Lexusgs430:


What the newspaper point is/was, a legal challenge was brought against the amount a sponsor was meant to earn, before a spousal visa application process. It was challenged as unfair and very steep and also against the human right convention.

The Supreme threw the challenge out and the law remain the same (now the legal cost against the challengers would be huge).........

What it means is £22,400 must be earned by the sponsor yearly, before a spousal visa application can be tendered (applicant + one child).

thank you so much for the clarification,

To all the eminent consultants, please when is the earliest time to start processing an extension of spousal visa due to expire in October 2017?

Thanks for your prompt feedback.

TheShopKeeper:
To all the eminent consultants, please when is the earliest time to start processing an extension of spousal visa due to expire in October 2017?

Thanks for your prompt feedback.

An FLR visa extension thread already exists. Look on thread for clarification(s).

Been listening to LBC & BBC, UK talk radio stations via the tunein app all day. The main topics was the Supreme Court challenge of the spousal visa process. I now truly know the value of this thread to applicants.
Loads of people living in the UK are really having difficulties meeting the spousal visa requirements (not only applicants from Nigeria, but also loads of other countries).

THE VALUE OF THIS THREAD IS TRULY PRICELESS TO APPLICANTS..... ...... ... ..........

[quote author=midmenconsult post=53946471][/quote]

ENCOURAGES SOMEONE OR DISCOURAGES IN FACT, IT POURS COLD WATER ON SOMEONE'S PLAN AND EVEN PUTS A SPANNER OR MONKEY WRENCH IN IT!!!

Supreme court justices have unanimously backed Theresa May’s “particularly harsh” £18,600 minimum income rule for British citizens to bring non-European spouses into Britain that campaigners say has led to tens of thousands of families being separated.

But the supreme court ruling does acknowledge that the rule has caused hardship for thousands, and criticises the lack of focus on the treatment of children and the ability of Home Office staff to consider alternative assets when they assess the earning ability of the British spouse.

Lord Carnwath said he and his fellow judges had held “that the minimum income threshold is accepted in principle” but he added that the Home Office’s rules and instructions failed to take full account of their legal duties in respect to the children involved or to allow alternative sources of funding to be considered.

The justices ruled that current Home Office rules and guidance are defective and unlawful until they are amended to give more weight to the interests of the children involved. This could give limited hope to some of the separated families with children but the four families who brought the appeal will not find out whether they can live together in Britain until their cases are reconsidered.

The £18,600 minimum income threshold for British citizens to bring non-European Economic Area spouses to live with them in the UK was introduced by May when she was home secretary in 2012 as part of her drive to reduce net migration below 100,000 and the ruling will come as a major relief to the Home Office.

It was estimated in 2015 that the £18,600 threshold excludes 41% of the British working population, including 55% of women, from bringing a foreign spouse to live in Britain. The threshold rises to £22,400 if there is one or more non-European-born child in the family. The income of the non-European partner does not count towards the threshold.

The ruling testing the legality of the family visa rules covered several linked cases. Two of them, Abdul Majid and Shabana Javed, involve British nationals married to Pakistanis; a third, known as MM, is a Lebanese refugee. A nephew of MM, known as AF, is also an appellant, as well as SS, a refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The ruling is a blow to campaigners who say the rule has meant British families have faced a choice of separation or living in exile. They have highlighted the plight of up to 15,000 British children who have grown up as “Skype kids” to keep in contact with one of their parents since the rule was introduced.

The supreme court justices acknowledge in their judgment that the £18,600 rule “causes hardship to many thousands of couples, including some who are in no way to blame for the situation in which they find themselves” but add that “does not mean that it is incompatible” with article 8 of the European convention on human rights on the right to family life.
The supreme court also agreed that the income rule has “a particularly harsh effect” on British citizens who have lived and worked abroad, have married or formed stable relationships there and now cannot return home to Britain.

It is also particularly harsh for couples who got together before 2012. “Of particular concern is the impact upon the children of these couples, many or even most of whom will be British citizens themselves,” they add.

The justices also acknowledge that the rule “does present a serious obstacle to their enjoying family life together” and may provide a permanent obstacle to many couples because those earning less than £18,600 are unlikely to amass sufficient savings to make good the shortfall. Women and especially those from minority ethnic groups will be particularly hit because of the gender pay gap.

