Zambrano Settled Status EU settlement scheme Paper Application Form - NEW

[marcidevpal]

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

Time limit
You only have 4 months after your last hearing to successfully apply to the European Court of Human Rights. If you wait until the last minute, and your application has errors, it seems they will say you missed the deadline. Many, many people have errors on their application. They have to fix the application and re-apply. So, submit as early as possible. Give yourself time to apply again if your first application was rejected.

Make the ask!
Make sure you ask the First-tier Tribunal judge and the Upper Tribunal judge to consider your human rights. Give them a chance to refuse to consider your human rights on your EUSS application. If you go to the European Court of Human Rights, and you never asked the UK judges to even consider your human rights, your application may not be allowed.

Costs
It is free to apply. If your application is accepted, you will have to find a lawyer to represent you. There are charities. Also, you don't have to use a UK lawyer.

[marcidevpal]

Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA)

https://ima-citizensrights.org.uk/report-complaint/
https://ima-citizensrights.org.uk/compl ... ur-rights/

The implementation and application of citizens' rights in the EU will be monitored by the European Commission acting in conformity with the Union Treaties. In the United Kingdom, this role will be fulfilled by an independent national authority.

This Authority will be granted equivalent powers to those of the European Commission

• to receive and investigate complaints from Union citizens and their family members,

• to conduct inquiries on its own initiative, and

• to bring legal actions before UK courts concerning alleged breaches by the administrative authorities of the UK of their obligations under the citizens' rights part of the Withdrawal Agreement.

Examples
06.06.2022 - IMA launches inquiry to investigate EUSS Certificate of Application delays
13.10.2022 - IMA files skeleton argument in judicial review claim against Home Office

The Authority and the European Commission shall inform each other annually through the Joint Committee established by the Withdrawal Agreement of the measures taken to implement and enforce the citizens' rights under the Agreement. Such information should include in particular the number and nature of complaints treated and any follow up legal action taken.

The IMA has received 154 complaints from 1 January to 31 August 2022. 118 were about residency. 108 were in England.

[marcidevpal]

More on The Independent Monitoring Authority for Citizens’ Rights Agreements (IMA)

• Funded by the UK Government

• The board of directors has six non-executive members.

• All board members are appointed by the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice.

The citizens’ panel was set up so that the IMA could hear directly from EU and EEA EFTA citizens and their family members. All members are aged 16 or over, live in the UK or Gibraltar and come from one of the 27 EU countries or Iceland, Liechtenstein, or Norway. If you would like to join the citizens’ panel at a future date, please email ima@citizensrights.org.uk

[marcidevpal]

CELIK

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov. ... 08592-2021

Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE RIMINGTON
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE O’RYAN

Between
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Appellant and METAJ (anonymity direction not made) Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr P Turner instructed by Imperium Chambers
For the Respondent: Mr T Melvin, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

8. Celik is good law and there is no indication of any grant of appeal on Celik to undermine that authority which was determined by a Presidential panel. We refuse, in the absence of good reason, therefore, to stay the appeal pending any further determination.

13. The Secretary of State’s decision did not encompass any decision on human rights and the Secretary of State specifically refused to consent to have any human rights submissions determined.

[marcidevpal]

CELIK

1.) In the months before the Celik ruling, many, many judges took human rights into account. How could so many be so wrong?

2.) Many lawyers continue to raise ECHR concerns in their EUSS appeals. They appear to be unconvinced by Celik. How could so many be so wrong?

3.) In light of the chaos, is it not time to refer the matter to a higher court? Would that not be the fair thing to do?

4.) At the very least, judges should not be able to just say "Celik" as if we were playing a card game and they dropped an ace. They should explain their position with regard to their responsibilities under the Human Rights Act, the ECHR, the Political Declaration and the Withdrawal Agreement. Just writing, Celik, leads to group think.

