Zambrano Settled Status EU settlement scheme Paper Application Form - NEW

[to be free]

Typical HO with double standard

It is like they make this important decesions in their staffroom while having tea and biscuits while laughing. Who makes these decesions at the HO? Sometimes I feel like there is a robot there doing all this.

[krish147]

Dear All,
Euss application was submitted by 30/06/2021
on 12 02 2022, received COA.
My visa was expired by NOV 2021. We did not submit the FLR application in the parent route.
I don't have any visa status now. What kind of outcome I may get from HO is entirely unknown in present circumstances. I am more confused now after reading the above Email from our colleague.

Has any of our Zambrano applicants recently received either pre-settled or settled status?
If yes, please let us know your primary grounds for the success of your applications?

Regards
Krish

[Blessed child]

Dear All,
Euss application was submitted by 30/06/2021
on 12 02 2022, received COA.
My visa was expired by NOV 2021. We did not submit the FLR application in the parent route.
I don't have any visa status now. What kind of outcome I may get from HO is entirely unknown in present circumstances. I am more confused now after reading the above Email from our colleague.

Has any of our Zambrano applicants recently received either pre-settled or settled status?
If yes, please let us know your primary grounds for the success of your applications?

Regards
Krish

My guess is that people like you without current leave to remain, who has made the Zambrano application by 30th June and who did not have any FLR application pending might be in a better position for a positive outcome because the court on January 25th did not support HO in telling people to go and make the FLR application first. This is my thought but HO have a mind of their own. May God help us all ,whatever our situation. I guess decisions will start coming out soon. It appears they are currently issuing COA for people that applied in June 2021.

[THM1982]

https://insights.doughtystreet.co.uk/po ... s-re-think

[JB007]

From Hackney Law Centre, who represent Ms Akinsanya.

https://hclc.org.uk/news

[wizzy1979]

Dear All,
Euss application was submitted by 30/06/2021
on 12 02 2022, received COA.
My visa was expired by NOV 2021. We did not submit the FLR application in the parent route.
I don't have any visa status now. What kind of outcome I may get from HO is entirely unknown in present circumstances. I am more confused now after reading the above Email from our colleague.

Has any of our Zambrano applicants recently received either pre-settled or settled status?
If yes, please let us know your primary grounds for the success of your applications?

Regards
Krish

I submitted mine on the 30/06/21, did biometrics on the 6th December 2021 with a pending FLR application as at tht time. No COA till now. I hope it works out. Let’s keep the updates coming

[warid6955321]

Dear All,
Euss application was submitted by 30/06/2021
on 12 02 2022, received COA.
My visa was expired by NOV 2021. We did not submit the FLR application in the parent route.
I don't have any visa status now. What kind of outcome I may get from HO is entirely unknown in present circumstances. I am more confused now after reading the above Email from our colleague.

Has any of our Zambrano applicants recently received either pre-settled or settled status?
If yes, please let us know your primary grounds for the success of your applications?

Regards
Krish

I submitted mine on the 30/06/21, did biometrics on the 6th December 2021 with a pending FLR application as at tht time. No COA till now. I hope it works out. Let’s keep the updates coming

My situation here.
Applied EUSS Zambrano 30.06.2021
With pending Flr fp application on 08.07.2021

Euss Biomatrics done 07.02.2022
No COA from Euss
No reply flr fp.

Hope for the best.

[warid6955321]

Are non Eea citizens with british child and British partner eligible for Zambrano carer Application?

[krish147]

Dear All,
Euss application was submitted by 30/06/2021
on 12 02 2022, received COA.
My visa was expired by NOV 2021. We did not submit the FLR application in the parent route.
I don't have any visa status now. What kind of outcome I may get from HO is entirely unknown in present circumstances. I am more confused now after reading the above Email from our colleague.

Has any of our Zambrano applicants recently received either pre-settled or settled status?
If yes, please let us know your primary grounds for the success of your applications?

Regards
Krish

My guess is that people like you without current leave to remain, who has made the Zambrano application by 30th June and who did not have any FLR application pending might be in a better position for a positive outcome because the court on January 25th did not support HO in telling people to go and make the FLR application first. This is my thought but HO have a mind of their own. May God help us all ,whatever our situation. I guess decisions will start coming out soon. It appears they are currently issuing COA for people that applied in June 2021.

