AN application for parent with Settled Status + no CSI

[NikiGio]

Hi All!

Haven't been on the Immigration Boards site for about a year - super busy times!

I'm one of the many trying to get their head around the latest changes re AN applications, CSI, etc.

We sent my Mum's AN application online last week - after about 3 years of gathering info and applying for EEA (PR), etc.

Finally!!!

She's in her 70s, has been here since 2012, dependent on me and my sibling, she obtained Settled Status in Feb 2019, isn't married to a Brit.

I understand the requirement to demonstrate exercising treaty rights has come back again - she can only demonstrate them as a family member of a qualified person.

I was a qualified person during Jan 2010-Feb 2018, but stopped working in Mar 2018-Sep 2019 due to illness - so I can't demonstrate being a qualified person in that period. I have had EEA PR since 2018, for the period 2010-2015.

My sibling has been in continuous employment during Jan 2013-present - so has been a qualified person during 2013-2020.

So now we're onto next steps, Sopra Steria, etc.

We've gathered and scanned most of the Residence evidence required.

Given my Mum's right to Naturalisation derives from being the family member of two qualified persons - we are sending in the scan of my + my sibling's EEA (PR) cards/letters.

Do we also need to send translated birth certificates, to prove the relationship?

I've already translated my birth certificate into English (I was born abroad), so we can send mine - but my sibling's has lost birth certificate so we won't be able to supply it.

Any thoughts? Thanks!

[CR001]

Given my Mum's right to Naturalisation derives from being the family member of two qualified persons

There is NO such 'right'. Your mother must qualify for citizenship in her own right. There is no concept of dependence/dependent/dependency for naturalisation. She must only submit the limit documents asked for.

Existing lengthy topic on the CSI issue already.

https://www.immigrationboards.com/briti ... 6-240.html

[NikiGio]

here is NO such 'right'. Your mother must qualify for citizenship in her own right. There is no concept of dependence/dependent/dependency for naturalisation. She must only submit the limit documents asked for.

Hi CR001, thanks for the friendly reply. You are though right - I still have the EEA PR mindset, which isn't relevant to Naturalisation.

We have researched enough about CSI, so I don't really have any questions about that - but thanks for the link to the thread.

KR

[NikiGio]

Given my Mum's right to Naturalisation derives from being the family member of two qualified persons

There is NO such 'right'. Your mother must qualify for citizenship in her own right. There is no concept of dependence/dependent/dependency for naturalisation. She must only submit the limit documents asked for.

Having refreshed my knowledge and re-read the AN Guidance, Guidance for Home Office Staff, and other Immigration blogs - I don't think you are correct is saying that there is no such right. My mother doesn't qualify for citizenship in her own right given she didn't have CSI while here as an EEA self-sufficient citizen, and therefore there IS concept of dependence/dependent/dependency in her case.

Secret Simon also states as much in:

Simply put, you will need to demonstrate that in the last five years, you met the requirements of the EEA Regulations while residing in the UK. So, you will likely need to demonstrate that your EEA citizen spouse was either working or seeking work or was a student or self-sufficient person with CSI.

Your work at that time is irrelevant (at least as far as I understand it now), because your right to reside in the UK was based on your EEA citizen spouse exercising treaty rights.So you do need to prove that your EEA citizen spouse was exercising treaty rights.

Effectively you have to meet the requirements of making a PR (as opposed to a Settled Status) application.

She has to meet the requirements for PR in her AN application - hence, she needs to demonstrate the dependency from two qualified persons, her offspring. Unless we can demonstrate that she was a qualified person by being self-sufficient with CSI (which she didn't have) or she was a qualified person by being the dependent parent of two qualified persons - her AN application will be refused.

[dogcat]

It is all because after a year or so HO chose to revert to its previous position re interpretation of the law with settled status not being 'enough' which, in all honesty, it isn't, not under the current legislation anyway.

