- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2
Thank you for your reply.CR001 wrote:1. You will likely lose an appeal. The rules regarding RLMT are very strict and the full and proper process MUST be done. The sponsor should know this. Likely they will have to redo the RLMT in the proper way and issue another CoS.
2. No, HO does not have a reimbursement policy for visa fees, if an application is refused, you lose the fee. You will have to pay the visa fees again if you re-apply. You only get a refund of the immigration health surcharge if your application is refused. Suggest you speak to your sponsor then and see what they say.
I think you will find HO calls the shots here.freeekychakra wrote:Thank you for your reply.
I contacted the sponsor. They claim that the RLMT was properly met. They sent me an email stating the same and that they have asked the Universal Jobsmatch website to send a screenshot of the vacancy. Now waiting for the website's reply. Wondering how two parties could claim the opposite. Home Office saying RLMT wasnt met, Sponsor which is an A rated sponsor with lots of experience confident it was met.
Are you suggesting that the HO is most probably correct?noajthan wrote:I think you will find HO calls the shots here.freeekychakra wrote:Thank you for your reply.
I contacted the sponsor. They claim that the RLMT was properly met. They sent me an email stating the same and that they have asked the Universal Jobsmatch website to send a screenshot of the vacancy. Now waiting for the website's reply. Wondering how two parties could claim the opposite. Home Office saying RLMT wasnt met, Sponsor which is an A rated sponsor with lots of experience confident it was met.
On the balance of probabilities, yes.freeekychakra wrote:Are you suggesting that the HO is most probably correct?
not sure how that is relevant. the fact that the home office administers the guidance does not mean that caseworkers don't make errors in their decision making. there does not appear to be a dispute about the procedures here but a dispute aas to a question of fact as to whether the procedures were followed.noajthan wrote:On the balance of probabilities, yes.freeekychakra wrote:Are you suggesting that the HO is most probably correct?
After all it is HO that administers and implements guidance for Tier 2 visas through both their internal procedures, and procedures for sponsor to follow, all based on the relevant legislation.
Well, the way I have heard some horror stories from a few of my friends, I wont be surprised if there is an error on the part of the HO. At the same time, there can be an error on the part of the sponsor. Crosschecking the credibility of the sponsor revealed that they have advertised another job of similar capacity and they have mirrorred the advertisement on Universal Jobmatch Website. Hence, it would be prudent to believe that they must be intending the same for all adverts to meet the RLMT Criteria, unless of course it was a case of human error in the job I got selected for. About the Universal Jobmatch website, I noticed it is very difficult to retrieve information more than 30 days old. They dont allow an advert for more than 30 days either. Once you cross 30 days, you cant search for that job, hence cant prove that the advert was there. And now we are waiting for a reply from the website for a screenshot of an advert 2 months old. Things should probably be made simpler and more accessible in order to transparently follow the rules, thats just my honest opinion, if at all it is so important to advertise the job in a website noone eventually cares for in my profession, and then prove it was lying there in isolation for 28 days as a more important deciding factor for issuing a VISA than in the main website which locks thousands of logins daily and where the the cut-throat really happens.Greenie wrote:not sure how that is relevant. the fact that the home office administers the guidance does not mean that caseworkers don't make errors in their decision making. there does not appear to be a dispute about the procedures here but a dispute aas to a question of fact as to whether the procedures were followed.noajthan wrote:On the balance of probabilities, yes.freeekychakra wrote:Are you suggesting that the HO is most probably correct?
After all it is HO that administers and implements guidance for Tier 2 visas through both their internal procedures, and procedures for sponsor to follow, all based on the relevant legislation.
Exactly.Greenie wrote:not sure how that is relevant. the fact that the home office administers the guidance does not mean that caseworkers don't make errors in their decision making. there does not appear to be a dispute about the procedures here but a dispute aas to a question of fact as to whether the procedures were followed.