5.) The judges would ideally say, given the possibility Celik will be declared unlawful by a higher court, what happens to all those people who were wrongfully denied permanent residence? Do we have another situation like the EEA Regulations, which for years wrongly denied derivative card holders permanent residence? There has been no apology from the Home Office on that one, nor any attempt to make things right by the Courts.

[marcidevpal]

The Withdrawal Agreement

Zambrano carers who lived in the UK for five years prior to 31 December 2020 acquired the right of permanent residence.

The Withdrawal Agreement says that UK can not ignore or cancel rights acquired prior to the withdrawal date -with the exception of a few limited circumstances.

Article 13 Residence rights

4. The host State may not impose any limitations or conditions for obtaining, retaining or losing residence rights on the persons referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, other than those provided for in this Title. There shall be no discretion in applying the limitations and conditions provided for in this Title, other than in favour of the person concerned.

However, many believe the WA does not apply to Zambrano carers.

We can therefore only logically conclude one of two things, as far as I am concerned:

1.)The Withdrawal Agreement sought to universally cancel or invalidate the right of Zambrano carers (of British children) to permanent residence, or

2.) The Withdrawal Agreement applies to Zambrano carers of British children.

If we conclude scenario one, then the EU and the UK worked together to undermine the European Convention on Human Rights, along with United Nations commitments.

If we conclude scenario two, then Zambrano carers fall within scope of the Withdrawal Agreement and should be granted permanent residence - even if they had leave to remain under Appendix FM at the time of application.

I believe in the second scenario because the Withdrawal Agreement states the following:

Article 12 Non-discrimination

Within the scope of this Part, and without prejudice to any special provisions contained therein, any discrimination on grounds of nationality within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 18 TFEU shall be prohibited in the host State and the State of work in respect of the persons referred to in Article 10 of this Agreement.

To cancel the acquired rights of Zambrano carers simply because they are 3rd party nationals is discriminatory. Who is going to fix this situation?

[marcidevpal]

Europe Advice, ECAS, SOLVIT

https://ec.europa.eu/eu-rights/enquiry- ... ageCode=en
https://www.ecas.org/
https://ec.europa.eu/solvit/index_en.htm

Given that the Independent Monitoring Authority is not going to investigate individual complaints regarding the Withdrawal Agreement, and is not staffed by people from the EU, what other options exist?

Your Europe Advice is an EU advice service for the public, currently provided by the legal experts from the European Citizen Action Service (ECAS) operating under contract with the European Commission.

They

• provide free and personalised advice in the language of your choice, within a week

• clarify the European law that applies in your case

• explain how you can exercise your EU rights

Your Europe Advice works closely with SOLVIT, a problem-solving network that deals with problems between individuals or companies and the authorities in another country, in cases where there is a possible misapplication of EU law.

Your Europe Advice answers questions from…

• individuals who are nationals of the European Union, Norway, Iceland or Liechtenstein

• non-Europeans – if they are family members of an EU national or resident in an EU country

• businesses having their seat in the EU

• European/national information and advice services, on behalf of individuals

SOLVIT

The United Kingdom left the SOLVIT network on 31 December 2020. As a result, SOLVIT can no longer assist with UK-related problems that require co-operation or intervention of some parts of the United Kingdom administration. However, SOLVIT may be able to offer some assistance on a case-by-case basis on UK-related problems if the matter can be solved without involving the United Kingdom administration.


EU citizens’ EU rights in the UK
→ you can report a breach of your rights to the UK Independent Monitoring Authority.

UK citizens’ EU rights in the EU
→ you can report a breach of your rights to the European Commission.

[marcidevpal]

IMA versus European Commission

Neither the IMA nor the European Commission have to take action. The recommended procedure is to go before the national or local courts. If the local courts do not adhere to the Political Declaration or the Withdrawal Agreement, and the judges refuse to refer the matter to a higher court, there is a question around what can be done.

Under the European Convention on Human Rights, individuals must have the ability to bring legal action. The question becomes, is it right that individuals are unable to go beyond the local court in challenging the implementation of the Withdrawal Agreement and/or Political Declaration?

