5 years for ILR rule implemented

[tvt]

I think that the following immigration lawyers could be more suitable for challenging the change. These lawyers have an inherent advantage as they specialise in the Human Rights and Administrative Law aspects of Immigration law whereas the other two mentioned here are more oriented on business immigration.

http://www.maliklaw.com/

[itsme]

all, below is reply i got from HO

IND Public Enquiries <INDpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:
From: IND Public Enquiries <INDpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk>
To:
Subject: RE: new immigration rules - effect on HSMP extension
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:16:50 -0000

Dear

Thank you for your enquiry.

In terms of how long your next HSMP Visa will be i am unable
to answer this.

The length of time that is granted is decided
by caseworkers who will make a decision after assessing the
application form.

Yours sincerely

James Smith

Managed Migration

If you intend to reply to this email please ensure
that you re-send all the information from your
original enquiry.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> Sent: 14 March 2006 03:43
> To: indpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
> Cc:
> