Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6,521 Excellent

About 7by7

  • Rank
    Star Member
  • Birthday 09/09/1955

Previous Fields

  • Location
    Surrey and Bangsu

Recent Profile Visitors

30,641 profile views
  1. You need to show that there will be adequate accommodation for you once in the UK. Para E-ECP.3.4 of the rules states that you should occupy this accommodation exclusively; but what that means is that you can live in a shared household, provided you have at least one room for your exclusive use. The household can belong to a relative or friend, and the owner should wrote a letter confirming that you can live there together with a brief description of the property and who else lives there to show that there is room for you. For more, see the relevant paragraphs of the guidance.
  2. Except they didn't return home; according to Mathew they fled to Egypt to escape the massacre of the innocents by Herod the Great Which makes them refugees. After Herod's death they, again according to Matthew, returned to Judea (or Judah or Israel depending on which translation one reads). Herod died in 4 AD and was succeeded by Herod Archelaus. Historically, Archelaus was such a violent and aggressive king that in the year 6 AD he was deposed by the Romans, in response to complaints from the population. Galilee was ruled by a much calmer king, Herod Antipas, and there is historical evidence that Galilee had become a refuge for those fleeing the iron rule of Archelaus. According to Matthew, the Holy Family were among these. Refugees, again.
  3. A man with mental health and drug related issues who happens to be a Muslim deliberately drove into a crowd of pedestrians, the religion of whom is unknown. The police are keeping an open mind as to his motives. They have said they do not currently believe it to be terrorist related, but have not dismissed it completely. Fortunately, in Australia and many other countries the police and other authorities base their judgements on the evidence, and so keep an open mind until they have gathered that evidence. Unlike those who base their opinions on nothing but prejudice.
  4. It was 'aired to that effect' on BBC1 breakfast news yesterday morning. Didn't watch the lunchtime news, working, but it was also 'aired to that effect' in the discussion on the issue on Radio 2's Jeremy Vine show at noon! But what this has to do with the excellent work by the police reported in the OP, only the person who introduced it into the topic, you, knows!
  5. Ashes 2017/2018