If my grievance is with one (or both) parties to the Withdrawal Agreement, then that grievance must surely be heard before a neutral party, the European Court of Justice?

Per the European Commission

If the Commission does formally follow up your complaint, its aim is a general one – to ensure the laws of the Member State in question are brought fully into line with EU law and correctly applied. If the European Court of Justice confirms a breach of EU law, the Member State in question has to take action, to remedy the breach.

[marcidevpal]

WA versus TFEU

The Withdrawal Agreement (WA) in an international agreement. People say Zambrano carers are NOT covered by WA. Zambrano carers were protected by a treaty called the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU (TFEU). Zambrano carers relied on rights under Article 20 of the TFEU prior to Brexit.

According to the European Parliament, EU Treaties are higher in the hierarchy than international agreements.

See International Agreements, page 2 - https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/ ... 282_EN.pdf

The mechanism for a preventive test of an international agreement's legality under a special
procedure set out in Article 218 TFEU does not preclude a subsequent review of its legality by the
CJEU, i.e. after it has entered already into force (Case C-25/94 Commission v Council). This is because in the hierarchy of acts constituting the EU legal order, international agreements are placed below the EU Treaties. Since the ratification of an international agreement takes place via an act of the Council, it is that act (of ratification) that is subject to the CJEU's review under Article 263 TFEU,2 not the treaty itself.

Rights acquired based on Article 20 TFEU cannot be voided by the Withdrawal Agreement because the WA is lower on the hierarchy and therefore less powerful than the TFEU.

Therefore, Zambrano carers who achieved five years residence prior to Brexit, remain entitled to permanent residence.

[marcidevpal]

Commission of the European Communities v Council of the European Union (1996)

Case C-25/94

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 25&from=EN

Summary
There is the Council, the Commission and the Community. The Council and Commission had an arrangement (International agreement) to make decisions about fishing policy. The European Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled that only the Community, or European Community, is responsible for making decisions about fishing policy. The CJEU annulled the international agreement.

Quotes

the Council and the Commission have entered into an arrangement which they intended as a binding commitment towards each other and under which, once a common position is established, the Commission is to exercise the right to vote in the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in areas falling essentially within the exclusive competence of the Community

a decision of the Council giving the Member States the right to vote for the adoption of an agreement to promote compliance with international conservation and management measures by fishing vessels on the high seas must be annulled because it is in breach of that arrangement

the subject-matter of such an agreement falls essentially within the exclusive competence of the Community as regards conservation of the biological resources of the sea.

How does this case relate to Zambrano carers?

This CJEU case shows the CJEU is willing to look at international agreements. Union Law ranks treaties above international agreements. The CJEU may conclude the actual scope of the Withdrawal Agreement is wider than people who exercised their freedom of movement rights under the 2004 Directive. This matter really should be referred to the CJEU.

[marcidevpal]

Putting it all together

In an ideal world:

• The Home Office would consider Article 8 human rights in its decisions and act accordingly, or

• The UK Judges would consider human rights in its decisions and make a human rights assessment, or

• The Home Office would grant permission for the judges to consider human rights (but that would defeat the purpose which is to deny people their human rights), or

• The UK judges would refer the question of whether or not human rights must be considered to the CJEU, or

• The Independent Monitoring Authority (IMA) would open an investigation into the lack of consideration of people's human rights and recommend the matter to the European Court of Justice (CJEU). The CJEU would then be able to tell the UK to consider human rights.

Given that they stopped consdering human rights around September last year, and we are heading in to February, it seems the IMA will not take any action.

The question becomes, if a matter SHOULD go to the CJEU but is blocked by the IMA and the UK courts, what should happen?

