Thanks for replay. I will do that.
- 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
Hi Simon,secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:45 pmNo point in applying for reconsideration. It will be refused, because the original refusal was correct.chiefengineer wrote: ↑Fri Dec 22, 2017 4:33 pmI was refused, because I was absent 5 years ago on the date they get my application.
May be because everything were correct in my application and they simply need to refuse some quantity of applications.
I apply for reconsideration last week. Actually I was in UK offshore waters near Southwold, I don't think it is absence from UK.
But what a crazy reasons for refusal. (I have been living 10 years in UK)
The "physically present in the UK at the start of the five year period" is a non-negotiable requirement for naturalisation, over which the Home Office has no discretion. If the applicant was not physically in the UK at the start of the five year period, the application must fail. It is the one condition which the Home Office has no discretion to disregard. It is because of this one requirement that I believe that Meghan Markle may need a personal Act of Parliament to become a British citizen.
As for the being on an oil rig in UK Continental Shelf (the 200 mile exclusive economic zone), working on oil installations outside UK territorial waters (the 12 mile zone around the UK) is not subject to UK Immigration Rules, but to international conventions. Hence it is not considered being physically present in the UK for the purpose of nationality law either.
Therefore the refusal of the Home Office was not only correct, the refusal was a requirement of the law (i.e. no discretion was afforded to the Home Office to overlook this shortcoming).
Did you go through the NCS when making the application? They should have caught that you did not meet this very specific requirement.
Should be fine. Submitted on 11 March means you must be present on 11 March 5 years earlier, and you were. The online application waiting time seems a bit longer at the moment than it was earlier this year (when there were 3 week approvals!).Granada wrote: ↑Wed May 16, 2018 11:46 amHi Simon,
I submitted my online application for BC on 11 March, the fees were deducted on the same day and I received an email from the home office with a reference number on 12 March. I am subjected to the three years rule as I am married to a British citizen, in 2015, I was in the UK on 11 and 12 March, leaving from Heathrow on 12 March in the evening. Also my NRDS documents were received by the home office on 20 March (I was in the UK on 20 March 2015)
do you think my application will get rejected? it has been 65 days so far, longer than most other online applications and I am very worried.
do you recommend that I contact the home office?
thanks
No.Beautifulmum wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 10:31 amHello Everyone,
My citizenship application just go rejected based on Good character, I applied Mar, 18 but got a response yesterday dated the 10/5/18. Based on the fact I didn't have right to remain between the period of 2007-May 2010 and I was working. HO says any application made before May 2020 is most likely to be refused (PS I dont plan to make any more application till 2020) and I have 2 British children.
My question now is does any one know if this decision made now will affect my 2020 application?
Many thanks
Many thanks. You are right about the online applications, interestingly, NCS applications are moving far quicker now!muraenidae wrote: ↑Fri May 18, 2018 10:02 amShould be fine. Submitted on 11 March means you must be present on 11 March 5 years earlier, and you were. The online application waiting time seems a bit longer at the moment than it was earlier this year (when there were 3 week approvals!).Granada wrote: ↑Wed May 16, 2018 11:46 amHi Simon,
I submitted my online application for BC on 11 March, the fees were deducted on the same day and I received an email from the home office with a reference number on 12 March. I am subjected to the three years rule as I am married to a British citizen, in 2015, I was in the UK on 11 and 12 March, leaving from Heathrow on 12 March in the evening. Also my NRDS documents were received by the home office on 20 March (I was in the UK on 20 March 2015)
do you think my application will get rejected? it has been 65 days so far, longer than most other online applications and I am very worried.
do you recommend that I contact the home office?
thanks
Because you already have a topic which all will see. No need to spam the forum with multiple duplicate posts.
You will get better responses in your own topic than if you post here and as you started a duplicate topic of your own, the post in this topic was removed.