Since settled status is not 'enough' all that PR palava will bleed into Naturalisation as one will have to demonstrate being a 'qualified person' within the meaning of Directive 2004/38/EC (same as if one were to apply for a PR card)

It's just ridiculous that some people were granted citizenship if they managed to apply before May/ Jun 2020 no questions asked (I'm exaggerating slightly lol ) and people who applied after will have to go through all that permanent residency/qualified person crap again.

It all looks a bit silly to be implementing these changes now NOW as opposed to making it clear form the get go when whole settlement scheme started.

[secret.simon]

Having refreshed my knowledge and re-read the AN Guidance, Guidance for Home Office Staff, and other Immigration blogs - I don't think you are correct is saying that there is no such right.

I think that what @CR001 is pointing out is that naturalisation in the UK is a grant and not a right. It is not like the EU PR, where if you have met specific requirements, you automatically acquire that status.

UK law approaches both immigration and naturalisation as being grants of the government, rather than being matters of right, which is the general EU approach.

[NikiGio]

Having refreshed my knowledge and re-read the AN Guidance, Guidance for Home Office Staff, and other Immigration blogs - I don't think you are correct is saying that there is no such right.

I think that what @CR001 is pointing out is that naturalisation in the UK is a grant and not a right. It is not like the EU PR, where if you have met specific requirements, you automatically acquire that status.

UK law approaches both immigration and naturalisation as being grants of the government, rather than being matters of right, which is the general EU approach.

I see what you mean, Simon. Thanks for clarifying - I find CR001's replies are often so short that they're impossible to comprehend, and therefore can be misleading.

In my understanding, CR001 is giving misleading information when he/she says that 'there is no concept of dependence/dependent/dependency for naturalisation' - there *is* a concept of dependence/dependent/dependency for naturalisation, as I've explained above having read the Guidance.

But I get what you mean re naturalisation not being a 'right'. More appropriate word would be 'access to' or 'can apply for'.

Thanks for taking the time to give a reasonable answer.

[NikiGio]

It is all because after a year or so HO chose to revert to its previous position re interpretation of the law with settled status not being 'enough' which, in all honesty, it isn't, not under the current legislation anyway.

Since settled status is not 'enough' all that PR palava will bleed into Naturalisation as one will have to demonstrate being a 'qualified person' within the meaning of Directive 2004/38/EC (same as if one were to apply for a PR card)

It's just ridiculous that some people were granted citizenship if they managed to apply before May/ Jun 2020 no questions asked (I'm exaggerating slightly lol ) and people who applied after will have to go through all that permanent residency/qualified person crap again.

It all looks a bit silly to be implementing these changes now NOW as opposed to making it clear form the get go when whole settlement scheme started.

Yes, I see what you mean. Frankly, the HO often looks silly and also quite often loses appeals in court. But given they have discretion, they can do pretty much whatever they like. Unless something changes in the law, they will continue to do so.

Having said that, although laborious - the PR and Settled Status applications have all been successful for my family, with no major issues.

We'll see what happens with the AN side of things.

[Frou01]

It is all because after a year or so HO chose to revert to its previous position re interpretation of the law with settled status not being 'enough' which, in all honesty, it isn't, not under the current legislation anyway.

Since settled status is not 'enough' all that PR palava will bleed into Naturalisation as one will have to demonstrate being a 'qualified person' within the meaning of Directive 2004/38/EC (same as if one were to apply for a PR card)

It's just ridiculous that some people were granted citizenship if they managed to apply before May/ Jun 2020 no questions asked (I'm exaggerating slightly lol ) and people who applied after will have to go through all that permanent residency/qualified person crap again.

It all looks a bit silly to be implementing these changes now NOW as opposed to making it clear form the get go when whole settlement scheme started.

Yes, I see what you mean. Frankly, the HO often looks silly and also quite often loses appeals in court. But given they have discretion, they can do pretty much whatever they like. Unless something changes in the law, they will continue to do so.

Having said that, although laborious - the PR and Settled Status applications have all been successful for my family, with no major issues.

We'll see what happens with the AN side of things.

I’m in general a bit confused about the appeal route for refusals of naturalisation.
Some say you can only go the route of reconsideration and then I’ve seen people claiming they took a refusal to court.
So do refusals can be taken to court or is there only the option of reconsideration?