But they have ruled that the £18,600 threshold is a legitimate part “of an overall strategy aimed at reducing net migration. Its particular aims are no doubt entirely legitimate to ensure, as far as practicable, that the couple do not have recourse to welfare benefits and have sufficient resources to be able to play a full part of British life.” They say that, given that is a legitimate aim, it was not possible to say that “a less intrusive measure” should have been adopted.

Immigration welfare campaigners took comfort in the supreme court’s findings that the rule was causing hardship to thousands of families and that the interests of children needed to be reconsidered.

Saira Grant, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This judgment is a real victory for families, especially those with children. For five years JCWI has been working with affected families and has been trying to persuade the government to abandon the family migration rules it introduced in 2012 because they are tearing families apart and significantly harming children.

“The supreme court has now declared this to be the case. These rules are unlawful as they do not safeguard the best interests of children. The strict requirement that only the sponsor’s personal finances can allow the £18,600 threshold to be met has also been discredited.”

She added: “The supreme court has said that alternative funding sources should be taken into account when a person’s right to family life could be breached. These are significant victories for families up and down the country. This judgment confirms that the government’s position is now untenable and they must now take immediate steps to protect the welfare of children in accordance with their legal duty.”

A Home Office spokesperson said the court had endorsed its approach in setting an income threshold for family migration that prevents a burden on the taxpayer and ensures migrant families can integrate into our communities.

“This is central to building an immigration system that works in the national interest,” they said.

“The current rules remain in force but we are carefully considering what the court has said in relation to exceptional cases where the income threshold has not been met, particularly where the case involves a child,” they added.

SOURCE: The Guardian

stillwaiting:


ENCOURAGES SOMEONE OR DISCOURAGES IN FACT, IT POURS COLD WATER ON SOMEONE'S PLAN AND EVEN PUTS A SPANNER OR MONKEY WRENCH IN IT!!!

Supreme court justices have unanimously backed Theresa May’s “particularly harsh” £18,600 minimum income rule for British citizens to bring non-European spouses into Britain that campaigners say has led to tens of thousands of families being separated.

But the supreme court ruling does acknowledge that the rule has caused hardship for thousands, and criticises the lack of focus on the treatment of children and the ability of Home Office staff to consider alternative assets when they assess the earning ability of the British spouse.

Lord Carnwath said he and his fellow judges had held “that the minimum income threshold is accepted in principle” but he added that the Home Office’s rules and instructions failed to take full account of their legal duties in respect to the children involved or to allow alternative sources of funding to be considered.

The justices ruled that current Home Office rules and guidance are defective and unlawful until they are amended to give more weight to the interests of the children involved. This could give limited hope to some of the separated families with children but the four families who brought the appeal will not find out whether they can live together in Britain until their cases are reconsidered.

The £18,600 minimum income threshold for British citizens to bring non-European Economic Area spouses to live with them in the UK was introduced by May when she was home secretary in 2012 as part of her drive to reduce net migration below 100,000 and the ruling will come as a major relief to the Home Office.

It was estimated in 2015 that the £18,600 threshold excludes 41% of the British working population, including 55% of women, from bringing a foreign spouse to live in Britain. The threshold rises to £22,400 if there is one or more non-European-born child in the family. The income of the non-European partner does not count towards the threshold.

The ruling testing the legality of the family visa rules covered several linked cases. Two of them, Abdul Majid and Shabana Javed, involve British nationals married to Pakistanis; a third, known as MM, is a Lebanese refugee. A nephew of MM, known as AF, is also an appellant, as well as SS, a refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The ruling is a blow to campaigners who say the rule has meant British families have faced a choice of separation or living in exile. They have highlighted the plight of up to 15,000 British children who have grown up as “Skype kids” to keep in contact with one of their parents since the rule was introduced.

The supreme court justices acknowledge in their judgment that the £18,600 rule “causes hardship to many thousands of couples, including some who are in no way to blame for the situation in which they find themselves” but add that “does not mean that it is incompatible” with article 8 of the European convention on human rights on the right to family life.
The supreme court also agreed that the income rule has “a particularly harsh effect” on British citizens who have lived and worked abroad, have married or formed stable relationships there and now cannot return home to Britain.

It is also particularly harsh for couples who got together before 2012. “Of particular concern is the impact upon the children of these couples, many or even most of whom will be British citizens themselves,” they add.

The justices also acknowledge that the rule “does present a serious obstacle to their enjoying family life together” and may provide a permanent obstacle to many couples because those earning less than £18,600 are unlikely to amass sufficient savings to make good the shortfall. Women and especially those from minority ethnic groups will be particularly hit because of the gender pay gap.

