Good News For Overstayers??? But If They Act Fast!

hopeless · Post by **hopeless** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 2:32 am

Does anyone know whether the governement will allow any overstayer to sort out their status in the uk rather than making a move out of the country and back again. what difference will it make if someone does it in the uk or abroad.

Mr Rusty · Post by **Mr Rusty** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 8:49 am

hopeless wrote:Does anyone know whether the governement will allow any overstayer to sort out their status in the uk rather than making a move out of the country and back again. what difference will it make if someone does it in the uk or abroad.

Of course not. It's not an amnesty. The government has brought in a rule which makes the Entry Clearance system a lot less forgiving in future of people who have previously offended.

Very sensibly they've decided to delay its implementation for 6 months to give those who otherwise might have a reasonable expectation of successfully applying for a visa a chance to decide whether or not to go back home and apply or to take their chances by staying here illegally.

The difference it makes is that those who apply properly for a visa should not be at a disadvantage against those who have entered the country or overstayed illegally. Lawbreakers should not be allowed to benefit from their crime.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:24 am

hopeless wrote:Does anyone know whether the governement will allow any overstayer to sort out their status in the uk rather than making a move out of the country and back again. what difference will it make if someone does it in the uk or abroad.

No chance!

republique · Post by **republique** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:34 am

Wanderer wrote:
hopeless wrote:Does anyone know whether the governement will allow any overstayer to sort out their status in the uk rather than making a move out of the country and back again. what difference will it make if someone does it in the uk or abroad.
No chance!

Exactly. What difference does it make? That's why from their standpoint they want you to leave.

Hernancortes · Post by **Hernancortes** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 12:27 pm

"Lawbreakers should not be allowed to benefit from their crime."

Hate to be the pedant but, what crime? Have we altered our legal system to one where suspects are automatically branded criminals?
This scheme is complete bollocks. I wouldn't waste my time with it.

Post by **vinny** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 1:02 pm

Hernancortes wrote:"Lawbreakers should not be allowed to benefit from their crime."

Hate to be the pedant but, what crime?

Overstayers wrote:1. An overstayer is a person who was granted limited leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, but who neither left the country on the date indicated nor asked for the leave to be extended.

2. Overstaying is an offence, contrary to s.24(1)(b)(i) of the Immigration Act 1971. Section 24(1A) of the 1971 Act, which was inserted by s.6(1) of the Immigration Act 1988, provides that a person commits the offence on the day when he or she first knows that leave to enter or remain has expired, and continues to commit it until such time as his or her position is regularised, for example through a further grant of leave.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 1:32 pm

Hernancortes wrote:DO NOT fall for this scheme until you have sought LEGAL ADVICE, and have heard of experinces from people returning under the scheme.Bush tried similar proposals in a sponsored immigration bill in capitol hill. The only difference was the undocumented migrant, having returned to his country of origin, was supposed to pay a fine in order to return to the US.

Byrne must think we are simpletons.

I agree with the emboldened.

Mr Rusty · Post by **Mr Rusty** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 1:57 pm

Twin wrote:
Hernancortes wrote:DO NOT fall for this scheme until you have sought LEGAL ADVICE, and have heard of experinces from people returning under the scheme.Bush tried similar proposals in a sponsored immigration bill in capitol hill. The only difference was the undocumented migrant, having returned to his country of origin, was supposed to pay a fine in order to return to the US.

Byrne must think we are simpletons.
I agree with the emboldened.

Yes, of course take legal advice, but don't hang about too long, because if you are an offender and go home and apply for a visa after October 1, it will almost certainly be refused. Doubtless also there will be appeals and challenges in the High Court, but the BIA will be on a lot stronger ground because it can say that it has given people a chance to comply.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 2:24 pm

Mr Rusty wrote:
Twin wrote:
Hernancortes wrote:DO NOT fall for this scheme until you have sought LEGAL ADVICE, and have heard of experinces from people returning under the scheme.Bush tried similar proposals in a sponsored immigration bill in capitol hill. The only difference was the undocumented migrant, having returned to his country of origin, was supposed to pay a fine in order to return to the US.

Byrne must think we are simpletons.
I agree with the emboldened.
Yes, of course take legal advice, but don't hang about too long, because if you are an offender and go home and apply for a visa after October 1, it will almost certainly be refused. Doubtless also there will be appeals and challenges in the High Court, but the BIA will be on a lot stronger ground because it can say that it has given people a chance to comply.

I share that view too.

sahsamp · Post by **sahsamp** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 5:20 pm

i overstayed in 2004 by 2 months. i now want to apply for EC for HSMP visa, will my overstay have any bearing on me being denied EC?

Post by **Administrator** » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:35 pm

.

sahsamp wrote:i overstayed in 2004 by 2 months. i now want to apply for EC for HSMP visa, will my overstay have any bearing on me being denied EC?

What is your immigration record into and out of the UK since then ..?