[marcidevpal]

SSHD v NOEL

Heard at Field House
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On 3 August 2022
On 29 September 2022

Before
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALLEN
DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CHAPMAN

Between
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Appellant
and NOEL (ANONYMITY DIRECTION NOT made) Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr A Eaton, counsel instructed by Southwark Law Centre
For the Respondent: Mr P. Deller, Home Office Presenting Officer

1. The Respondent applied for leave to remain under the EUSS as the sole carer of a British citizen child. This application was refused in a decision and the Respondent appealed against this decision to the First tier Tribunal.

2. In a decision and reasons promulgated on 27 September 2021, Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Neville allowed the Respondent’s appeal on the basis that the decision of the SSHD was not in accordance with the residence scheme immigration rules.

12.5. Permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal was granted solely in relation to the fact that the SSHD had obtained permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal. However, in a judgment dated 25 January 2022, whilst Underhill LJ preferred the submissions on behalf of the SSHD with regard to ground 1, the effect of the Zambrano jurisprudence, he upheld the judgment of Mostyn J as to the SSHD’s erroneous approach to regulation 16 of the EEA Regulations, holding that persons with limited leave to remain are entitled to a derivative right to remain, alongside their limited leave, if they otherwise satisfy certain specified criteria.

12.8. Whilst we decided that it would be pertinent to include consideration of the effect of Velaj, in this particular case ultimately we have concluded that it makes no material difference, given the absence of any dispute of fact particularly as to the lack of availability of any alternative carer for the Respondent’s British daughter.

Decision
13. We find no error of law in the decision and reasons of First tier Tribunal Judge Neville and his decision is upheld.

The judges appear to be saying that any Zambrano carer should be granted residence under the immigration rules - even though the Home Office said that the immigration rules do not allow Zambrano carers who have leave to remain under Appendix FM. The cases are not applied consistently. Zambrano carers should be treated equally. At the very least, the judges should ask the Home Office to explain why and evaluate the lawfulness of the decision. It should not be irrational or discriminatory.

[marcidevpal]

IMA - LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

https://ima-citizensrights.org.uk/inqui ... oceedings/

We are able to bring or intervene in legal proceedings (legal cases) where we consider it appropriate to do so in order to promote the adequate and effective implementation or application of Part 2 of the Withdrawal Agreement and Part 2 of the EEA EFTA Separation Agreement.

The factors we consider before using our litigation powers are set out in Volume 5 of the Operational Guidance. We will only intervene in a case where we are satisfied that the IMA’s contribution will add value to the proceedings and assist the court in its determination.

Whilst we are not able to intervene in every case, we are always keen to hear from practitioners, organisations and individuals who are involved in legal proceedings which concern citizens’ Part 2 rights. Individual cases could, for example, highlight a wider issue that we may wish to investigate further. In the event you would like us to be aware of any proceedings or potential proceedings that you are involved in, please let us know by emailing IMA@ima-citizensrights.org.uk.

Information about all our legal action to date can be found in our news section.

INQUIRIES

We may conduct an inquiry for one of three reasons:

• as a result of a complaint or series of complaints

• as a result of our own monitoring and intelligence gathering

• following a request from a Secretary of State (SoS), Scottish Minister, Welsh Minister or Executive Office in Northern Ireland

We will look for systemic failings to ensure the fair treatment of EU, EEA and EFTA citizens and their family members.

We will not carry out an inquiry unless we have reasonable grounds to conclude that a failure has or is about to occur.

We will set out our concerns to the relevant public body with regards to the way they have interpreted or implemented legal requirements.

Following an inquiry, we will publish reports which set out our conclusions and any recommendations for the public body to address the issue raised.  The public body will be expected to confirm what actions they will be taking to each recommendation.

We've launched our first Inquiry

The IMA has launched its first Inquiry into the EUSS Certificate of Application delays

If we believe there may have been a failure or imminent failure in the way in which a UK authority has implemented the citizens’ rights agreements, we can use our powers of inquiry to hold public bodies to account.

COA Delays? Really??? What about human rights? What about Celik?