Thank you for your kind words.I hope a positive result will come from HO very soon.

[Miss-Suz]

Morning all,

the Home Office has indicated that the reconsideration process is underway and that it expects to complete that reconsideration and to promulgate its outcome by 25 April 2022.

From hackney law centre

[wizzy1979]

Can I go to school with the COA with student finance?

[askme234]

Hi All,

This is an update on the below dismissal from the FTT-

The permission to appeal has been granted and it came along with the below directions
see below for your reference

my questions are below;

Do I need to make another bundle or I can rely on the initial evidence produced to the Tribunal when the appeal was dismissed?

The initial appeal was done on a paper hearing, can the Tribunal decide this on an oral hearing? and if yes, does that mean I have to prepare a Bundle for the court or I can still rely on the initial evidence?

I would appreciate your answers to the above in time so I can better prepare myself.



Note: In these directions, “Appellant” means the party (including any representative) who has been
granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (the
“FtT”) and “Respondent” means any other person (including any representative) who was a party before
the FtT.

1. These Directions of the Upper Tribunal (“the Tribunal”) apply in this case in which
permission to appeal has been granted. They must be followed unless varied,
substituted or supplemented by further directions.

2. The parties are reminded that any failure to comply with these directions may result in
the Tribunal making an adverse order pursuant to its power under Rule 10 of the
Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (“the Rules”).

3. These Directions seek to give effect to the requirement in Rule 2 of the Rules to deal
with cases fairly and justly and all other aspects of the overriding objective. The parties
are reminded of their obligation pursuant to Rule 2(4) to help the Tribunal to achieve
that objective and to co-operate with the Tribunal generally.

4. There is a presumption that, in the event of the Tribunal deciding that the decision of
the FtT is to be set aside as erroneous in law, the re-making of the decision will take
place at the same hearing. The fresh decision will normally be based on the evidence
before the FtT and any further evidence admitted (see [5] below), together with the
parties’ arguments. The parties must be prepared accordingly in every case.

5. The Tribunal is empowered to permit new or further evidence to be admitted in the remaking of a decision. In any case where this facility is sought the parties must comply
with Rule 15(2A) which is in these terms:
In an asylum case or an immigration case –
(a) if a party wishes the Upper Tribunal to consider evidence that was not before the
First-tier Tribunal, that party must send or deliver a notice to the Upper
Tribunal and any other party –
(i) indicating the nature of the evidence; and
(ii) explaining why it was not submitted to the First-tier Tribunal; and
(b) when considering whether to admit evidence that was not before the First-tier
Tribunal, the Upper Tribunal must have regard to whether there has been
unreasonable delay in producing that evidence.
A failure to comply with Rule 15(2A) will be regarded as a serious matter and may
result in fresh or further evidence not being considered by the Tribunal.

6. The following timetable has been set for this appeal:
(i) If the Respondent wishes to provide a response pursuant to Rule 24 the time
limit for doing so is one month from the date of these Directions. If the
Respondent decides not to provide a response, this must be notified in
writing to the Tribunal and the Appellant within the same time limit.
(ii) If a response is provided pursuant to (i) above the Appellant must provide
any reply within ten working days before the hearing of the appeal at latest.
(iii) Any notice by the Respondent pursuant to Rule 15(2A) must be sent with
any Rule 24 response within the time limit specified in (i) above or with the
notification that no response is proposed.
(iv) Any notice by the Appellant pursuant to Rule 15(2A) must be sent ten
working days before the hearing of the appeal at latest.
(v) All notices pursuant to Rule 15(2A) must be accompanied by an indexed and
paginated bundle of documents, including all the material that was before
the FtT together with a supplementary indexed and paginated bundle of the
proposed new evidence or where feasible, an extended version of the FtT
bundle.
(vi) Both parties shall, at latest five working days prior to the scheduled hearing
of the appeal, contact the Tribunal for the purpose of confirming that all
bundles and any other materials considered by the FtT and/or as directed
above are available for distribution to the judge/s and taking any other
appropriate steps to this end.

