5 years for ILR rule implemented

[K2004]

i suggest that we all wear working clothes as a suit and tie for example, so the world sees that we are professional and not just REFUGEE...

[grassvv]

I am surprised that a few people can digest the new changes in IM rules so quickly and so smoothly.

Once again, I want to say, just like some buddies said, it is not just one-more-year thing; neither, it is not just hundreds-bulks-money thing. The thing is we are being treated unfairly!

If we were told before we came here that we would not be able to apply PR until we can work as WP holders for 5 years, it would be fine because we were well informed and coming or not was our own decision. However, we were told we could apply PR after we work as WP holders for 4 years when we planned to come to the UK. And now, when we are almost finishing our 4 years services here we are told that rules changed, and we have to wait one more year! This IS unfair!

An evidence for this unfair treatment is that Marriage Spouse visa holders’ IM rules will remain to 2 years. (No offence to any Marriage Spouse visa holder.) But why? Obviously, because the other half of the couple is British!As to our WP holders…most of us have no rights to vote, so no threaten at all!

If this time they can implement the changes easily, I am sure new changes will be emerged in the short future. I will definitely write complain letters because I do not like to take the ‘unfair pill’ silently.

[lemess]

Lemess,

I think it is a big issue, last week all media has talked about the new point based immigration system.. i think this issue is as important as that...

I disagree. the points based immigration system is important to the general public as it represents a change in the way people are assessed for immigration.

This issue on the other hand only concerns people who are making a transition from work permits to ILR and some of them having to wait an additional 12 months - a minor constituency in the overall scheme of things. It is a big issue for the people affected but not for the public as a whole.

[djbabyboom]

I don't think this is an issue that will grab the papers as it affects only a minority and will not be seen as a big public issue.

Unless it will be emphasized that it creates a dangerous precedent of retrospective rule enforcement, and having this precedent will subsequently affect the UK citizen and their rights. Given we are the prospective UK citizens, how can we care less?

[Kavik]

It is like we have wasted our 4 years here with out getting settled in life.

I am surprised that a few people can digest the new changes in IM rules so quickly and so smoothly.

Once again, I want to say, just like some buddies said, it is not just one-more-year thing; neither, it is not just hundreds-bulks-money thing. The thing is we are being treated unfairly!

If we were told before we came here that we would not be able to apply PR until we can work as WP holders for 5 years, it would be fine because we were well informed and coming or not was our own decision. However, we were told we could apply PR after we work as WP holders for 4 years when we planned to come to the UK. And now, when we are almost finishing our 4 years services here we are told that rules changed, and we have to wait one more year! This IS unfair!

An evidence for this unfair treatment is that Marriage Spouse visa holders’ IM rules will remain to 2 years. (No offence to any Marriage Spouse visa holder.) But why? Obviously, because the other half of the couple is British!As to our WP holders…most of us have no rights to vote, so no threaten at all!

If this time they can implement the changes easily, I am sure new changes will be emerged in the short future. I will definitely write complain letters because I do not like to take the ‘unfair pill’ silently.

[lemess]

I don't think this is an issue that will grab the papers as it affects only a minority and will not be seen as a big public issue.

Unless it will be emphasized that it creates a dangerous precedent of retrospective rule enforcement, and having this precedent will subsequently affect the UK citizens and their rights.

Not quite sure you can make that case.

Rule enforcement is not really retrospective. The home office will argue that all they have changed is the eligibility criteria for new ILR applications. They are not enforcing anything retrospectively.

I suspect the thing to argue for is to ask for a longer transitional period than currently given and highliht the possible hardships to those caught by the change to allow more time to plan their circumstances around this application. A representation to increase this to lets say 12 months bolstered by evidence that it only involves a small number of people who would otherwise be subject to unfair hardships etc. would have a much higher chance of success than general agitation about unfair rules.

That way you're not fighting the rule but just want to negotiate a slightly longer adjustment period.

[K2004]

it is very unfair, its not only 12 months, it is 2 years until applying for British Citizenship, who knows what extra rules and cost will happen by then?

can somone take the lead in here and make a suggestions ? lets gather a list of who is interested in protesting first and then will think about the way to protest... I start the list with my name

1-K2004

[shoegazer]

I don't think this is an issue that will grab the papers as it affects only a minority and will not be seen as a big public issue.