[Owotonia]

 Hello House I applied for Zambrano in July 2021 , I got my COA IN 2022 I just got a reply from the home office that I should Submit additional documents and am a single mum I have not seen him since 2021
WHAT DO I DO?
The HO reply
 We are contacting you as a named helper in regard to an application under the EU Settlement Scheme.
 
Thank you for your client's applications under the EU Settlement Scheme. We are in the process of considering the application(s) and we require some additional information or evidence from you to help us to make sure we reach the correct decision.
 
You must reply within 14 days, or your application could be decided based on the evidence we have available.
 
We are therefore writing to ask you to provide the following additional evidence to help us consider whether your client meet the requirements for settled status (indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (limited leave to enter or remain).
 
Primary care
Evidence that you are the primary carer of the British citizen ******** ********we require evidence such as:
 
* A letter from their school in which it shows how long they have been enrolled there for and details of any involvement you have in their school lives such as taking them to and picking them up from school and attending parent's evenings. You can get this evidence by contacting the school directly and asking for a letter. Please note if your child has attended more than one school during the period you are relying on then please contact their previous school(s) to get the same evidence.
 
* A letter from your local GP practice in which it shows how long you and your child have been registered there and any details of appointments you may have taken them to during the relevant period you rely on for example a letter of the doctor stating this or a request for your child's medical record could also show this.
 
* A letter from your local dental surgery in which it shows how long you and your child have been registered there and any details of appointments you may have taken them to during the relevant period you rely on.
 
* Letters from the NHS regarding your child such as any appointment they have had to attend
 
* If applicable, details of other care/support arrangements in place for them.  Please include any other evidence, confirming that you have been the primary carer of your sponsor.  You can also include details of your day-to-day involvement in their life. You must also include evidence that the British citizen would be unable to remain in the UK if you were required to leave for an indefinite period.
 
The evidence must cover the following period(s):
* June 2020 to January 2023
 
 
You have stated in your application form that you are a sole primary carer, your daughter who was born in December 2019 and your son both have the same father listed on their birth certificates therefore please can you submit the following:
 
* Evidence of the British citizen's other parent's involvement in their lives.  Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
 
* Please provide the other parent's address / evidence of any contact or involvement they have with the British citizen's including details of when they last had contact with them
 
* Please confirm what contact your child has with their other parent and the date they last had contact with them and provide evidence of this. Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
 
* If applicable, please explain why the British citizen's other parent is not be a suitable alternative carer should you be required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.
* Details of any other alternative carers available to the child, for example grandparents / siblings.
 
 
 
If you are unable to provide any of this evidence, please explain this clearly in your reply to this email.

[Owotonia]

This application was for Pre settlement please I need advice
Thank you

[marcidevpal]

You submitted an application.

The Home Office asked you to submit further documentation.

The Home Office said if you do not have the documentation, you should respond to them and explain why.

[Owotonia]

You submitted an application.

The Home Office asked you to submit further documentation.

The Home Office said if you do not have the documentation, you should respond to them and explain why.

Their dad is absent from their life, I have the NHS letters, Gp reports, I don’t have dentist cos I don’t take them there, my daughter just clocked 3yrs she would be starting school next week I hope this won’t jeopardise my chances pls advise
Thank you

[marcidevpal]

They are deciding

whether your client meet the requirements for settled status (indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (limited leave to enter or remain).

They want you to prove 

you are the primary carer of the British citizen

Your additional evidence

must cover the following period(s):
* June 2020 to January 2023

 
Pay attention to this part

* Please confirm what contact your child has with their other parent and the date they last had contact with them and provide evidence of this. Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
* If applicable, please explain why the British citizen's other parent is not be a suitable alternative carer should you be required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.
* Details of any other alternative carers available to the child, for example grandparents / siblings.

It sounds like you are clearly the primary carer of your British children. It seems you have (at least some) evidence for the required period. The key is to explain in writing why no one else in the UK can be the primary carer of your child(ren).