Does anyone know if point 3 above is actually true and if HO rejects applications on this basis? I read that Guidance document but I found the information there confusing. I wasn't able to find an example in this forum of an unsuccessful application of an EU national due to "overstaying" (for example being a student without CSI). A few people have asked the same question in other posts but they didn't receive a reply. This approach from HO seems very serious and maybe unlawful under EU law?TeamAc4 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2017 11:07 pm1. An EEA(PR) holder can previously have "overstayed" if they were not an EEA national at the time, they had leave to remain, and they remained in the country once that leave expired. So the answer is: yes. UKVI will take into account the previous 10 years, so will look beyond the qualifying residence period now.
2. The qualifying period is always five years (unless you are married to a British citizen) under s.6(1) BNA and Schedule 1. Only this period will be taken into account by UKVI. Under some circumstances, it is possible for an EEA national to obtain PR after two or three years, but the majority it takes five years, at which point you become free from immigration time restrictions. You must hold that status for a minimum of twelve months.
3. Although the published Nationality Instructions quoted above have not been updated, UKVI will now generally regard residence of an EEA national in the UK without exercising Treaty rights as unlawful and going against the good character requirement. This includes prior overstayers, or people who have not had comprehensive sickness insurance as a student or self-sufficient person, for example. UKVI will look at the preceding ten year period in deciding whether there were immigration breaches. See the EEA Caseworker Guidance at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ent-rights pp. 34 et seq.
4. An immigration breach in the ten year period is not in and of itself conclusive that an application should be refused. The caseworker must consider whether the breach goes to good character, although the rather strict application of the comprehensive sickness insurance requirement suggests that the default position will be that a breach will bar naturalisation within those ten years.
Indeed! I have asked about this in the forums before but did not get any definite answers.demiane wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:00 pmDoes anyone know if point 3 above is actually true and if HO rejects applications on this basis? I read that Guidance document but I found the information there confusing. I wasn't able to find an example in this forum of an unsuccessful application of an EU national due to "overstaying" (for example being a student without CSI). A few people have asked the same question in other posts but they didn't receive a reply. This approach from HO seems very serious and maybe unlawful under EU law?TeamAc4 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2017 11:07 pm1. An EEA(PR) holder can previously have "overstayed" if they were not an EEA national at the time, they had leave to remain, and they remained in the country once that leave expired. So the answer is: yes. UKVI will take into account the previous 10 years, so will look beyond the qualifying residence period now.
2. The qualifying period is always five years (unless you are married to a British citizen) under s.6(1) BNA and Schedule 1. Only this period will be taken into account by UKVI. Under some circumstances, it is possible for an EEA national to obtain PR after two or three years, but the majority it takes five years, at which point you become free from immigration time restrictions. You must hold that status for a minimum of twelve months.
3. Although the published Nationality Instructions quoted above have not been updated, UKVI will now generally regard residence of an EEA national in the UK without exercising Treaty rights as unlawful and going against the good character requirement. This includes prior overstayers, or people who have not had comprehensive sickness insurance as a student or self-sufficient person, for example. UKVI will look at the preceding ten year period in deciding whether there were immigration breaches. See the EEA Caseworker Guidance at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ent-rights pp. 34 et seq.
4. An immigration breach in the ten year period is not in and of itself conclusive that an application should be refused. The caseworker must consider whether the breach goes to good character, although the rather strict application of the comprehensive sickness insurance requirement suggests that the default position will be that a breach will bar naturalisation within those ten years.
Note that British citizenship laws are completely separate and independent of 'EU Law'. The EU rules and regulations do not apply to applications for British Citizenship.demiane wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:00 pmDoes anyone know if point 3 above is actually true and if HO rejects applications on this basis? I read that Guidance document but I found the information there confusing. I wasn't able to find an example in this forum of an unsuccessful application of an EU national due to "overstaying" (for example being a student without CSI). A few people have asked the same question in other posts but they didn't receive a reply. This approach from HO seems very serious and maybe unlawful under EU law?TeamAc4 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2017 11:07 pm1. An EEA(PR) holder can previously have "overstayed" if they were not an EEA national at the time, they had leave to remain, and they remained in the country once that leave expired. So the answer is: yes. UKVI will take into account the previous 10 years, so will look beyond the qualifying residence period now.
