered japa-ing to the UK.

How then are you eligible for refund? A refund covering a period you were in Africa?

Make it make sense

To be fair to our dear senior nurse, it appears the message was a direct copy of what was sent to him (presumably by his landlord) and the message acknolwedges some of the recipients might not have been tenants from Dec 2023.

Rock86, you stay in a HMO, right? The rule is that landlords are liable to pay for council tax for HMOs but some get the tenants to pay instead. It appears your landlord has been caught (I doubt they volunteered to begin paying as they seem to be implying), and the council is now billing them and refunding you. You don't have any obligation to pay them a penny out of it and there's nothing they can do to get you to pay them anything.

Practically though, the fact that you'd be paying council tax yourself may have influenced your rent being lower, and you may also want to be mindful of the relationship (they might not be able to force you to pay but you probably don't want to be feuding with your landlord), so you may want to chuck a few quid their way as a goodwill gesture.

Here's a similar scenario: https://www.justanswer.co.uk/law/pyz62-lived-hmo-paid-council-tax-directly.html

Jamesclooney:
There is nothing immoral or wrong in saying the country can no longer take in new people crossing the Channel. It is not possible to take care of every starving person in the world. People in Nigeria are suffering with all the APC shenanigans (hyperinflation, kidnappings & killings, brazen corruption etc.) but unfortunately not everyone can japa to UK or be helped in one way or another. The same logic should be applied here. Focus on the citizens and legal residents who are struggling with rising costs instead of housing new arrivals in hotels. The ECHR cannot force a government to house people if there is no money.

Wake up, Labour Party. You’re our only hope because I cannot vote Conservative or Reform.

This.

Fully aware of the most salient practical difficulties in withdrawing from the ECHR, especially the way it'll affect Northern Ireland (ECHR is embedded in the Good Friday Agreement and the EU-UK Cooperation Agreement), but this current open borders policy for people smugglers is unsustainable from all standpoints and it's truly mind-boggling that all recent governments have been allowing it to continue.

Ultimately if Labour doesn't get a grip on this, then Reform, which is happily cutting and pasting from the US playbook, will likely be the ones to do something, and one can easily imagine the nightmare of having the UK's version of ICE on the streets, carrying out racialised immigration enforcement amongst a migrant population with no physical evidence of immigration status now that BRPs are gone, with the UK papers running articles about black and brown legal residents or UK citizens or ILR holders ending up in Somalia or Eritrea or exported to the 21st century version of pre-colonial Australia.

rock86:
There is a s.i.c.k person who has quoted me. I think some of you in this thread have got issues

More of this from you again I will ban you from this section.

Nobody insulted you, they are only trying to answer your question and all you could do is to insult them?

brine:
That's awesome! Will you be registering for VAT? I registered for VAT and I would suggest registering for VAT if you haven't.



No, they didn't come to visit. I used my house address. I'm not sure if it's advisable to use a virtual address but I guess it depends on the nature of your business. If your application raises any concerns, it could lead to delays, and they may either visit your office location or schedule an online meeting with you and your authorizing officer. If possible, I’d recommend avoiding a virtual address.

Yes, you can start writing the business plan now as you'll need to include that with your application. You'd write the business plan as if you wanted to pitch your idea to investors to invest in your business. Try to include market analysis and financial projection amongst others in your business plan. There are several examples online and here's a guide that you might find useful https://getsling.com/blog/restaurant-business-plan/

Many thanks for your response, brother. As for the address, I’ve been using the virtual address I purchased throughout the process, since I don’t want to bother the kind person who agreed to be my director. That's what I've used for my companies house, to set up PAYE etc. LOL.

I did consider using my home address like you did, but I was worried it might raise concerns with the Home Office, since that same address would also appear on my CoS. How come that didn’t trouble you in your case?

As for the company plan, thanks for the link, I’ll start working on it ASAP!


Edit: Brine, sorry to bother you bro. Just thought I'd call your attention to this incase you missed it.

Hello house,

What's the best mortgage advisor to use, free or paid ?

Cheers.