If they refuse your application because they do not believe you are a Zambrano carer (which seems unlikely), you can always appeal to the First-tier Tribunal and explain your situation to the judge.

Someone else may have suggestions...Hope that helps!

[Tina87]

They are deciding

whether your client meet the requirements for settled status (indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (limited leave to enter or remain).

They want you to prove 

you are the primary carer of the British citizen

Your additional evidence

must cover the following period(s):
* June 2020 to January 2023

 
Pay attention to this part

* Please confirm what contact your child has with their other parent and the date they last had contact with them and provide evidence of this. Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
* If applicable, please explain why the British citizen's other parent is not be a suitable alternative carer should you be required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.
* Details of any other alternative carers available to the child, for example grandparents / siblings.

It sounds like you are clearly the primary carer of your British children. It seems you have (at least some) evidence for the required period. The key is to explain in writing why no one else in the UK can be the primary carer of your child(ren).

If they refuse your application because they do not believe you are a Zambrano carer (which seems unlikely), you can always appeal to the First-tier Tribunal and explain your situation to the judge.

Someone else may have suggestions...Hope that helps!

Please how long does it takes for appeal to be replied? When I submitted, they said 10working days. But its now 3months.

[Tina87]

They are deciding

whether your client meet the requirements for settled status (indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (limited leave to enter or remain).

They want you to prove 

you are the primary carer of the British citizen

Your additional evidence

must cover the following period(s):
* June 2020 to January 2023

 
Pay attention to this part

* Please confirm what contact your child has with their other parent and the date they last had contact with them and provide evidence of this. Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
* If applicable, please explain why the British citizen's other parent is not be a suitable alternative carer should you be required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.
* Details of any other alternative carers available to the child, for example grandparents / siblings.

It sounds like you are clearly the primary carer of your British children. It seems you have (at least some) evidence for the required period. The key is to explain in writing why no one else in the UK can be the primary carer of your child(ren).

If they refuse your application because they do not believe you are a Zambrano carer (which seems unlikely), you can always appeal to the First-tier Tribunal and explain your situation to the judge.

Someone else may have suggestions...Hope that helps!

Please how long does it takes for appeal to be replied? When I submitted, they said 10working days. But its now 3months.

[marcidevpal]

An appeal to the First-tier Tribunal can happen in person or on paper.

Scenario 1
If you ask for your appeal to be in person, they will write to tell you the day you go to the First-tier Tribunal.

Scenario 2
If you ask for an appeal on paper, the judge will look at your documents, and the documents sent by the Home Office.

I do not think either scenario can happen in just 10 days.

Perhaps you filed a judicial review?

Perhaps you filed an administrative review?

Perhaps you misunderstood what the email or letter said?

You can email the court and ask them for an update.

[Owotonia]

They are deciding

whether your client meet the requirements for settled status (indefinite leave to enter or remain) or pre-settled status (limited leave to enter or remain).

They want you to prove 

you are the primary carer of the British citizen

Your additional evidence

must cover the following period(s):
* June 2020 to January 2023

 
Pay attention to this part

* Please confirm what contact your child has with their other parent and the date they last had contact with them and provide evidence of this. Evidence can include, NHS letters, school letters etc.
* If applicable, please explain why the British citizen's other parent is not be a suitable alternative carer should you be required to leave the UK for an indefinite period.
* Details of any other alternative carers available to the child, for example grandparents / siblings.

It sounds like you are clearly the primary carer of your British children. It seems you have (at least some) evidence for the required period. The key is to explain in writing why no one else in the UK can be the primary carer of your child(ren).

If they refuse your application because they do not believe you are a Zambrano carer (which seems unlikely), you can always appeal to the First-tier Tribunal and explain your situation to the judge.

Someone else may have suggestions...Hope that helps!

Thank you marcidevpal
He was never in their lives all he did was follow me to get birth certificate and apply for their British passport since then I have net seen him, the confusing part is i don’t even have any evidence of him with the children. Pls what do I do now

[marcidevpal]

I would create a proper letter to set the record straight once and for all.

