Unintentionally omitted council tax liability order in previous applications

[ilovegrapes14]

Hi, sorry to intrude on this thread but I'm in a very similar situation. Currently 30 years old, arrived in the UK at 11 years old, was first given leave to remain under the 10-Year Private Life route when I was 22 in June 2015. I have now completed 7.8 legal years under this route, but unlike mumakk, this includes the time waiting for decisions in between extensions (though I made an in-time application every time). Also unlike mumakk, I am currently unemployed as I was in my final year of my undergraduate degree but had to suspend my studies last month (will be back in September) due to health issues. I'm so happy for you and your good news mumakk, but I do wonder if your essential worker status contributed to the favourable decision. I do also have a British child (and husband).

I am due to make my next extension application in July, though of course preferably I would apply for ILR instead.

To summarise, if all the below is true then your ILR should succeed:

• you were first given a visa on the basis of your private life when you were aged between 18 and 24 and you met the half-life test
• you initially arrived in the UK as a child
• you have lived in the UK for at least 5 continuous years

zimba, your quote above seems to be from this page: https://www.gov.uk/apply-indefinite-lea ... ligibility but it is written under the subheading 'children and young adults', which makes me think I need to be under 25?

Also, regarding PL 14.1.: An applicant who has, or last had, permission to stay on the private life route as a child, or young adult who met the half-life test under PL 4.1....

My 'last' permission was given when I was 28 so not because I was under 25 and passed the half-life test, but it was because I was PREVIOUSLY given permission as a young adult who passed the half-life test.

I am conflicted on the wording of PL 14.1. because it says 'LAST HAD' which feels very specific to the most recent grant of leave, rather than 'previously' which could encompass all the grant of leaves that came before.

[zimba]

The extension is possible (even if above 25) if you were first granted leave before turning 25. Here is what the guide says:

Applications for extension of permission to stay as a young person
A person applying for an extension of permission on the private life route who was
initially granted permission under either Appendix Private Life or paragraph 276ADE
in Part 7 may no longer be in the young person age bracket (for example, they may
be 25 or over) at the date of application. The applicant will be eligible to extend their
permission to stay under PL 10.2 if they were initially granted as a person who was
18 or over but under 25 years old and met the half of life test when first granted
permission to stay on the private life route.

Further consideration
Those individuals who arrived as children and are applying over the age of 18, but
do not meet the requirement of having lived in the UK for at least half of their life may
still qualify. They may wish to apply as an adult who has lived continuously in the UK
for less than 20 years and will need to demonstrate there would be very significant
obstacles to their integration into the country where they would have to live if
required to leave the UK. They will not be eligible though if they have lodged a
protection or asylum claim which has been declared inadmissible.

You got it when you were 22, so you met the half of life test then. You should be able to get ILR without the need for an extension

Guide: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... e_life.pdf

[ilovegrapes14]

Thank you so much zimba. I read through the publication but it only mentions 'initially granted leave as a young person who passed the half-life test' under the context of extension.

For ILR, I only have PL 14.1. to go on and I can't get past the 'last had' wording, which reads as if to qualify for ILR under the new rules, I need to be max 26-27 years old so that my literal last leave was granted when I was under 25 years old.

If I apply for ILR and am rejected, would you know how likely it is that they will vary my leave for an extension rather than outright reject it and make me pay in full for a new extension application?

Also, would Section 3C apply whilst I await a decision for ILR if the ILR ends up being rejected, because then that would mean that the application was never 'valid,' right?

I appreciate any insight you're able to give. Thank you!

[bailfyr44]

You should apply - regardless of whether the last had matters or not.

You will get an extension if they deem you ineligible for ILR.

[zimba]

The rules require you to pass the half-of-life test during an extension. The wording in the guide then says you will be treated 'as if you were under 25' and so you pass the test because of initial leave. That means technically you passed that test during the extension (last grant of leave) and therefore requirements under PL 4.1 are satisfied. So I believe you should not fail under PL 14.1.

Section 3C will always kick in when there is a pending in-time application and your leave expires.

[ilovegrapes14]

Hi bailfyr44, I actually went back to post an update on this thread before you responded, but thanks so much for your insight regarding their extending my leave if I'm rejected for ILR. I hope things have gone well with your application?

On the page to apply for settlement, here: https://visas-immigration.service.gov.u ... 648724958 it actually states what zima was referring to all along!

It says:
You can apply to settle in the UK after 5 years if you were first granted permission on the private life route as a child or as a young adult (aged between 18 and 24) and you have lived in the UK for more than half your life. If you are aged under 18 and are applying to settle on the basis of your private life, you must apply on a different form."

I will definitely be going for this now! What a relief. Thanks so much to both of you.

[zimba]

I think that is also fair for such a person, given that you are expected to have lived half your life by the very first grant.

[ilovegrapes14]

Hi, I am applying for ILR and it is only now that I realised that the question, 'have you ever had a civil court judgement made against you' applies to me as I had a liability order issued for council tax arrears in 2017 (settled in full that same year). I had previously misinterpreted this question as asking if I've ever had a CCJ, and I knew that a liability order was not a CCJ, hence why I'd selected 'no' in my 2 previous further leave applications.

Please can someone advise me on what to do because I want to declare this in my ILR application but I'm worried that my character will be called into question for not declaring this before. Would explaining why I made the oversight be enough? Or do I now need to give further proof of my improved financial reliability, like my credit report showing no missed payments in the last 5 years?

[zimba]

CCJs and Liability Orders are both issued by civil courts. The only difference is that Liability Order is given to councils to recover any debt due like non-payment of the council tax. CCJs are issued for other types of debt you owed in civil cases. Not declaring these is not a big deal at all but you are advised to do so.

Note they do not have any effect on ILR:

A civil order will not normally result in refusal or cancellation of permission unless the person has:
• been convicted of breaching the civil order
• received an order or orders which would suggest a pattern of behaviour that means they are a persistent offender

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... nality.pdf

[ilovegrapes14]

You are my guardian angel, zimba! Thank you so much. I will declare it alongside proof that it was paid in full.