Removal

[Mikky99]

Good day all.

Could someone please help me out

Two years ago, my sis was sent back home

At the Airport. By immigration

For false information.

No crime committed.

Genuine documents,. But she was unlucky.

Just wondering if she stands any chance of coming

Back on visiting only. Because she has a good job.

And what can I do from here to strengthen her chances. Please all advise all welcome.

I don't mind if it's stupid to you. But to me it might be valuable. Thanks all in advance for your help.

[Casa]

What was the false information

[ouflak1]

Two years ago, my sis was sent back home

At the Airport. By immigration

For false information.

No crime committed.

This is contradictory.

Genuine documents. But she was unlucky.

What part was 'unlucky' that she was refused entry because of 'false information'? Without some key specific details, we can't offer much in the way of useful advice.

[Mikky99]

Good morning Casa,

Thanks for your reply.

What I meant by unlucky and no crime committed

She applied for the visa by herself, when asked at the airport what she came to do. She said something contradictory.

No crime, she came on genuine documents.
Was only removed according to the documents
Given to her at the airport. Thanks

[vinny]

Unfortunately, if they had refused her due to deception, then they may ban her from re-entry for at least 10 years under 320(7B).

[ouflak1]

She applied for the visa by herself, when asked at the airport what she came to do. She said something contradictory.

Do you know what she said and what it actually contradicted from her documentation? What kind of visa was it? The only way through this to demonstrate that what she said was not contradictory and perhaps and error or misinterpretation by the entry clearance officer. Maybe a few more details and there is a glimmer of hope.

[Mikky99]

Thanks ourtflak.

I will try and scan the documents given to her

If not. I will type it out for you to read.

Thanks

[Mikky99]

Is 91R
These are the tick boxes statement

1. You have previously failed or refused to leave UK
When required to do so.
IS. 86
You have been detained under paragraph 16 of schedule 2 to the 1972 act.

Is 92
You were refused to enter UK
I have now given directions for your removal from the uk.

I don't know if this makes any sense to you.
Can't paste or copy. Thanks

[vinny]

IS 86 - seems incorrect, if she hadn’t previously been required to leave the UK.

IS 92 - didn’t go into the details of why she was detained and removed.

[Mikky99]

Thanks for your reply.

To be honest. All what she said was that she told them she came for a training and a course. may why.

She got the visa as a tourist. Everything thick on the documents. I texted to you. Without hiding anything.
What i would like to know is can she reaply for UK visa. Because it's now two years ago. Since the incident.

[ouflak1]

Thanks for your reply.

To be honest. All what she said was that she told them she came for a training and a course.

So was she actually coming to the UK to attend training and a course? If so, she applied for (and somehow got) the wrong visa. If she was telling the truth, and was merely confused and was given the wrong visa, she should be fine to demonstrate that later on, though she will need all supporting evidence for her next application. But the key point here is: What were her intentions with the original attempt to enter the UK? This is sounding a lot less like 'unlucky' as you first described it. I understand that you may not have all the exact details.

She got the visa as a tourist. Everything thick on the documents. I texted to you. Without hiding anything.
What i would like to know is can she reaply for UK visa. Because it's now two years ago. Since the incident.

Without knowing exactly why she was first visiting and what tripped her up at immigration control, it's hard to give sound advice.