Zambrano Settled Status EU settlement scheme Paper Application Form - NEW

[Lagosbos]

Sorry i meant after 4 years. I submitted a paper application. Can't see anything online relating to this. Thank you

https://www.gov.uk/view-prove-immigration-status

[apollo_alpha]

Hi everyone

Good afternoon.
Please kindly advice.
I renewed my 10 year parent route last year July 2021. I then made an application for EUSS in March and I have been sent COA which says entitled to benefit. Now this morning I get an email that I have been granted 5 year leave which I never applied for 5 years and no recourse to public funds. My child is British and eventhough I never claimed benefit I just got the child benefit( just did not need ). Is this not an error. Cause I don't understand.

Thank you

I am really surprised they granted you 5years limited leave. The max they grant is 2.5years for limited leave. I know the pre-settled status is 5years. So please can you check whether the 5years you were granted is for the parent route or if it is pre-settled status?

[Lagosbos]

That was the response i received following my email to their Director. For the highlighted reason no one understands what angle they will be taking in the forthcoming changes in Appendix EU. They are also refusing few people where the other parent (carer) has a settled status in light of the Velaj case which is due to be heard at the appeal court sometime in June, but that is arguable in court as its not in accordance with Paragraph 16 (8&9) of the EEA reg nor appendix EU. We are waiting to see what happens on the 25th April.

For those who might have been refused based on the afore mentioned reason you need include the following in your argument. The words “both primary carers” have been added to reg 16 (5) to reflect the effect of reg 16 (9) and the words in italics in (8) (b)(ii) were deleted by operation of the Immigration (EEA) (amendment) Regulations 2018 SI2018/801. Prior to that amendment, the appellant would not have been entitled to a derivative right of residence as his wife is an exempt person.
13. The explanatory memorandum to SI 2018/801 provides:
Paragraph 10 of the Schedule to these Regulations amends the 2016 Regulations so as to give effect to the judgment of the CJEU in the case of C—133/15 Chavez-Vilchez and others. It does so by amending regulation 16(8)(b) of the 2016 Regulations to allow a person to be recognised as a "primary carer" if they are the sole carer or if they share equally the care with another person, regardless of whether that person is an "exempt person" within the meaning of regulation 16(7)(c).

Hello Lagosbos,

Hope you are well. I am in the process of applying for Zambrano EU Settlement Scheme. I had FLR fp but has expired in 2020. I've submitted PSS application but was denied. I am married to British guy and we have a British child. He works full time and I am a full time mom.

I have done some research about the potential issue of my application as a Zambrano carer as I am sharing responsibility with my husband.

Do you think Regulations 16(5) would help strengthen my application? Can you help me understand this regulation? My apology but my comprehension on laws and regulations is really limited.

Thank you in advance.

There is no part of Zambrano principle that exempts someone sharing care responsibility for EU/British Citizen with another person. HO will always want to play different games, but its down to you fight it out in court. I have similar case in court waiting to be heard later this month and I will be posting the outcome on here. All the best!

[apollo_alpha]

That was the response i received following my email to their Director. For the highlighted reason no one understands what angle they will be taking in the forthcoming changes in Appendix EU. They are also refusing few people where the other parent (carer) has a settled status in light of the Velaj case which is due to be heard at the appeal court sometime in June, but that is arguable in court as its not in accordance with Paragraph 16 (8&9) of the EEA reg nor appendix EU. We are waiting to see what happens on the 25th April.

For those who might have been refused based on the afore mentioned reason you need include the following in your argument. The words “both primary carers” have been added to reg 16 (5) to reflect the effect of reg 16 (9) and the words in italics in (8) (b)(ii) were deleted by operation of the Immigration (EEA) (amendment) Regulations 2018 SI2018/801. Prior to that amendment, the appellant would not have been entitled to a derivative right of residence as his wife is an exempt person.
13. The explanatory memorandum to SI 2018/801 provides:
Paragraph 10 of the Schedule to these Regulations amends the 2016 Regulations so as to give effect to the judgment of the CJEU in the case of C—133/15 Chavez-Vilchez and others. It does so by amending regulation 16(8)(b) of the 2016 Regulations to allow a person to be recognised as a "primary carer" if they are the sole carer or if they share equally the care with another person, regardless of whether that person is an "exempt person" within the meaning of regulation 16(7)(c).