7. Where a skeleton argument is directed by the Tribunal or considered appropriate by a
party this will be filed and served no later than three clear working days before the
scheduled hearing date together with copies of any relevant authorities.

8. Any request for the services of an interpreter must be made to the Tribunal in writing,
at latest seven days in advance of the scheduled hearing date.

9. The parties will receive written notification of the hearing date in due course. All
hearings in the Tribunal are listed at 10.00 hours unless otherwise notified.
Principal Resident Judge

Hi Snooky and Co,

I need your help on the below;

My appeal for the derivative residence card under the Zambrano has been dismissed on the basis set out by the judge below. I need your help in applying to the upper tribunal as it says I can only apply on a point of law and it must be in accordance with the rule.

Would you please read the decision below and point me in the right direction? so that I don't break any law when lodging in the application.

Please note that my FM leave to remain has now expired and I didn't renew it. Although, I still have a pending application for the EU settlement scheme(Second application) which was sent in June this year.


Many thanks for your help in advance


To the Appellant and Respondent

Clerk to the First-tier Tribunal
Enclosed are the First-tier Tribunal’s decision and reasons in the above appeal.

Either party may apply to the First-tier Tribunal for permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law
arising from the First-tier Tribunal's decision.
Any application must be made in accordance with the relevant Procedure Rules and must be provided to the Tribunal
so that it is received no later than 14 days after the date on which the party making the application was sent the
written reasons for the decision, except where the Appellant is outside the United Kingdom; in which case any
application must be provided to the Tribunal so that it is received no later than 28 days after the date on which the
party making the application was sent the written reasons for the decision.
The Secretary of State will be informed of any application made by an appellant for permission to appeal to the Upper
Tribunal (but not the grounds). This is to prevent any unlawful action being taken.
All applications must be sent to:



© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2021
IAC-AH-     -V1
First-tier Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard on the Papers at Taylor House Decision & Reasons
Promulgated
On 30 November 2021
………………21.12.2021………
Before
JUDGE OF THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL N M PAUL
Between
(ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT MADE)
Appellant
and
ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER

Respondent

DECISION AND REASONS

1. The appellant is a citizen of xxxxxxxxxx. On 22 September 2020
his application, made on 30 June 2020 for a derivative residence card under the
Zambrano judgment to confirm that he was a Primary Carer of a British citizen
dependant, was refused.

Respondent’s Decision
2. The application had been considered under Regulations 16(5), 8 & 20 of the EEA
Regulations 2016. The Secretary of State was required to issue an applicant with a
derivative residence card on production of a valid passport and proof that a person
had a derivative right to reside in the UK.


3. The appellant was applying on the basis that he was the Primary Carer of xx
xxxx, a British citizen. To be considered the Primary Carer, the
appellant would have to provide evidence to show that he spent the majority of his
time with his child, and that he was responsible financially for that child. No evidence
had been submitted to demonstrate that he lived with Philip, or that he was financially
responsible for him.


4. Furthermore, to qualify for a residence card, he had to show that he was the Primary
Carer. However, Philip was living with his mother, xxxxx, who was
a British citizen and free from British Immigration controls. The appellant’s son’s
mother could continue to care for her son in the UK if the appellant was required to
leave. The Zambrano application required that a person seeking this right had to
establish that he was the Primary Carer of the British citizen.
The Appeal

5. The appellant had submitted with his appeal notice a bundle of documents which
included (amongst other things) evidence of finance, employment, and his son’s
education and domestic circumstances. He also included a letter in which he set out
his reasons for applying for a derivative residence card. He said that they were living
at the same address, and his partner had another son with the appellant, as well as a
stepson. They had been living together at the same address since January 2016,
and the appellant’s son attended a local primary school in xxxx. The
supporting documents indicated that he was living with his father, and that the
appellant was financially responsible.

6. The appellant then invoked the decision of the Supreme Court in Patel & Shah -vSSHD [2019], and in particular quoted from the judgment of Lady Arden which said
that, where a father would be compelled to leave the UK, the consequences for the
child would be the determinative feature of whether or not the Zambrano test was
met.

