- 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, Administrator
Anyone still trusts this goverment?IMMIGRATION LAWYER wrote: That means that a lot of people, who trusted the governemnt
Anyone who left between 17 March and 1 October will benefit from the grace period.ricky wrote:i think anyone left between 1 st april and 1 st October will benefit from this 6 months concession anydate before that : NO
i noticed in your post you wrote : application 17th of March)
anyone left before and applied in march will have autmatic ban thats what a lawyer explained to me
1APRIL UNTIL 1 OCTOBER
any overstayer who left volantarly (btwn 1st april- 1 st october ) need to keep his tickt when he left that s a proof that he left and paid for it
and in the application for re entry need to be included with immigration history and a letter expalining : that the person left during concession time
God only knows what he's playing at. Maybe I'm missing something here but if there isn't more clarification on this soon, especially about how ECOs are treating applications, this so-called amnesty is going to do nothing more than to create even more overstayers in the UK.
You will be aware that paragraph 320 of the Immigration Rules only applies to applications for leave to enter (including entry clearance applications).
It therefore has no bearing on how we deal with applications by overstayers.
I can, however confirm that we will not use paragraph 320 (7B) to refuse someone for a past breach of our immigration laws if, subsequent to that breach, we granted them leave to enter or remain. Therefore, a student who overstayed but was granted leave following an out of time application would not be subject to a re-entry ban on the basis of that overstaying.
Anyone here for VRP?We do not intend to create a new scheme to pay the costs of those who are unable to fund their own departure.
That said, the concession will extend to people who leave under our existing assisted voluntary return programmes. As I said earlier though, the concession is strictly time limited, so those who wish to apply for public funding to return should do so in good time, so that they can leave by 1 October.
jei2, are you saying those who have been served is151b but leave voluntarily will not benefit from the concession?jei2 wrote:My worry is that Liam Byrne's assurance of an "amnesty" period seems to be couched in ambiguity. ECOs may therefore believe that they are applying 320 (7B) correctly.
Note the following extract from his letter to ILPA:
God only knows what he's playing at. Maybe I'm missing something here but if there isn't more clarification on this soon, especially about how ECOs are treating applications, this so-called amnesty is going to do nothing more than to create even more overstayers in the UK.
You will be aware that paragraph 320 of the Immigration Rules only applies to applications for leave to enter (including entry clearance applications).
It therefore has no bearing on how we deal with applications by overstayers.
I can, however confirm that we will not use paragraph 320 (7B) to refuse someone for a past breach of our immigration laws if, subsequent to that breach, we granted them leave to enter or remain. Therefore, a student who overstayed but was granted leave following an out of time application would not be subject to a re-entry ban on the basis of that overstaying.
And let's not even start on the IS151Bs (removal decisions) that are being issued with the IS151As. What a nightmare this initiative is going to be. I predict a very busy AIT.
Personally I think its going to be panic stations for a couple of months while "don't have a clue" decisions are made by ECOs.I covered the issue of people being served with enforcement decisions while leaving the UK when I wrote to you on 29 February. People who are leaving voluntarily should generally be served with form IS151A (Part1) confirming their status and not with an IS151A (Part 2) or an IS151B, which are removal decisions.
Nevertheless, even if somebody was served with a removal decsion while leaving voluntarily, this will not mean that he or she will be treated for the purpose of the re-entry ban as having been removed from the UK. It is perfectly possible for a person to leave voluntarily after being served wtih a removal decision, but it is only those who are actually removed or deported who will be subject to the ten year ban. Our guidance to Entry Clearance Officers makes this point clear.
...but those who leave in that time period are not overstayers and cannot be regarded as such.jei2 wrote:Well Twin,
According to Liam Byrne they're supposed to benefit. His letter to ILPA continues:
Personally I think its going to be panic stations for a couple of months while "don't have a clue" decisions are made by ECOs.I covered the issue of people being served with enforcement decisions while leaving the UK when I wrote to you on 29 February. People who are leaving voluntarily should generally be served with form IS151A (Part1) confirming their status and not with an IS151A (Part 2) or an IS151B, which are removal decisions.
Nevertheless, even if somebody was served with a removal decsion while leaving voluntarily, this will not mean that he or she will be treated for the purpose of the re-entry ban as having been removed from the UK. It is perfectly possible for a person to leave voluntarily after being served wtih a removal decision, but it is only those who are actually removed or deported who will be subject to the ten year ban. Our guidance to Entry Clearance Officers makes this point clear.
There also seems to be a belief that the concession only applies to those who left within the 28 day overstaying period. Everyone else - depending on how and by what financial means they exited the UK will be penalised. Aaargggh !
I just hope someone will post news of a successful return to the UK here to give others some encouragement.
I agree, but I wonder whether maybe that is the whole point of the exercise. Mr Byrne is not exactly quiet about the fact that he disagrees with the way that "his" laws are interpreted by judges. So maybe he just wants to give them a bit more work, and sabotage the system by overloading the tribunals. After all, what good is an appeal if it takes a year or more to get there?jei2 wrote:And let's not even start on the IS151Bs (removal decisions) that are being issued with the IS151As. What a nightmare this initiative is going to be. I predict a very busy AIT.
They most certainly will not be able to put forward a ground to challenge the ECO on immigration rules but they definitely can fight their article 8 grounds.aka189 wrote:But the new rules are designed in such a way that it restricts the power of the Immigration Judges. So AIT will be definitely busy but the homeoffice will win most of the cases as these new laws are mandatory refusals and restricts Judges' descretion.
So Liam Byrne has done very good job in drafting these new laws so that the homeoffice will benefit from them and they will definitely be benefitted.
Not sure what you mean by the first sentence. The concessionary period runs from 17 March to 1 October 2008.chrissy wrote:Ok so the new rules have come into effect and apply to everyone who left before 1st April. Now the rules say that one will be bammed for up to 1,5 or 10years from when they left the UK.
Am I correct to say them that if you apply 1 year after you left, you can not be banned? Or will the ban run for a year from when you apply?
Please clarify for me.