In a nutshell: Yes ... it COULD have a bearing. But there is a lot of detail missing from your comment that could determine how much bearing, and if there are options. Or even if any options are required.

the Admin

William Blake · Post by **William Blake** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:26 am

Mr Rusty wrote:
The difference it makes is that those who apply properly for a visa should not be at a disadvantage against those who have entered the country or overstayed illegally. Lawbreakers should not be allowed to benefit from their crime.

what crime ? what benefit?

William Blake · Post by **William Blake** » Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:28 am

skillipedia · Post by **skillipedia** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:43 am

not be allowed to benefit from their crime.

What crime. You, yourslef will do the same if you were born in one of those hopeless countries.

Or may be this says much about yourself! Selfish and narrow-minded

skillipedia · Post by **skillipedia** » Wed Mar 26, 2008 6:46 am

I will be very naive if i take Byrn's for his words. From his statements alone, he should be a member of the BNP

William Blake · Post by **William Blake** » Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:19 pm

I think strictly speaking it is possible to put anything down on the law book as a crime. Look at that approach they had of getting people to ask permission of the state to get married first. I mean that alone shows they feel they can do anything to us because we have little rights. Thank God for the judiciary atleast there is some source of justice and commonsense.

And of course there are other laws that criminalize other activities for example those that said a black person could not dine in certain restaurants or laws that make being part of a certain religion a crime. Overstaying a criminal offence? Well maybe so on the books but this is nothing more than a status imposed on a person when they have done no crime. At any rate people who are complicit in criminal activities should share in the penalty. So when incompetency and inhumane decision making leads to someone being an overstayer I think it only fair there should be a penalty for the Home Office. They are the real criminals here.

vs004 · Post by **vs004** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:17 pm

Quick question. Are applications which were lodged before 29th feb but still with the home office/bhc/consulate awaiting decision subjected to these new rules (including 320(7a).Or are applications assessed according to the rules applicable on the date they were filed.

how much does other breaches of immigration like student overworking etc affect a spouse visa. are eco's more lenient to such breaches while assessing a spouse visa.

Read in this forum that most of the apeals regarding spouse visa are upheld.If that so why do the eco refuse these visa's .Are they punishment tactics?

vs004 · Post by **vs004** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:35 am

34G.For the purposes of these rules, the date on which an application or claim (or a variation in accordance with paragraph 34E) is made is as follows:

(i) where the application form is sent by post, the date of posting,

(ii) where the application form is submitted in person, the date on which it is accepted by a public enquiry office of the Border and Immigration Agency of the Home Office,

(iii) where the application form is sent by courier, the date on which it is delivered to the Border and Immigration Agency of the Home Office, or

(iv) where the application form is submitted online, the date on which it is so submitted.

34H. Applications or claims for leave to remain made before 29 February 2008 for which a form was prescribed prior to 29 February 2008 shall be subject to the forms and procedures as in force on the date on which the application or claim was made.

34I. Where an application or claim is made no more than 21 days after the date on which a form is specified under the immigration rules and on a form that was permitted for such application or claim immediately prior to the date of such specification, the application or claim shall be deemed to have been made on the specified form.

Does this apply to "leave to enter" as well?

vs004 · Post by **vs004** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:05 am

anyone?

jei2 · Post by **jei2** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 6:20 pm

In relation to which rules or procedures would be applied when the form is received, I think 34G i - iv answers your question.

I doubt that overstaying would be rated according to the type of visa you had at the time. Even lapses of leave on work permits (where the employer is responsible for the application) tend to be penalised when it comes to applying for ILR.

In the eyes of most ECOs a breach is a breach. Note another favourite phrase in the standard cut and paste refusal letters:

"blah blah blah.. If you have a previous application and immigration history, this may have been considered".

Following that, does anyone know what would happen if you return home as an overstayer and apply before the October deadline but are refused and want to apply again after the deadline?

vs004 · Post by **vs004** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:54 am

34H. Applications or claims for leave to remain made before 29 February 2008 for which a form was prescribed prior to 29 February 2008 shall be subject to the forms and procedures as in force on the date on which the application or claim was made.

Thanks jei2,
Cant be sure with these rules,the interpretation seems to be so vague. 34h mentions only 'leave to remain'. I was wondering if the same procedure applies to 'leave to enter' as the first one is in country and the second one is out of country.
And for a non-legal person like me,can you tell me the difference between a 'rules' and 'procedure'. My taking is that "subject to forms and procedure" means that rules applicable to the day of submission will be applied.or am i wide off the mark.

vs004 · Post by **vs004** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 6:58 am

duplicate post sorry

William Blake · Post by **William Blake** » Wed May 07, 2008 6:28 pm

So whats the meaning of this then?

http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewto ... 706#165706

starman · Post by **starman** » Wed May 07, 2008 7:23 pm

y'all DO know that you can still apply for leave to remain if you've overstayed for less than 6 months, right??

William Blake · Post by **William Blake** » Wed May 07, 2008 7:42 pm

You mean if someone has overstayed here in the UK for less than six months and they wanted to apply for say ILR or otherwise the application should not fall for automatic refusal?

So they don't have to leave and re-enter.

Where does it say this?

Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Good News For Overstayers??? But If They Act Fast!

.