2. The qualifying period is always five years (unless you are married to a British citizen) under s.6(1) BNA and Schedule 1. Only this period will be taken into account by UKVI. Under some circumstances, it is possible for an EEA national to obtain PR after two or three years, but the majority it takes five years, at which point you become free from immigration time restrictions. You must hold that status for a minimum of twelve months.
3. Although the published Nationality Instructions quoted above have not been updated, UKVI will now generally regard residence of an EEA national in the UK without exercising Treaty rights as unlawful and going against the good character requirement. This includes prior overstayers, or people who have not had comprehensive sickness insurance as a student or self-sufficient person, for example. UKVI will look at the preceding ten year period in deciding whether there were immigration breaches. See the EEA Caseworker Guidance at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ent-rights pp. 34 et seq.
4. An immigration breach in the ten year period is not in and of itself conclusive that an application should be refused. The caseworker must consider whether the breach goes to good character, although the rather strict application of the comprehensive sickness insurance requirement suggests that the default position will be that a breach will bar naturalisation within those ten years.
Of course EU law may affect applications for British Citizenship. The good character requirements include not having been in the country illegally in the last 10 years. In the document above, on page 27, some cases are described where an EU national would be in the UK "in breach of the Nationality, ImmigrationCR001 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:12 pmNote that British citizenship laws are completely separate and independent of 'EU Law'. The EU rules and regulations do not apply to applications for British Citizenship.demiane wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:00 pmDoes anyone know if point 3 above is actually true and if HO rejects applications on this basis? I read that Guidance document but I found the information there confusing. I wasn't able to find an example in this forum of an unsuccessful application of an EU national due to "overstaying" (for example being a student without CSI). A few people have asked the same question in other posts but they didn't receive a reply. This approach from HO seems very serious and maybe unlawful under EU law?TeamAc4 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2017 11:07 pm1. An EEA(PR) holder can previously have "overstayed" if they were not an EEA national at the time, they had leave to remain, and they remained in the country once that leave expired. So the answer is: yes. UKVI will take into account the previous 10 years, so will look beyond the qualifying residence period now.
2. The qualifying period is always five years (unless you are married to a British citizen) under s.6(1) BNA and Schedule 1. Only this period will be taken into account by UKVI. Under some circumstances, it is possible for an EEA national to obtain PR after two or three years, but the majority it takes five years, at which point you become free from immigration time restrictions. You must hold that status for a minimum of twelve months.
3. Although the published Nationality Instructions quoted above have not been updated, UKVI will now generally regard residence of an EEA national in the UK without exercising Treaty rights as unlawful and going against the good character requirement. This includes prior overstayers, or people who have not had comprehensive sickness insurance as a student or self-sufficient person, for example. UKVI will look at the preceding ten year period in deciding whether there were immigration breaches. See the EEA Caseworker Guidance at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ent-rights pp. 34 et seq.
4. An immigration breach in the ten year period is not in and of itself conclusive that an application should be refused. The caseworker must consider whether the breach goes to good character, although the rather strict application of the comprehensive sickness insurance requirement suggests that the default position will be that a breach will bar naturalisation within those ten years.
Yes i think its a honest mistake....u should apply for reconsiderationbilalburri wrote: ↑Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:34 amWe made joint naturalisation application including me,my wife and two children based on 5years plus one on ILR.All are granted naturalisation except my wife based on good character requirement due to following.
"Basically we move house back in 2015 and did not update address on car registration paper that was on my wife name although we updated our driving licence thinking that's the only thing we need to do.In early 2017 at one point we forget to pay road tax well on time and so vehicle was clamped but was release within few hours after we pay every thing.later on DVLA send some 80 pounds fine for delay in paying tax but that letter were keep going on our previous address.because of non response DVLA refer the case to court.we had no idea about this until we receive a letter from MARSTON group that a court order(warrant of control) has been issued against my wife to pay 688 pounds fine to pay for "possession of vehicle without licence"--we were absolutely shocked.any how pay the whole fine."
We mention all above in our application for naturalisation with explaination that we were unaware about this fine until were found out by MARSTON but Home office wrote that is not enough ground to be accepted and that becomes the bases for my wife refusal.Do you think we have any legal chance to first make an appeal in court against the original fine and secondly to ask for reconsideration?