But they have ruled that the £18,600 threshold is a legitimate part “of an overall strategy aimed at reducing net migration. Its particular aims are no doubt entirely legitimate to ensure, as far as practicable, that the couple do not have recourse to welfare benefits and have sufficient resources to be able to play a full part of British life.” They say that, given that is a legitimate aim, it was not possible to say that “a less intrusive measure” should have been adopted.

Immigration welfare campaigners took comfort in the supreme court’s findings that the rule was causing hardship to thousands of families and that the interests of children needed to be reconsidered.

Saira Grant, the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said: “This judgment is a real victory for families, especially those with children. For five years JCWI has been working with affected families and has been trying to persuade the government to abandon the family migration rules it introduced in 2012 because they are tearing families apart and significantly harming children.

“The supreme court has now declared this to be the case. These rules are unlawful as they do not safeguard the best interests of children. The strict requirement that only the sponsor’s personal finances can allow the £18,600 threshold to be met has also been discredited.”

She added: “The supreme court has said that alternative funding sources should be taken into account when a person’s right to family life could be breached. These are significant victories for families up and down the country. This judgment confirms that the government’s position is now untenable and they must now take immediate steps to protect the welfare of children in accordance with their legal duty.”

A Home Office spokesperson said the court had endorsed its approach in setting an income threshold for family migration that prevents a burden on the taxpayer and ensures migrant families can integrate into our communities.

“This is central to building an immigration system that works in the national interest,” they said.

“The current rules remain in force but we are carefully considering what the court has said in relation to exceptional cases where the income threshold has not been met, particularly where the case involves a child,” they added.

SOURCE: The Guardian

It's simply an income generating policy aka indirect taxation.
Since EU citizens cannot be taxed for migration, they simply passed the buck........... ..

Lexusgs430:


An FLR visa extension thread already exists. Look on thread for clarification(s).

Please where can I get the FLR visa extension thread?

Hello My people, I'm happy to report that I've just picked up my passport with visa in it! 20 months in naija no be small thing.

I will be sharing my story and timeline in subsequent posts to encourage someone!

TunzAntman:
Hello My people, I'm happy to report that I've just picked up my passport with visa in it! 20 months in naija no be small thing.

I will be sharing my story and timeline in subsequent posts to encourage someone!

Congratulations to you, the good news go reach me by Gods Grace ohh,, Please don't forget to state all processes for those of us who are yet to apply

TunzAntman:
Hello My people, I'm happy to report that I've just picked up my passport with visa in it! 20 months in naija no be small thing.

I will be sharing my story and timeline in subsequent posts to encourage someone!

Congratulations...... .. ..

So I arrived in the U.K. In 2003 on a 2 year visit visa(I was 15 at the time). Went school, college, Uni and even got a valid N.I and started work. When I wanted to apply different solicitors just collected consultation fees and advice rubbish.

Forward to 2013, I and a few friends get stopped by police(another story) and they find out I don't have my papers, I get taken to a detention centre but I put a Human Rights application in straightaway. I spent 4 weeks there before I got released.

The application got refused, I then appealed to the lower tribunal and that also got refused. I then applied to appeal to the upper tribunal and that got refused also (we're now in 2015). A week after the refusal while I was still trying to put forward a Judicial Review, I got picked up at the reporting centre and got taken to a detention centre again.

I decided then I was going to leave voluntarily and even after that I still spent 6 weeks there.

Got to Nigeria in June 2015, married October 2016, Applied November 2016, Visa Feb 2017.

So for people with adverse immigration history, don't let it scare you. I had overstayed for 8 years before I applied but still got it.

Like oga Lexusgs430 would say be honest, dot all the I's and cross all the t's and you'll be good.

Good luck to everyone on this journey!

TunzAntman:
So I arrived in the U.K. In 2003 on a 2 year visit visa(I was 15 at the time). Went school, college, Uni and even got a valid N.I and started work. When I wanted to apply different solicitors just collected consultation fees and advice rubbish.

Forward to 2013, I and a few friends get stopped by police(another story) and they find out I don't have my papers, I get taken to a detention centre but I put a Human Rights application in straightaway. I spent 4 weeks there before I got released.

The application got refused, I then appealed to the lower tribunal and that also got refused. I then applied to appeal to the upper tribunal and that got refused also (we're now in 2015). A week after the refusal while I was still trying to put forward a Judicial Review, I got picked up at the reporting centre and got taken to a detention centre again.