You can even think of it as a witness statement.

Here is an example. I just thought of this quickly, so don't use it as a copy and paste. It's just to give you an idea of what I am saying. You want a proper letter that you can show to anyone who asks. You can update the letter every year or so if they keep asking you the same question. This way, you have a consistent, complete explanation. You can show this letter to the judge, in case you need to file an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal later on.

01 February 2023

Dear Home Office,

I write further to your email dated 01 January 2023 in which you requested an explanation of the role my children's father plays in their lives.

Background

Bob is a citizen of Country A, born on 1st January 1990. I am a citizen of Country B, born on 1st February 1993. We met in London in March 2001. (I entered the UK on a student visa in May 2000.)

Our children

We had our first child in Birmingham in May 2012. We had our second child in November 2015.

Bob's interaction with his children

Bob left the family home in May 2017. I have not seen him since he left. My children have not had contact with him. We have no contact information for him. We do not anticipate he will be in touch in the near future, or ever. The emergency contact for our children is a neighbour.

I hope this letter answers your questions. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via email on me@gmail.com or via phone on +44 12345678.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Sincerely,
An Amazing Single Mother who happens to be a Zambrano carer

Other people may have suggestions....

[Owotonia]

I would create a proper letter to set the record straight once and for all.

You can even think of it as a witness statement.

Here is an example. I just thought of this quickly, so don't use it as a copy and paste. It's just to give you an idea of what I am saying. You want a proper letter that you can show to anyone who asks. You can update the letter every year or so if they keep asking you the same question. This way, you have a consistent, complete explanation. You can show this letter to the judge, in case you need to file an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal later on.

01 February 2023

Dear Home Office,

I write further to your email dated 01 January 2023 in which you requested an explanation of the role my children's father plays in their lives.

Background

Bob is a citizen of Country A, born on 1st January 1990. I am a citizen of Country B, born on 1st February 1993. We met in London in March 2001. (I entered the UK on a student visa in May 2000.)

Our children

We had our first child in Birmingham in May 2012. We had our second child in November 2015.

Bob's interaction with his children

Bob left the family home in May 2017. I have not seen him since he left. My children have not had contact with him. We have no contact information for him. We do not anticipate he will be in touch in the near future, or ever. The emergency contact for our children is a neighbour.

I hope this letter answers your questions. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via email on me@gmail.com or via phone on +44 12345678.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Sincerely,
An Amazing Single Mother who happens to be a Zambrano carer

Other people may have suggestions....

Thank you soo much @marcidevpal this is helpful

[Owotonia]

I would create a proper letter to set the record straight once and for all.

You can even think of it as a witness statement.

Here is an example. I just thought of this quickly, so don't use it as a copy and paste. It's just to give you an idea of what I am saying. You want a proper letter that you can show to anyone who asks. You can update the letter every year or so if they keep asking you the same question. This way, you have a consistent, complete explanation. You can show this letter to the judge, in case you need to file an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal later on.

01 February 2023

Dear Home Office,

I write further to your email dated 01 January 2023 in which you requested an explanation of the role my children's father plays in their lives.

Background

Bob is a citizen of Country A, born on 1st January 1990. I am a citizen of Country B, born on 1st February 1993. We met in London in March 2001. (I entered the UK on a student visa in May 2000.)

Our children

We had our first child in Birmingham in May 2012. We had our second child in November 2015.

Bob's interaction with his children

Bob left the family home in May 2017. I have not seen him since he left. My children have not had contact with him. We have no contact information for him. We do not anticipate he will be in touch in the near future, or ever. The emergency contact for our children is a neighbour.

I hope this letter answers your questions. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via email on me@gmail.com or via phone on +44 12345678.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Sincerely,
An Amazing Single Mother who happens to be a Zambrano carer

Other people may have suggestions....

Thank you soo much @marcidevpal this is helpful

The email and No is not Consistent