[NikiGio]

It is all because after a year or so HO chose to revert to its previous position re interpretation of the law with settled status not being 'enough' which, in all honesty, it isn't, not under the current legislation anyway.

Since settled status is not 'enough' all that PR palava will bleed into Naturalisation as one will have to demonstrate being a 'qualified person' within the meaning of Directive 2004/38/EC (same as if one were to apply for a PR card)

It's just ridiculous that some people were granted citizenship if they managed to apply before May/ Jun 2020 no questions asked (I'm exaggerating slightly lol ) and people who applied after will have to go through all that permanent residency/qualified person crap again.

It all looks a bit silly to be implementing these changes now NOW as opposed to making it clear form the get go when whole settlement scheme started.

Yes, I see what you mean. Frankly, the HO often looks silly and also quite often loses appeals in court. But given they have discretion, they can do pretty much whatever they like. Unless something changes in the law, they will continue to do so.

Having said that, although laborious - the PR and Settled Status applications have all been successful for my family, with no major issues.

We'll see what happens with the AN side of things.

I’m in general a bit confused about the appeal route for refusals of naturalisation.
Some say you can only go the route of reconsideration and then I’ve seen people claiming they took a refusal to court.
So do refusals can be taken to court or is there only the option of reconsideration?

That doesn't really answer my question, and I'm hoping to do things right so we don't get a refusal unless we don't meet the criteria

[obormot]

I was a qualified person during Jan 2010-Feb 2018, but stopped working in Mar 2018-Sep 2019 due to illness - so I can't demonstrate being a qualified person in that period. I have had EEA PR since 2018, for the period 2010-2015.

My sibling has been in continuous employment during Jan 2013-present - so has been a qualified person during 2013-2020.

I think we discussed it before. My personal feeling is that having one sponsor looks more straightforward.
Now, you say you have PR granted for period 2010-15, i.e. on your PR letter the date you acquired it must be in 2015, right?
In that case I believe you are qualified person after 2015, no matter whether you worked or not and whether you had CSI or not.
So it seems to me that you can simply state that your mother was dependent on you, qualified person in 2012-15 because of work, and after 2015 because of PR.
(So I guess you will need to submit your birth certificate, and your PR - I am even not sure that you need to submit info on your work before 2015, since it is accepted by HO that if you have PR then you were qualified person for 5 years before that)
?

[NikiGio]

I was a qualified person during Jan 2010-Feb 2018, but stopped working in Mar 2018-Sep 2019 due to illness - so I can't demonstrate being a qualified person in that period. I have had EEA PR since 2018, for the period 2010-2015.

My sibling has been in continuous employment during Jan 2013-present - so has been a qualified person during 2013-2020.

I think we discussed it before. My personal feeling is that having one sponsor looks more straightforward.
Now, you say you have PR granted for period 2010-15, i.e. on your PR letter the date you acquired it must be in 2015, right? In that case you are qualified person after 2015, no matter whether you worked on not and whether you had CSI or not.
So it seems to me that you can simply state that your mother was dependent on you, qualified person in 2012-15 because of work, and after 2015 because of PR.
(So I guess you will need to submit your birth certificate, and your PR - I am even not sure that you need to submit info on your work before 2015, since it is accepted by HO that if you have PR then you were qualified person for 5 years before that)
?

Yes, we did discuss it a couple of years ago - I remember well and have looked back through the posts.

I think you're right.

The only reason why we're having two sponsors is that my Mum lived in my place between 2012-2018, then moved into my sister's place in 2018-currently.

But I guess that's not really relevant if we're going for the option of saying/proving that Mum is a qualified person by way of her being the parent of a qualified person who she's financially dependent on, rather than going for the option of saying/proving she's a qualified person by way of being the parent of a qualified person who she's part of the household of.

Surprised re UKCEN not being very helpful - I see what you mean re looking for anecdotal references though, makes sense and can be useful.

I have my birth certificate and the translation, as I did it a couple of years ago when we were going to submit her PR application.

Thanks for that, really useful