Hello Lagosbos,

Hope you are well. I am in the process of applying for Zambrano EU Settlement Scheme. I had FLR fp but has expired in 2020. I've submitted PSS application but was denied. I am married to British guy and we have a British child. He works full time and I am a full time mom.

I have done some research about the potential issue of my application as a Zambrano carer as I am sharing responsibility with my husband.

Do you think Regulations 16(5) would help strengthen my application? Can you help me understand this regulation? My apology but my comprehension on laws and regulations is really limited.

Thank you in advance.

There is no part of Zambrano principle that exempts someone sharing care responsibility for EU/British Citizen with another person. HO will always want to play different games, but its down to you fight it out in court. I have similar case in court waiting to be heard later this month and I will be posting the outcome on here. All the best!

The court of appeal have promulgated the decision yesterday. The case of Velaj https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/767.html.

[Kmt2014]

Thank you everyone for the reply. So I was on 10 year parent route . I applied for extension under 10 parent route last year July. Then in March this year I applied for zambrano and got COA 2 weeks ago . Then today I got an email with attachment that I have been granted 5 year parent leave and that after 5 years under this route I can apply for indefinite. I never applied for 5 years. Also no recourse to public funds. Am surprised confused. .thank you

[apollo_alpha]

Thank you everyone for the reply. So I was on 10 year parent route . I applied for extension under 10 parent route last year July. Then in March this year I applied for zambrano and got COA 2 weeks ago . Then today I got an email with attachment that I have been granted 5 year parent leave and that after 5 years under this route I can apply for indefinite. I never applied for 5 years. Also no recourse to public funds. Am surprised confused. .thank you

So just so we understand. Were you granted leave already on the 10-year parent route last year when you applied? If yes, when did they grant you the leave?

[Lagosbos]

That was the response i received following my email to their Director. For the highlighted reason no one understands what angle they will be taking in the forthcoming changes in Appendix EU. They are also refusing few people where the other parent (carer) has a settled status in light of the Velaj case which is due to be heard at the appeal court sometime in June, but that is arguable in court as its not in accordance with Paragraph 16 (8&9) of the EEA reg nor appendix EU. We are waiting to see what happens on the 25th April.

For those who might have been refused based on the afore mentioned reason you need include the following in your argument. The words “both primary carers” have been added to reg 16 (5) to reflect the effect of reg 16 (9) and the words in italics in (8) (b)(ii) were deleted by operation of the Immigration (EEA) (amendment) Regulations 2018 SI2018/801. Prior to that amendment, the appellant would not have been entitled to a derivative right of residence as his wife is an exempt person.
13. The explanatory memorandum to SI 2018/801 provides:
Paragraph 10 of the Schedule to these Regulations amends the 2016 Regulations so as to give effect to the judgment of the CJEU in the case of C—133/15 Chavez-Vilchez and others. It does so by amending regulation 16(8)(b) of the 2016 Regulations to allow a person to be recognised as a "primary carer" if they are the sole carer or if they share equally the care with another person, regardless of whether that person is an "exempt person" within the meaning of regulation 16(7)(c).

Hello Lagosbos,

Hope you are well. I am in the process of applying for Zambrano EU Settlement Scheme. I had FLR fp but has expired in 2020. I've submitted PSS application but was denied. I am married to British guy and we have a British child. He works full time and I am a full time mom.

I have done some research about the potential issue of my application as a Zambrano carer as I am sharing responsibility with my husband.

Do you think Regulations 16(5) would help strengthen my application? Can you help me understand this regulation? My apology but my comprehension on laws and regulations is really limited.

Thank you in advance.

There is no part of Zambrano principle that exempts someone sharing care responsibility for EU/British Citizen with another person. HO will always want to play different games, but its down to you fight it out in court. I have similar case in court waiting to be heard later this month and I will be posting the outcome on here. All the best!