Unless it will be emphasized that it creates a dangerous precedent of retrospective rule enforcement, and having this precedent will subsequently affect the UK citizen and their rights. Given we are the prospective UK citizens, how can we care less?

I think the majority of posters agree, the retrospective nature of this is what is egregious and unfair. Correct it only affects a (politically quiet, "safe") minority of constituents, but imagine if local councils were given powers to retroactively increase council tax because of changes in local government. This is what I chose to highlight in my letters to jcwi and the guardian:

[url]mailto:politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk[/url]

to lemess - I respect your opinions, I also think in the great scheme of things this will not be the first or greatest of injustices perpetrated on legal immigrants. However I will write anyway. And I hope you do too. We will need all the help we can get.

[Kavik]

Add me
kavik

it is very unfair, its not only 12 months, it is 2 years until applying for British Citizenship, who knows what extra rules and cost will happen by then?

can somone take the lead in here and make a suggestions ? lets gather a list of who is interested in protesting first and then will think about the way to protest... I start the list with my name

1-K2004

[basis]

I think in all fairness......there are many angles to this. No one here genuinly supports the decision nor does anyone want people to suffer whatever for one more year in waiting for ILR.

The govt which is democratically elected has made rules. There are democratic ways to report our dislking of it. Let's as a board support in whatever way we can people who suffer from this sudden change.

And stop the arguments on which country is better and which is not, how people can accept this and how they cannot, how UK is a bad country for immigrants and how it is not.

Let's not get emotional....lets try to find ways how we can come out of either by getting some reprieve for the people who would suffer badly due to the cut-off date and otherwise if that's not possible how we can help them constructively to overcome genuine issues.

Let's stop the bashing and beating the UK govt or each other. every one has their views and let's respect that....Let's see how we can help those who are affected by it the best and those who are affected need to focus on constructive ways to overcome it than spilling their anger, emotions....

While that's ok for a bit I think now we have reached page 15 and there is already enough of it. Let's focus our energies on what best we can make of the situaition.

Good luck. Would like to see moderators steer the discussion in the right way..........

[lemess]

I don't think this is an issue that will grab the papers as it affects only a minority and will not be seen as a big public issue.

Unless it will be emphasized that it creates a dangerous precedent of retrospective rule enforcement, and having this precedent will subsequently affect the UK citizen and their rights. Given we are the prospective UK citizens, how can we care less?

I think the majority of posters agree, the retrospective nature of this is what is egregious and unfair. Correct it only affects a (politically quiet, "safe") minority of constituents, but imagine if local councils were given powers to retroactively increase council tax because of changes in local government. This is what I chose to highlight in my letters to jcwi and the guardian:

[url]mailto:politics.editor@guardianunlimited.co.uk[/url]

to lemess - I respect your opinions, I also think in the great scheme of things this will not be the first or greatest of injustices perpetrated on legal immigrants. However I will write anyway. And I hope you do too. We will need all the help we can get.

I just don't think the 'injustice' angle is likely to get anyone anywhere.

Things will only change if there is either a public outcry or strong representation such that the HO feel the pressure to change things. As pointed out the former is unlikely.

Strong representation from MPs is the way to go but I think it should be in the form of a give and take negotiation of immigration groups with the HO rather than an adversarial approach.

As I said in my view what will work is some representation to increase the transitional period so that people have more time to adapt their life to the rules.

Obviously it is just my view but the worst case scenario in this case for an individual ( 12 extra months to ILR) does not appear drastic enough for this issue to raise a public outcry so I think a negotiated position is the only hope of bringin about any change.

[abcd1]

The original link can no longer be opened. I couldn't find any other source where this news was mentioned! All news say that new change should come to place from mid-2007

Looks like something very very fishy is going on...

[raina]

Maybe they have retracted this and now will apply the same from 2007!!!
I hope I hope I hope......

[MWazir]

Maybe they have retracted this and now will apply the same from 2007!!!
I hope I hope I hope......

You can still see the detailed document from here
http://www.official-documents.co.uk/doc ... 4/0974.pdf as laid before the parliment on the 13th of March

[lemess]

I think people are wrongly characterising this as retrospective enforcement which I don't think it is.