7. It was therefore argued that the application had been wrongly refused on the basis of
the incorrect consideration of Regulation 16(5)c.

Conclusions & Reasons

8. The burden is on the appellant to show that he meets the requirements of the EEA
Regulations. The simple answer in this case is that the appellant has not established
that he is the Primary Carer under the Zambrano principle, because of course he
shares the care of his child with the child’s mother, and they are all living in a family
unit. In any event according to the respondent’s decision notice, he had previously
been granted leave to remain under Appendix FM, and that was the correct route for
a further application for leave to remain. Thus, it excluded him from being
considered under the EEA Regulations.

9. In my view, the SSHD’s analysis in this case is right, and the appellant’s attempt to
bypass the requirement of Appendix FM cannot succeed. The decision was properly
made.

This appeal is dismissed, as the respondent’s decision was in accordance with the EEA
Regulations.
No anonymity direction is made.
Signed Date 3 December 2021
Judge Nicholas M Paul
Judge of the First-tier Tribunal
TO THE RESPONDENT
FEE AWARD
I have dismissed the appeal and therefore there can be no fee award.
Signed Date 3 December 2021
Judge Nicholas M Paul
Judge of the First-tier Tribunal

[Victory111]

Hi I received this email from home office
You applied to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) as a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’.

The definition of a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ provides, at paragraph (b), that the person must be without leave to enter or remain in the UK, unless this was granted under Appendix EU (see Annex 1 to Appendix EU).

On 31st December 2020 you held leave to enter or remain in the UK under the Immigration Rules

The effect of paragraph (b) is that a person who held UK immigration leave (other than under Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules) could not meet the Appendix EU definition of a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’.

However, in the case of R (Akinsanya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 1535 (Admin), the High Court ruled that paragraph (b), and the parts of the guidance – EU Settlement Scheme: person with a Zambrano right to reside – addressing that provision, were unlawful and ordered the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) to reconsider the relevant provisions of Appendix EU.

As a result of the High Court’s decision, the SSHD agreed, by way of a consent order dated 17 June 2021, that she will not determine applications made under Appendix EU on the basis that a person is or was a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’, where their case is affected by the decision in Akinsanya, until after she has completed her reconsideration of Appendix EU.

Given that you currently hold leave to remain in the UK until, your application is directly affected by the decision in Akinsanya.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the SSHD’s appeal on 25 February 2022 and the SSHD is considering the implications of the judgment. In the meantime, your application cannot yet be decided. A decision will be made as soon as possible once the SSHD has completed her reconsideration of Appendix EU, as required by the consent order.

The SSHD does not consider that any detriment arises as a result of the hold on your application. As you have made a valid EUSS Zambrano application, your certificate of application can be relied upon to confirm that your rights to work, study and (in England) rent a place to live are protected until the final determination of your EUSS Zambrano application (including the outcome of any appeal).

[Nyamebeye]

@Victory111, when does your leave expire? When did you apply?
It looks like a similar letter was sent to @Agyapa.

[Victory111]

Hi My ltr expired in September 2021 and I also applied for zambrano on 30 June 2021.I applied my flrfp extension both applications are pending.

[Nyamebeye]

Did you request your documents back t use for the flr(fp) application? I mean the the ones you submitted in support of your Zambrano application? Or did you ask them to use the documents you have already submitted? I am assuming you are relying on the same child.

[Victory111]

When I applied for zambrano application i send my passport my wife passport and my British child passport. They returned it after after 5 month. As in flrfp they don’t need any documents I just uploaded online.

[Nyamebeye]

Thank you. So did you not send any supporting documents with your Zambrano application in addition to the passports? I'm asking because my husband needs to renew his flr fp but the documents he needs to upload are with the home office for his zambrano application.
May be we need to request the documents back so that he can upload inline for flr fp.
If the home office had a portal for each applicant where they save copies of their documents, we would not need to be sending same documents back and forth for every application.
For example, they always ask for birth cert as proof of relationship to child which they would have already verified in previous applications, yet they ask again. Birth certificates don't change unless paternity is disputed later on . I just don't understand the home office.
I could go on and on. It's just frustrating.