I decided then I was going to leave voluntarily and even after that I still spent 6 weeks there.

Got to Nigeria in June 2015, married October 2016, Applied November 2016, Visa Feb 2017.

So for people with adverse immigration history, don't let it scare you. I had overstayed for 8 years before I applied but still got it.

Like oga Lexusgs430 would say be honest, dot all the I's and cross all the t's and you'll be good.

Good luck to everyone on this journey!

Just as i also advised a recent OP who was in about the same shoe, the home office is simply flexing their muscle. They are simply making applicants in similar position sweat and stew... .......... .
I remember when you made your enquiry. We say patience is virtue (you owe us a slap up meal, drinks and trims in Camden town).......
Enjoy your new journey (no more hiding inside the cupboard when you see a blue siren aka 50...............

TunzAntman:
So I arrived in the U.K. In 2003 on a 2 year visit visa(I was 15 at the time). Went school, college, Uni and even got a valid N.I and started work. When I wanted to apply different solicitors just collected consultation fees and advice rubbish.

Forward to 2013, I and a few friends get stopped by police(another story) and they find out I don't have my papers, I get taken to a detention centre but I put a Human Rights application in straightaway. I spent 4 weeks there before I got released.

The application got refused, I then appealed to the lower tribunal and that also got refused. I then applied to appeal to the upper tribunal and that got refused also (we're now in 2015). A week after the refusal while I was still trying to put forward a Judicial Review, I got picked up at the reporting centre and got taken to a detention centre again.

I decided then I was going to leave voluntarily and even after that I still spent 6 weeks there.

Got to Nigeria in June 2015, married October 2016, Applied November 2016, Visa Feb 2017.

So for people with adverse immigration history, don't let it scare you. I had overstayed for 8 years before I applied but still got it.

Like oga Lexusgs430 would say be honest, dot all the I's and cross all the t's and you'll be good.

Good luck to everyone on this journey!

Like I say, the solicitor also gat bills to pay. Solicitors not required for spousal visa, unless the case is over- over complicated... ...... ... .... ...

Dear house. I need your advise. I want to apply for my masters . In the uk . Lucky for me, my proposed school has one year workplacement. After my studies. I already have a 5 years uk visiting visit tho.
My questions are
1). Will my 5 years visa be cancelled if am issued a school visa
2) can my husband apply for a spouse visa , he also have uk visiting 5 years. Will his visiting visa be cancelled if his issued spouse visa.
3) can he get a job while am school.
Thanks await response

kokorita:
Dear house. I need your advise. I want to apply for my masters . In the uk . Lucky for me, my proposed school has one year workplacement. After my studies. I already have a 5 years uk visiting visit tho.
My questions are
1). Will my 5 years visa be cancelled if am issued a school visa
2) can my husband apply for a spouse visa , he also have uk visiting 5 years. Will his visiting visa be cancelled if his issued spouse visa.
3) can he get a job while am school.
Thanks await response

-Yes, your 5 years visiting visa would be cancelled (you cannot have 2 different visa's run concurrently)
- No your husband cannot apply for spousal visa
- Since he cannot apply for a spousal visa, he cannot be eligible for work

Hello House.

My wife used to live with her mom but her mom got transferred to Manchester. Now we have change the name on the tenancy agreement from her moms name to my wife name.

We plan to submit the tenancy agreement with supporting letter from the landlord.

Are these two documents ok to cover for accommodation?

Thanks

stillwaiting:
MANY THANKS ARE DUE TO ALMIGHTY GOD. Today is one of the happiest days in my family. My 2nd application was successful today, after many years of separation with my family. I want to sincerely thank the following people for their encouragement for me to submit a fresh application without waiting for the hydra-headed appeal;@justwise, @Abbylove,@Lexusgs430 @ @portsmouth86, @newbie715, @light me @Uchman365, @dday101: I want to sincerely thank justwise for encouraging me to scan the refusal letter so that other people on this forum will advise me which I found very invaluable in preparing documents for this my successful 2nd application. I quoted the definition of subsisting marriage as suggested by @light me. In fact, people in this forum are very helpful it is far better than paying a huge amount of money for ignoramus lawyers. Almighty God will bless you all for your selfless service. Those of us that got help here, we should not abandon this forum because we have been relieved. We should recommend it to others. I was not aware of this forum when my lawyer prepared my first application that was refused and even when the appeals was prepaRED and they refused to overturn it. Thanks, thanks.I pray for those that are waiting that God will put smiles on their faces.

my timeline follows

Congratulations to you, finally you have your ticket to family life, God bless you xx

tosine:
Hello House.