    It hasn't helped that Cook, Root and Ali haven't performed with the bat and Broad and Anderson have struggled with the ball; but Smith is definitely the difference between the sides. Comparisons are already being made: Ashes: Is Steve Smith the best since Donald Bradman? At home with the Dukes ball England are a force to be reckoned with, and all this will be forgotten by the powers that be if we perform well against Pakistan and India at home in the summer. Then we tour Sri Lanka followed by the West Indies. Probably struggle against Sri Lanka, but should do ok, and unfortunately the Windies have not been much of a force for some time. All of which means despite all the post mortems in the next couple of months, the complacency will have set in again by the time we play for the Ashes again at home in 2019. In English conditions with the Dukes ball we may even have a chance!
  6. 1) As EU nationals are, currently, not subject to the immigration rules, your comment is completely irrelevant to this topic. 2) It is also completely false. Whatever the cause for the increase in homelessness and begging, even the anti EU and anti immigrant Migration Watch accept that approximately 2/3rds of EU nationals in the UK are working and paying tax. What Migration Watch chooses to ignore is that most of the remainder are dependent family members of those working and are not scrounging of the state and begging in the streets.
  7. Not necessarily. From Family visas: apply, extend or switch; 7. Knowledge of English
  8. I'm going to take your options in reverse order. To do this your wife would have to be exercising a treaty right in the EEA member; i.e.be one of the following:- student job seeker (max 3 months stay unless at the end of that time she can satisfy her host country's authorities that she has a reasonable chance of finding employment in the very near future), worker, employed or self employed, a self sufficient person of independent means such as a pension. As a qualifying family member, you would have the right to accompany her. As you say, you could then use the Surinder Singh ruling to move to the UK together; provided you satisfy the requirements; for example As you can see, it is not a matter of turning up in the other state, living here for a few months and then moving to the UK! Of course, all this may be academic as by the time you satisfy all the requirements Brexit could have happened, and Surinder Singh may no longer apply to British citizens and their non EEA national family. It is not possible to apply for settlement in the UK whilst here as a visitor. You also could not marry in the UK whilst here as a visitor unless you entered with a marriage visit visa; but even with that you would have to leave the UK when or before the visa expired and apply for settlement in your country of residence (Thailand) or nationality (USA). You could apply for a type of settlement visa known as a fiance visa in Thailand, travel to the UK, marry and then apply after the wedding to remain here; but, apart from being married, the requirements are the same as applying for settlement as a spouse and it is an expensive way of doing things! UK settlement fees and charges are expensive enough as it is, without giving them even more money when you don't have to! The simplest. The process is not 'skewed towards people living and working in the UK' as such; but those doing so will find it easier to meet the financial requirement than many returning expats. Unless you and your partner have at least £62,500 in cash savings, you may have to do what many couples do; the Birish partner returns to the UK and finds work paying at least £18,600p.a and after they have been in that job for 6 months the foreign partner can apply to join them. A ludicrous and unfair situation in my opinion; but currently the law. However, a settlement visa is your best option, IMHO; whether you take the fiance route I mentioned above, marry first and apply as her spouse or, provided you have been living together in a relationship akin to marriage for at least the past two years and can prove it, as her unmarried partner. Have a read of Family visas: apply, extend or switch. Note that as a national of a majority Anglophone country, the USA, you will not need an English certificate; but if you apply in Thailand you will need a TB certificate. Once you've read all that, feel free to ask any further questions you may have.
  9. This would come under "9. Self-employment or Director or employee of a specified limited company in the UK" of the financial requirement. As you have only just started the company, obviously you cannot use "Category G: Average of last two full financial years" and will have to rely on "Category F: Last full financial year." Income from this source can be combined with income from "5. Salaried and non-salaried employment," "6. Non-employment income" and "8. Pension" to reduce the amount required from each source; as long as the income from these alternatives fall into the same financial year as the income from your directorships. Alternatively, if you have sufficient income between you from one or more of these sources then you can use that instead of your directorship. For reasons which no one has ever been able to explain, self employed etc. income cannot be combined with cash savings; but, if you have sufficient (£62,500 minimum) you can, of course, use those on their own to meet the requirement. Indeed.
  10. For those who can't be bothered to read the actual agreement, or to be more accurate, progress report, the three main areas covered are:- 1) The rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU. Basically, those EU citizens who are resident in the UK on the specified date and those UK citizens who are resident in the EU on that same date and their qualifying family members will retain the rights they currently have. The specified date being the actual date the UK finally leaves the EU. 2) The land border between Northern Ireland and the RoI will remain an open one. Essentially this means that all the agreements of the 1998 peace process will remain in place. What has yet to be agreed is how this will work in practice. I fail to see how anyone can call either of the above a sell out! 3) The financial settlement. This is, obviously, the contentious issue; not so much on the methodology, but the amount to be paid in total. Like anything to do with finance, this is complicated; but my understanding of what is said in the report is that the UK will honour any and all financial commitments it already has. What has to be calculated and agreed is the final amount of those commitments. Although the figure of 40 billion Euros has been put forward; a considerable drop from the 70 to 80 billion first mentioned by some in the EU! Of course, there are those who will say that we owe the EU nothing and should pay nothing. But we have made commitments, and as an honourable nation should honour those commitments. If only because if we don't, we can wave goodbye to any sort of final agreement at all and end up with the so called hard Brexit. There are those who say that a hard Brexit is a good thing; but I have to wonder if they fully realise what it could mean. Not just to trade but to them personally. I wonder if they'll still be saying that if they have to get a visa for their holiday in Ibiza! They'll probably blame May for 'selling us out' and not securing a deal which they like!
  11. Stop playing with words,you know fine well that the people voted for Brexit in the referendum,plus at this years G.E. 85% of the electorate voted for parties that support Brexit Actually, 89% of those who voted in the general election voted Conservative, Labour or LibDem. The leaders of all three at the time, May, Corbyn and Farron, as well as many members, from MPs down to constituency level, supported Remain in the referendum. But being democrats, they accept the referendum result and now want the best possible post Brexit deal for the UK. Although Farron resigned as LibDem leader after the election, he says this decision had nothing to do with Brexit.. Of course, your opinion on what constitutes a good deal obviously differs from theirs; especially May's. That is how the first past the post system works. UKIP failed in every constituency in which they fielded a candidate. But as they only received 1.8% of the votes passed, on any PR system they wouldn't have got many seats, if any at all! Do you remember Farage's reaction the morning after the referendum when he thought that Remain had won by 52% to 48%? I do. I remember him on TV and the radio ranting that such a small margin was too close to call and demanding another referendum. Later that day, after someone had pointed out to him that he had the figures the wrong way round, he started to claim a magnificent victory! I've received the opinions of two people on what they would and would not accept in any agreement; opinions expressed two days before this agreement. Neither you, nor anyone else here, has said why you believe with this agreement may has shafted the British people. You know my position on the EU; that whilst it has it's faults we are better in than out. Not as a colony, we never were that and never would have been; but as an equal partner. A partner who could either veto certain things we didn't like, for example new members, or opt out of certain areas, as we did with the Euro and the Schengen area.
  12. We'll have to wait and see. A few years ago we returned to the UK with a Canadian couple we had met on holiday. We could, of course, use the UK and EU gate, but the Canadians, despite being lawfully resident in the UK for many years, had to use the other gates.
  13. I don't know everything; far from it. However, when I post about subjects of which I have some knowledge, I do believe that what I am posting is correct; whether it be an opinion or the evidence with which I support that opinion. Are you saying that you do not believe the same about your opinions; that you do not believe your opinions to be correct? Surely not!
  14. Set aside used to be a cornerstone of the CAP; partly to help keep prices up, also to ensure the quality of arable land by utilising modern crop rotation. After many reforms, set aside was abolished completely in 2008. Your final sentence shows that, yet again, you have fallen for the myth rather than the reality. What EU 'rules' do you mean? Straight bananas and cucumbers, the minimum and maximum length of leeks, the colour of apples, the Eurosausage, banning British yoghurt etc., etc.!!!!!! The EU is actively working to reduce food waste. From the EU: Food Waste
  15. Who, in your opinion, are the people who won the election? As UKIP won a grand total of zero seats, it certainly wasn't them!