The court of appeal have promulgated the decision yesterday. The case of Velaj https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/767.html.

Thanks Apollo Aplpha, I had an interest in this case (Velaj v SSHS) as I also have something similar waiting to be heard at the FTT.

[Lagosbos]

Thank you everyone for the reply. So I was on 10 year parent route . I applied for extension under 10 parent route last year July. Then in March this year I applied for zambrano and got COA 2 weeks ago . Then today I got an email with attachment that I have been granted 5 year parent leave and that after 5 years under this route I can apply for indefinite. I never applied for 5 years. Also no recourse to public funds. Am surprised confused. .thank you

Makes sense, You must have been granted leave to remain on the 5 year route which has reset your clock for Indefinite. It must have been granted as result of meeting the relevant requirement under the rules i.e English Language and adequate accommodation requirement. Technically you will still have to extend one more time before applying for ILR.

[Kmt2014]

Yes. I was granted leave under 10 year route 2019 so I applied for extension last year. And today they said I have been granted 5 year parent leave. Which I did not apply. I also have COA for zambrano. I dont understand really

[Lagosbos]

Yes. I was granted leave under 10 year route 2019 so I applied for extension last year. And today they said I have been granted 5 year parent leave. Which I did not apply. I also have COA for zambrano. I dont understand really

You don't get to choose what route you are granted for applications for LTR it is at the discretion of the caseworker to decide what you are granted based on how you meet the relevant rules.

[Modesire]

Good afternoon All

Please advise

I was refused Zambrano application 2020 cuz I just 2.5 years LTR so I submitted another application close to the end my LTR which is 29/04/22 (My LTR end of the 10/5/22) so I did biometric on the 4/5/22 and got COA 9/5/22.

To my surprise I got this email from the caseworker today


You held, at 31 December 2020, leave to enter or remain in the UK under Family/Private Life until 10 May 2022.

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 held leave to remain in the UK until 10 May 2022, your application is directly affected by the decision in Akinsanya.

What do you advise I should do please

[Modesire]

Good afternoon All

Please advise

I was refused Zambrano application 2020 cuz I just 2.5 years LTR so I submitted another application close to the end my LTR which is 29/04/22 (My LTR end of the 10/5/22) so I did biometric on the 4/5/22 and got COA 9/5/22.

To my surprise I got this email from the caseworker today


You held, at 31 December 2020, leave to enter or remain in the UK under Family/Private Life until 10 May 2022.

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 held leave to remain in the UK until 10 May 2022, your application is directly affected by the decision in Akinsanya.

What do you advise I should do please

[to be free]

Good afternoon All

Please advise

I was refused Zambrano application 2020 cuz I just 2.5 years LTR so I submitted another application close to the end my LTR which is 29/04/22 (My LTR end of the 10/5/22) so I did biometric on the 4/5/22 and got COA 9/5/22.

To my surprise I got this email from the caseworker today


You held, at 31 December 2020, leave to enter or remain in the UK under Family/Private Life until 10 May 2022.

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 held leave to remain in the UK until 10 May 2022, your application is directly affected by the decision in Akinsanya.

What do you advise I should do please

Nothing much. This is the email almost everyone received.

Just grab yourself a very comfortable chair and join the waiting club

[warid6955321]

Court of Appeal confirms Zambrano applications must be based on facts, not assumptions
In the case of Velaj v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWCA Civ 767, the Court of Appeal has confirmed that Zambrano applications always require factual inquiries as to what would happen to the British dependant if their primary carer(s) indeed left the UK. In the case of joint primary carers, it must be shown — rather than assumed — that both carers would leave the country.

Background
The Upper Tribunal gave judgment on Mr Velaj’s appeal last year, and Iain’s post sets out the background, facts and law in detail, so I won’t repeat them here.

In summary, Mr Velaj was the joint primary carer of his British citizen children, together with his British citizen wife. His wife was clear that, if Mr Velaj were to leave the UK, she would stay behind with the children. Mr Velaj tried to argue that this shouldn’t matter: a literal interpretation of the EEA Regulations 2016 required the Home Office to assume that both he and his wife would leave the UK, rather than investigate whether that would be the reality. That would allow him to remain in the UK as a Zambrano carer.