My wife used to live with her mom but her mom got transferred to Manchester. Now we have change the name on the tenancy agreement from her moms name to my wife name.

We plan to submit the tenancy agreement with supporting letter from the landlord.

Are these two documents ok to cover for accommodation?

Thanks

Is the tenancy agreement transferable?

kokorita:
Dear house. I need your advise. I want to apply for my masters . In the uk . Lucky for me, my proposed school has one year workplacement. After my studies. I already have a 5 years uk visiting visit tho.
My questions are
1). Will my 5 years visa be cancelled if am issued a school visa
2) can my husband apply for a spouse visa , he also have uk visiting 5 years. Will his visiting visa be cancelled if his issued spouse visa.
3) can he get a job while am school.
Thanks await response

Your husband can apply for a tier 4 dependent visa and he will be able to work while you study.

Her mom no longer lives with her so the name on the tenancy agreement of the house is changed to her name from her moms name.

We have the tenancy agreement in my wife's name and we are getting a supporting letter from the landlord. I just want to know if these 2 docs are enough to cover for accommodation?

Lexusgs430:


Is the tenancy agreement transferable?

tosine:
Her mom no longer lives with her so the name on the tenancy agreement of the house is changed to her name from her moms name.

We have the tenancy agreement in my wife's name and we are getting a supporting letter from the landlord. I just want to know if these 2 docs are enough to cover for accommodation?

Yes, they are good enough. Is it solely occupied by her?

She lives with her younger sister. It's a 2 bedroom house.

All these information will be put in the sponsor cover letter and landlord supporting letter.

Thanks

Lexusgs430:


Yes, they are good enough. Is it solely occupied by her?

tosine:
She lives with her younger sister. It's a 2 bedroom house.

All these information will be put in the sponsor cover letter and landlord supporting letter.

Thanks

You might also require a property inspection report, just to cover all angles.....

figel:


Your husband can apply for a tier 4 dependent visa and he will be able to work while you study.

The prerequisites for such application would also be helpful...... ....

Hello Egbons of the house, I hope we all had a good weekend. Am not sure mine was productive as I just lazed about and ended seeing The Wedding Party at the cinema. Afterwards I felt I wasted 2000 Naira.
Please is there any average time in which the visa office returns passport? I submitted mine over two weeks ago and yet to hear from them. Also is there an email I can use to call or cross check? Many thanks for your responses.

Lexusgs430:


The prerequisites for such application would also be helpful...... ....

There is a thread for such an application. You can find the requirements here https://www.nairaland.com/2575449/uk-student-visa-tier-4

figel:


There is a thread for such an application. You can find the requirements here https://www.nairaland.com/2575449/uk-student-visa-tier-4

Me ke? Not unless you find me a British wife.. ... ......

Fynebouy:
Hello Egbons of the house, I hope we all had a good weekend. Am not sure mine was productive as I just lazed about and ended seeing The Wedding Party at the cinema. Afterwards I felt I wasted 2000 Naira.
Please is there any average time in which the visa office returns passport? I submitted mine over two weeks ago and yet to hear from them. Also is there an email I can use to call or cross check? Many thanks for your responses.

Application for what process? You for invite us make we go spend that 2k for suya spot.... .
If it's a priority application (about a month) & if normal application (between 3/8 months).. .. . .. ..

Lexusgs430:


Application for what process? You for invite us make we go spend that 2k for suya spot.... .
If it's a priority application (about a month) & if normal application (between 3/8 months).. .. . .. ..

Does this timeline still work for spousal, as I'd like to make the priority application( also wont I be seen as been too much in a hurry?) although I no get 3-8 months to wait.

EvaMD:


Does this timeline still work for spousal, as I'd like to make the priority application( also wont I be seen as been too much in a hurry?) although I no get 3-8 months to wait.

Open all your piggy banks and pay for priority application. If your application is watertight, you would be going anywhere Andrew in 4 weeks.. .. .. ..

EvaMD:


Does this timeline still work for spousal, as I'd like to make the priority application( also wont I be seen as been too much in a hurry?) although I no get 3-8 months to wait.

Too much hurry ke? They love your £450.00 extra application fee... .. ....... .

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/woman-deported-from-uk-despite-being-married-to-briton-for-27-years/ar-AAntpR9?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=iehp

For those applying for spousal visa's. A MUST READ ....................