Jump to content
Thailand Visa Forum by Thai Visa | The Nation

7by7

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    18,985
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6,480 Excellent

About 7by7

  • Rank
    Star Member
  • Birthday 09/09/1955

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Location
    Surrey and Bangsu

Recent Profile Visitors

30,163 profile views
  1. FLR timing of application.

    I haven't seen that many reports from people whose FLR applications have taken an excessive amount of time to be processed. However, I doubt your thought is correct because when anyone submits an application for leave to remain, of any type, their existing leave is automatically extended until the decision on the application is made. Also, those making a premium application in person usually receive their decision that say; regardless of how long is left on their existing leave. Exactly; and that is the major fault with this ridiculous current financial requirement; absolutely no account is taken of outgoings! A fault which has been obvious to all since this requirement was first mooted, and has been pointed out to the government many times. So your, as absurd as it seems, your rental scenario is perfectly acceptable under the current rules; as long as the requirements regarding unearned income and those specific to property rental are met. Anyone who wishes to know more about this should see the financial appendix "6.1. Category C: Non-employment income – requirements" especially "6.2. Property rental – further guidance." Income from Category C can be combined with income from Category A and Category B: salaried and non-salaried employment, Category D: cash savings and Category E: pension in order to meet the financial requirement.
  2. Unless the other parent is dead, in which case take death certificate; or she has sole custody issued by an ampur or court, in which case take the sole custody document.
  3. FLR timing of application.

    The guidelines are a very simplified version of the rules, they do not include everything. Your quote comes from the section "When you can apply to extend or switch," which continues "If you’re extending your visa to stay with the same family member, any time you have left will be added to your new stay up to a maximum of 28 days." Which means that if you apply earlier than 28 days before the initial visa expires then the FLR will be valid for 30 months and 28 days; not that the FLR application will be rejected because you applied too early. Which, provided you have been in the UK for at least 30 months, is fine because you only need 60 months for ILR. However, it is obvious that you believe otherwise, so let's leave it there.
  4. I'm not a tax expert, but my layman's opinion is that you would not be a UK resident. I think this may be beyond the expertise of most forum members, it's certainly beyond mine. I suggest you contact an OISC advisor for their advice.
  5. crazydrummerpauly, see my reply to the topic you started to ask the same question:
  6. FLR timing of application.

    My opinion is based upon the requirements are laid down in the Immigration Rules Appendix FM: family members: Family life with a partner FLR is covered by Section E-LTRP: Eligibility for limited leave to remain as a partner. There is no mention of any minimum time one must have lived in the UK for before one can apply; only that one must have a valid leave to enter or valid leave to remain when the application is made. Whereas Section R-ILRP: Requirements for indefinite leave to remain (settlement) as a partner clearly states So as FLR is valid for 30 months, then applying for it after being in the UK with the initial visa for 30 months means when it expires one will have completed the 60 months residence required for ILR. Of course, that is my opinion and if you want to be certain then there is no reason why you cannot wait until the expiry of her initial leave to enter before applying.
  7. I am not disputing what you say happened to your son. However, his situation is not the norm; far from it and I'm sorry, but his experience does not mean everybody will have the same and is no basis for saying His experience is unusual; maybe there is something you are not telling us or he is not telling you. Are he and his girlfriend, the child's mother, married? Is he British otherwise than by descent (i.e. born in the UK or a qualifying territory)? As already said; registering the birth at the British embassy is entirely optional, and doing so or not has no bearing on the child's entitlement to a British passport; Register a birth abroad
  8. Do you have a link to this? Like bobrussell, I have never head of it If true, there must be more to it than your simple statement; if one is born British then one is always British! There is no time limit on, or maximum age when, a British citizen has to apply for a first British passport.
  9. As shown by posts here, your experience is not the norm. A good question, which I hope he answers. Originally British fathers could not pass their British nationality onto their children born abroad if they were not married to the mother. This was changed by The British Nationality (Proof of Paternity) Regulations 2006, which still applies to births registered between 1st July 2006 and 9th September 2015. Notice it says 'or' not 'and.' If 2( a ) is satisfied then 2( b ) is irrelevant, if 2( b ) is irrelevant then so is 3! For births registered on or after10th September 2015 The British Nationality (Proof of Paternity) Regulations 2015 apply. Note that these are all evidence which may be required, not evidence which must be supplied. Unless there are reasons to doubt it's authenticity or it was issued more than 12 months after the birth, the birth certificate alone is usually sufficient. None of the above applies if the British father is married to the foreign mother, where being named on the birth certificate, issued within 12 months of the birth, is still sufficient; as the experiences posted above show. That is my understanding; but if anyone has definitive evidence that I have misunderstood the regulations please post it. I am always ready and willing to learn.
  10. Yes, and if she hasn't achieved B1 and/or passed the LitUK test when that expires she can apply for FLR again. Indeed she could carry on applying for FLR every 30 months even if she never meets the requirements for ILR. That's the situation at present; there is no guarantee, of course, that a future government wont limit the number of times someone can apply for FLR. Yes, she will need A2 for any future FLR application.
  11. It is the law in France that even if the victim is under the age of consent, currently 15 in France, to convict of rape the prosecution have to prove the sex was non consensual. If this cannot be proven, or if it was consensual, then they could, and should, use the lesser charge of sexual abuse of a minor; but that only carries a maximum sentence of 5 years in prison and a fine of 75,000 euros. See France to reassess child sex laws after controversial cases for more detail than that given in the OP. Edit: Tchooptip beat me to it!
  12. Why don't you give the date this article was published, and where? Why don't you click on the link at the end of HarrySeaman's post? For your benefit, CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE ARTICLE and you will see that it is dated 6th July 2017.
  13. Although, as theoldgit says, a return or onward ticket is not a requirement for entry to the UK as a visitor, some airlines are unaware of this so will refuse to carry someone who does not possess one. This is because they do not want to risk being fined and having to bear the cost of returning a passenger to their departure point for carrying a passenger who they know does not meet the entry requirements for their destination. Check with your airline if they will carry your wife with a visit visa and a single ticket only. If not then, as bobrussell says, buy a return with a changeable return date.
  14. As personal as the investments revealed in the leaking of these papers. Unless you believe that wealthy people do not deserve their privacy. Is that the point you say I am missing? If these papers revealed widespread tax evasion or other illegal activities I would be among the first to demand that those involved face justice. But they don't; they have revealed no illegal activities at all. Unless you believe that wealthy people should be subject to stricter laws than the rest of us; that what is legal for us should be illegal for them. Is that the point you say I am missing? The more you post, the more you remind me of Jimmy Carr: publicly lambasting celebrities who use offshore accounts to avoid tax, whilst privately doing just that himself!
  15. Britain agrees to set EU 'Exit Day' in law

    This must be the first time anyone anywhere has referred to The Guardian as a 'facist (sic) rag!' Except, possibly, by a member or supporter of the Socialist Workers Party, Communist Workers Organisation, Workers Revolutionary Party or similar!
×