The Court of Appeal disagreed. In the words of Lady Justice Andrews:

The focus is on whether the British Citizen dependant would be “unable” to remain in the UK “if” something happens – i.e. on what will happen to the child if the primary carer leaves (or both primary carers leave). In that context the word “if” requires the decision maker to consider the position of the child on the basis that something is (actually) going to happen. It does not require that premise to be purely hypothetical, let alone counterfactual. Given that the person asking themselves the question has to decide what in practice would happen to the child if that event occurred, it would make little sense to require them to make an assumption that the event will happen if it plainly will not…

“If the person left the UK for an indefinite period” could either mean “in the event that the person [in fact] left the UK for an indefinite period” or “on the hypothesis that the person will leave the UK for an indefinite period or “on the hypothesis that the person will leave the UK for an indefinite period (regardless of whether in fact he would do so)”. The former seems to me to be the more natural interpretation, and carries with it the necessary implication that the postulated event (here, leaving the UK) is realistic, and not just theoretical. At the risk of stating the obvious, a purely hypothetical event could have no impact, in practice, on the ability of the child or other British Citizen dependant to remain in the UK. [Paragraphs 47 and 48]

It therefore dismissed Mr Velaj’s appeal.

What does this mean in practice?
Of course, the EEA Regulations no longer apply in the UK post-Brexit, so you might wonder why any of this is relevant. The answer is that some Zambrano carers, who met the EEA Regulations by 31 December 2020, might still be able to apply for permission to stay under the EU Settlement Scheme. The way those Regulations are interpreted still matters.

On that note: the Home Office is due to publish its review of the EUSS Zambrano rules imminently, following on from the decision in Akinsanya v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWCA Civ 37. As the review is due out by 13 June, people who haven’t submitted an application yet would probably be wise to wait for that before making a decision as to whether it is worthwhile Similarly, anyone who has a pending application might want to see that review before deciding whether they should submit further evidence or representations.

For joint carers more specifically, Velaj is not the end of the road. They might still be able to meet the definition of “Zambrano carer”, so long as they can show that both the applicant and their partner would indeed leave the UK, such that their dependant would also have to leave.

[Kmt2014]

The waiting . We hope for positive outcome.

[annaoyin]

Sorry i meant after 4 years. I submitted a paper application. Can't see anything online relating to this. Thank you

https://www.gov.uk/view-prove-immigration-status

Congratulations dear, you can send your code for proof your status on a platform here. Rather just highlight email sent to you without your personal details so you can be advice accordingly.

[Kmt2014]

Thank you. I have checked status and showing COA.

[Shara111]

Thank you. I have checked status and showing COA.

That's much relief I would take it with both hands even they extend my visa only.
Cheers

[KRES]

That was the response i received following my email to their Director. For the highlighted reason no one understands what angle they will be taking in the forthcoming changes in Appendix EU. They are also refusing few people where the other parent (carer) has a settled status in light of the Velaj case which is due to be heard at the appeal court sometime in June, but that is arguable in court as its not in accordance with Paragraph 16 (8&9) of the EEA reg nor appendix EU. We are waiting to see what happens on the 25th April.

For those who might have been refused based on the afore mentioned reason you need include the following in your argument. The words “both primary carers” have been added to reg 16 (5) to reflect the effect of reg 16 (9) and the words in italics in (8) (b)(ii) were deleted by operation of the Immigration (EEA) (amendment) Regulations 2018 SI2018/801. Prior to that amendment, the appellant would not have been entitled to a derivative right of residence as his wife is an exempt person.
13. The explanatory memorandum to SI 2018/801 provides:
Paragraph 10 of the Schedule to these Regulations amends the 2016 Regulations so as to give effect to the judgment of the CJEU in the case of C—133/15 Chavez-Vilchez and others. It does so by amending regulation 16(8)(b) of the 2016 Regulations to allow a person to be recognised as a "primary carer" if they are the sole carer or if they share equally the care with another person, regardless of whether that person is an "exempt person" within the meaning of regulation 16(7)(c).