On the balance of probabilities
Hi Freekychakra,freeekychakra wrote:Dear all,
I applied for administrative review of my above mentioned VISA refusal based on the following points -
1) That my refusal letter stated that the reason for refusal stated that my CoS doesnt indicate that the job was advertised on Univeral Jobmatch.
2) However, this is not right as any job advertised in NHS Jobs is automatically mirrorred to Universal Jobmatch as per the working relations between NHS and Govt. Of UK with same reference number in both.
3) That the employer advertising in NHS Jobs doesnt have to manually log in to Universal Jobmatch for a separate advertisement but that there is an automatic transfer of the advertisement from NHS Jobs to Universal Jobmatch carrying the same reference number.
4) The same has been confirmed by the sponsor to me in written that it is self explanatory for the job advert to be auto transferred from NHS Jobs to Universal Jobmatch with same reference number and duration of advertisement.
5) The same can also be confirmed from NHS Employers Website which confirms that NHS Jobs continues to be the primary website for advertisement, and I quote the first line of the undermentioned link -
"The automatic transfer of vacancies from the NHS Jobs website to the Universal Jobmatch website was re-introduced on Tuesday, 7 April 2015. This change has important implications for international recruitment activities which need to comply with the resident labour market test (RLMT) conditions."-
http://www.nhsemployers.org/news/2015/0 ... arket-test
6) Added a little bit of genuine pathos and sympathy seeking.
Made up the story in 1000 words.
Do you believe this might work?
Hi Freekychakra and Feralissimoferalissimo wrote:Hi Freekychakra,freeekychakra wrote:Dear all,
I applied for administrative review of my above mentioned VISA refusal based on the following points -
1) That my refusal letter stated that the reason for refusal stated that my CoS doesnt indicate that the job was advertised on Univeral Jobmatch.
2) However, this is not right as any job advertised in NHS Jobs is automatically mirrorred to Universal Jobmatch as per the working relations between NHS and Govt. Of UK with same reference number in both.
3) That the employer advertising in NHS Jobs doesnt have to manually log in to Universal Jobmatch for a separate advertisement but that there is an automatic transfer of the advertisement from NHS Jobs to Universal Jobmatch carrying the same reference number.
4) The same has been confirmed by the sponsor to me in written that it is self explanatory for the job advert to be auto transferred from NHS Jobs to Universal Jobmatch with same reference number and duration of advertisement.
5) The same can also be confirmed from NHS Employers Website which confirms that NHS Jobs continues to be the primary website for advertisement, and I quote the first line of the undermentioned link -
"The automatic transfer of vacancies from the NHS Jobs website to the Universal Jobmatch website was re-introduced on Tuesday, 7 April 2015. This change has important implications for international recruitment activities which need to comply with the resident labour market test (RLMT) conditions."-
http://www.nhsemployers.org/news/2015/0 ... arket-test
6) Added a little bit of genuine pathos and sympathy seeking.
Made up the story in 1000 words.
Do you believe this might work?
I have exactly your same type scenario and was looking to go forwards with an admin review as well.
How did your Admin review go?
Hi Smsmxp2000,Re: VISA Refusal - help for next course of action
Postby Smsmxp2000 » Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:12 pm
Hi everyone who shared experience especially freeekychakra who took us through the whole story then didn't tell us how his review goes. Does anyone have experience about this issue as I received the similar letter from the HO.
This is not a general question or discussion topic. Please start your own thread with your circumstances.oliviaphua wrote:Hi Smsmxp2000,Re: VISA Refusal - help for next course of action
Postby Smsmxp2000 » Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:12 pm
Hi everyone who shared experience especially freeekychakra who took us through the whole story then didn't tell us how his review goes. Does anyone have experience about this issue as I received the similar letter from the HO.
I got the similar letter as well. Try to contact my sponsor at the moment and the person in charge is on leave and will be back on next Monday. Do you manage to find out more information?