There is an article here that explains about your type of refusal...

https://travel.stackexchange.com/questi ... 2122#92122

It may be helpful

Hello all, You say you are retired and your income is £360 a month through public funds or benefits and savings and investments. In support of your application some pension documents, savings certificates and bank statements in both you and your wife's name were provided. I note that some deposits ...

This is rich. In a droll turnabout of paradox, a thread on Biker Chat Forums has independently concluded that the SMS messages from Capita are an immigration scam! You have to love it...

http://www.bikechatforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=3435389

Jpg's included

Now The Times has jumped in to the party. Certainly not with the zeal of the BBC, but jumped in nonetheless.

Finally now the BBC is on to this...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20891597

People who are legitimately in the UK but who have been receiving unwanted text messages and telephone calls from Capita Plc demanding that they leave the UK on the grounds of being an overstayer should note that those acting on behalf of the crown are exempt from harassment charges. So there is not...

Interestingly, they are making these changes effective 13 Dec for those people whose application is *pending* in addition to those who have not applied. Their rationale for this is given in the SOC published this morning. We have not seen a retrospective set of changes for a long time!

Thanks for confirming that, Greenie. And it's well agreed what you said about 'separate matter'.

I suggest reading the thread again.

And I suppose the 'solicitor' will remain anonymous. Identifying her was the main interest I had at this point, and it looks like that's not going to happen.

I haven't seen any credible reports of it. What has occured more frequently is people who originally claimed to be unaffected by the new rules ended up getting the 10 year route. Given that the 10 year route did not exist until July 2012, they were affected by the new rules otherwise they would have...

Have you seen any grants of 3 year DL since 9 July?

The transition policy for DL is governed by a lot more variables than the simplistic explanation given in this forum, or the oft cited 'solicitor' who admins in another forum. There is no single outcome until you have taken all the variables into consideration, and the OP's assurances that everyone ...

This UT decision on maintenance has been published. Worth a read...

http://www.ait.gov.uk/Public/Upload/j25 ... lombia.doc

The 'fuss' is not really a fuss as such. It's an observation that you misled people by *insisting* on something that informed people knew was wrong, and it was significant... You said: people on the 2nd leg of DL will only have to do another 3 years. You got: 10 more years minimum, after which you m...

Alvi guidance here...

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... iew=Binary

They have today issued a statement, which contains this extract... Any application outstanding at the time the changes to the rules made on 19 July and 5 September came into force will be decided on the basis of the rules in force at the time of decision. The UK Border Agency will not reconsider cas...

New Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules HC 565 into force 6 September Some, but NOT ALL of the drafing errors have been corrected in the new Statement of Changes issued today. Take careful note that applications submitted today or hereafter are subject to the new rules as of 6 Sept 2012 (today...

Confused.

Did you not ask fundamentally the same question on our Facebook page?

You will never be able to reconcile all the various opinions across multiple forums into a single unanimous view; especially over something as speculative and conjectural as the issues you are raising.

Additional update. The policy unit has REVERSED a previously announced statement. They have now adopted the view that it is POSSIBLE to switch out of the 10 year route into the 5 year route. The only restriction is that time spent in the 10 year route is not bookable for qualifying under the 5 year ...

Update. They have agreed to change Paragraph 297(iv) in order to remove the paradox created by the phrase 'occupy exclusively' for situations where the application includes children.

I am in rare agreement with Greenie on this one. The very most that someone can expect from the Alvi decision is relief from the evidence specified in the guidance. And only for a short period, if at all. There will be no near-term relief for the income threshold itself. Although I am given to under...

That's what I was wondering: would welcome a bit more detail! The UK does of course make allowance for the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-370/90 Surinder Singh: if a UK national (or person with dual nationality of the UK and another Member State) exercises residence rights elsewhere in ...

And from the Command Paper laid yesterday, CM 8423, this fragment... The Government regrets that for these changes it has not been possible to comply with the convention that changes should be laid before Parliament no less than 21 days before they will come into force, but invites the Committee to ...

Fair enough. The topic of multipliers was explicitly raised and discussed at a meeting with them on 14 June and later reviewed at a different meeting on 25 June (which I attended). The minutes for the first meeting were never agreed and probably never will be. The minutes for the 2nd meeting have no...

Can you cite you source, please? Have you read the Hansard transcripts? Confused. Do you think that country multipliers actually exist and are missing from the guidance? Or alternatively, Do you want to advocate for country multipliers? Or raise a test case or judicial review that they should exist?