hamid84 wrote:
Claimed asylum in 2000 as my father's dependent.
Received ILR in 2008 under out of immigration rules
While it is true that in some cases a person granted asylum will have their previous stay (from the time they entered the country to the time granted asylum) included into the asylum claim period, it looks like from your description that:
- * (1) That you were in the country for some amount of time before going for asylum.
* (2) That you were never actually granted asylum
* (3) That you were instead granted leave outside of the normal rules
I could be totally wrong about any of these points, and hence wasting my time here. But please feel free to correct any of these points with a full complete immigration timeline.
(1) Being in the country for any significant period of time makes it unlikely a successful asylum claim would have previous stay retroactively included. Such claims are always considered dubiously. So if your leave expired during time of that claim being decided or before, it would always be considered illegal stay.
(2) Since you weren't granted asylum, there is no chance for any retroactive inclusion of previous stay anyway. As far as I'm aware, asylum is the only type of leave where previous stay without leave can be retroactively included.
(3) Your grant of leave outside the normal immigration rules is the point that your stay became legal again. Ten years from that date you were granted that leave, you would be able to apply for citizenship under the recent rule changes.
hamid84 wrote:HO is gone strange
The sovereign nation of the United Kingdom may change and apply their rules for citizenship as they see fit.