All that has happened is that the eligibility criteria for new ILR application has changed to demand a longer period of previous residence and the HO ( unfairly) have not given people on the cusp enough time to adjust and plan around this and more or less tried to steamroller this through.

Take this example - say the voting age were to increase from 18 to 19 on a particular day. Would it be seen as a grave injustice for the people who turned 18 just when this came into effect because they would have to wait one more year to vote ? I suspect not.

That's why I think the argument has to centre around the fact that the HO has not allowed enough time for people to adjust and not on the unfairness of "retrospective" rules.

[timefactor]

Is this happened or going to happen?

Take this example - say the voting age were to increase from 18 to 19 on a particular day. Would it be seen as a grave injustice for the people who turned 18 just when this came into effect because they would have to wait one more year to vote ? I suspect not.

[basis]

At this rate the title of this thread could be soon made 'Junk' or 'Miscellaneous'

[Chris]

Add me
kavik

it is very unfair, its not only 12 months, it is 2 years until applying for British Citizenship, who knows what extra rules and cost will happen by then?

can somone take the lead in here and make a suggestions ? lets gather a list of who is interested in protesting first and then will think about the way to protest... I start the list with my name

1-K2004

Writing user id would not really help. Can all who are against this retropective effect add their email address please.

kavik (-->email address)
1-K2004 (-->email address)
chrisp_2502@yahoo.co.uk

Maybe if someone can maintain an excel sheet for this as eventually

[basis]

I think better if people send PMs to one of you.. and that person can consolidate for want of better solution....else this thread could easily go to 100 pages if everyone starts to write their email ids....

And let's keep it in mind to apply enough caution and care while sharing contact details. Still feel mods can guide the whole thing instead of it taking its own turns....

[Kavik]

kavik[kkrayudu@yahoo.com]

Add me
kavik

it is very unfair, its not only 12 months, it is 2 years until applying for British Citizenship, who knows what extra rules and cost will happen by then?

can somone take the lead in here and make a suggestions ? lets gather a list of who is interested in protesting first and then will think about the way to protest... I start the list with my name

1-K2004

Wiring user id would not really help. Can all who are against this retropective effect add their email address please.

kavik (-->email address)
1-K2004 (-->email address)
chrisp_2502@yahoo.co.uk

Maybe if someone can maintain an excel sheet for this as eventually

[basis]

I think better if people send PMs to one of you.. and that person can consolidate for want of better solution....else this thread could easily go to 100 pages if everyone starts to write their email ids....

And let's keep it in mind to apply enough caution and care while sharing contact details. Still feel mods can guide the whole thing instead of it taking its own turns....

[timefactor]

Chris,

Posting e-mail addy in forums are not advisable, better to keep this in PMs

count me in - i will PM my e-mail to chris

thanks

Wiring user id would not really help. Can all who are against this retropective effect add their email address please.

kavik (-->email address)
1-K2004 (-->email address)
chrisp_2502

Maybe if someone can maintain an excel sheet for this as eventually

[Chess]

Guyz - as i wrote earlier; it is gonna be Impossible to reverse the rules.......

the best way forward is to 'exploit' the system and benefit as much as you can...

forexample if you are a Contractor charging £25/hr - then increase this to £35/hr to take account of the Injustice and inconvinience creatred by the new rules

[lemess]

Guyz - as i wrote earlier; it is gonna be Impossible to reverse the rules.......

the best way forward is to 'exploit' the system and benefit as much as you can...

forexample if you are a Contractor charging £25/hr - then increase this to £35/hr to take account of the Injustice and inconvinience creatred by the new rules

So let me get this right - clients will willingly pay an extra 40% hardship premium on your rate because of their sympathy with your situation under the new rules ?

Sounds ummmm not very likely

[Chess]

Guyz - as i wrote earlier; it is gonna be Impossible to reverse the rules.......

the best way forward is to 'exploit' the system and benefit as much as you can...

forexample if you are a Contractor charging £25/hr - then increase this to £35/hr to take account of the Injustice and inconvinience creatred by the new rules

So let me get this right - clients will willingly pay an extra 40% hardship premium on your rate because of their sympathy with your situation under the new rules ?

Sounds ummmm not very likely

If you offer an extremely valuable service - then they must pay unless you opearte as a CHARITY!!!!!

charge high fees if you can to compessate fopr the additional immigration fees you will have to pay!!!!