[to be free]

Thank you. So did you not send any supporting documents with your Zambrano application in addition to the passports? I'm asking because my husband needs to renew his flr fp but the documents he needs to upload are with the home office for his zambrano application.
May be we need to request the documents back so that he can upload inline for flr fp.
If the home office had a portal for each applicant where they save copies of their documents, we would not need to be sending same documents back and forth for every application.
For example, they always ask for birth cert as proof of relationship to child which they would have already verified in previous applications, yet they ask again. Birth certificates don't change unless paternity is disputed later on . I just don't understand the home office.
I could go on and on. It's just frustrating.

I requested for original documents I sent off with Zambarano application but for almost 4 months I got the same response" identity is yet to be verified" I even explained I needed them for FLR fp extension. I had to extend Flrfp without original documents, child's British passport, birth certificate and my BRP. Instead I provided photocopies which sopra steria uploaded for me when I went for Flrfp extension.

[Nyamebeye]

May be we might be able to get them back if we request for them as his ID verification was completed in Nov last year and he has received his COA. But yesterday, he also received the dreaded email ''your application would not be decided yet..... "same as @Agyapa and Victory111.

[to be free]

May be we might be able to get them back if we request for them as his ID verification was completed in Nov last year and he has received his COA. But yesterday, he also received the dreaded email ''your application would not be decided yet..... "same as @Agyapa and Victory111.

Yes, they should have posted them back by now. Usually they send them back with biometrics letter..

[omar1978]

hi
i made the application on 30 june 2021, later they returned applicant/spouse original passport but they didn't return child passport/birth cert. child passport already expired last year and I have made new child passport application without the old original one. passport office said they will issue new passport only when they receive the old one. is there any email where i can request for the documents return?
many thanks

[Nyamebeye]

Indeed, he received the passports back in Nov 2021 with the biometric letter when we requested the passports for travel. Its just the other supporting documents we don't have yet.

[Nyamebeye]

hi
i made the application on 30 june 2021, later they returned applicant/spouse original passport but they didn't return child passport/birth cert. child passport already expired last year and I have made new child passport application without the old original one. passport office said they will issue new passport only when they receive the old one. is there any email where i can request for the documents return?
many thanks

Call the EU resolution Centre and request return of the child's passport. That's what we did last year, and they returned the child's passport and the applicant's passport together with the biometric letter.

[jay.ho]

just received this email

FLR(FP) EXPIRED IN JULY 2021

You applied to the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) as a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’.



The definition of a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’ provides, at paragraph (b), that the person must be without leave to enter or remain in the UK, unless this was granted under Appendix EU (see Annex 1 to Appendix EU).



You currently hold leave to enter or remain in the UK under the Immigration Rules



The effect of paragraph (b) is that a person who held UK immigration leave (other than under Appendix EU to the Immigration Rules) could not meet the Appendix EU definition of a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’.



However, in the case of R (Akinsanya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 1535 (Admin), the High Court ruled that paragraph (b), and the parts of the guidance – EU Settlement Scheme: person with a Zambrano right to reside – addressing that provision, were unlawful and ordered the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) to reconsider the relevant provisions of Appendix EU.



As a result of the High Court’s decision, the SSHD agreed, by way of a consent order dated 17 June 2021, that she will not determine applications made under Appendix EU on the basis that a person is or was a ‘person with a Zambrano right to reside’, where their case is affected by the decision in Akinsanya, until after she has completed her reconsideration of Appendix EU.



Given that you currently hold leave to remain in the UK until, your application is directly affected by the decision in Akinsanya.



The Court of Appeal dismissed the SSHD’s appeal on 25 February 2022 and the SSHD is considering the implications of the judgment. In the meantime, your application cannot yet be decided. A decision will be made as soon as possible once the SSHD has completed her reconsideration of Appendix EU, as required by the consent order.



The SSHD does not consider that any detriment arises as a result of the hold on your application. As you have made a valid EUSS Zambrano application, your certificate of application can be relied upon to confirm that your rights to work, study and (in England) rent a place to live are protected until the final determination of your EUSS Zambrano application (including the outcome of any appeal).