Hello Lagosbos,

Hope you are well. I am in the process of applying for Zambrano EU Settlement Scheme. I had FLR fp but has expired in 2020. I've submitted PSS application but was denied. I am married to British guy and we have a British child. He works full time and I am a full time mom.

I have done some research about the potential issue of my application as a Zambrano carer as I am sharing responsibility with my husband.

Do you think Regulations 16(5) would help strengthen my application? Can you help me understand this regulation? My apology but my comprehension on laws and regulations is really limited.

Thank you in advance.

There is no part of Zambrano principle that exempts someone sharing care responsibility for EU/British Citizen with another person. HO will always want to play different games, but its down to you fight it out in court. I have similar case in court waiting to be heard later this month and I will be posting the outcome on here. All the best!

The court of appeal have promulgated the decision yesterday. The case of Velaj https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/767.html.

Please do keep us posted of the outcome. Thanks for replying.

[KRES]

That was the response i received following my email to their Director. For the highlighted reason no one understands what angle they will be taking in the forthcoming changes in Appendix EU. They are also refusing few people where the other parent (carer) has a settled status in light of the Velaj case which is due to be heard at the appeal court sometime in June, but that is arguable in court as its not in accordance with Paragraph 16 (8&9) of the EEA reg nor appendix EU. We are waiting to see what happens on the 25th April.

For those who might have been refused based on the afore mentioned reason you need include the following in your argument. The words “both primary carers” have been added to reg 16 (5) to reflect the effect of reg 16 (9) and the words in italics in (8) (b)(ii) were deleted by operation of the Immigration (EEA) (amendment) Regulations 2018 SI2018/801. Prior to that amendment, the appellant would not have been entitled to a derivative right of residence as his wife is an exempt person.
13. The explanatory memorandum to SI 2018/801 provides:
Paragraph 10 of the Schedule to these Regulations amends the 2016 Regulations so as to give effect to the judgment of the CJEU in the case of C—133/15 Chavez-Vilchez and others. It does so by amending regulation 16(8)(b) of the 2016 Regulations to allow a person to be recognised as a "primary carer" if they are the sole carer or if they share equally the care with another person, regardless of whether that person is an "exempt person" within the meaning of regulation 16(7)(c).

Hello Lagosbos,

Hope you are well. I am in the process of applying for Zambrano EU Settlement Scheme. I had FLR fp but has expired in 2020. I've submitted PSS application but was denied. I am married to British guy and we have a British child. He works full time and I am a full time mom.

I have done some research about the potential issue of my application as a Zambrano carer as I am sharing responsibility with my husband.

Do you think Regulations 16(5) would help strengthen my application? Can you help me understand this regulation? My apology but my comprehension on laws and regulations is really limited.

Thank you in advance.

There is no part of Zambrano principle that exempts someone sharing care responsibility for EU/British Citizen with another person. HO will always want to play different games, but its down to you fight it out in court. I have similar case in court waiting to be heard later this month and I will be posting the outcome on here. All the best!

The court of appeal have promulgated the decision yesterday. The case of Velaj https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2022/767.html.

Please do keep us posted of the outcome. Thanks for replying.

[omar1978]

any updates? or they need more time?

[Minaseer]

Any update on the HO guidance on zambrano tht r to be published by 13th…why r they leaving it to last minute

[Eburnie27]

We are all waiting for the updates. It is playing with people's emotional state
From 25th April to 16th May to 13th; that is a vicious game of hide and seek. If only they could allow those of us whose BRP are already expired to apply for extension.
Put us out of our misery already HO and SSHD

[Eburnie27]

Any update on the HO guidance on zambrano tht r to be published by 13th…why r they leaving it to last minute

It is playing with our nerves...... it is sickening

[Eburnie27]

Any update on the HO guidance on zambrano tht r to be published by 13th…why r they leaving it to last minute

It is playing with our nerves...... it is sickening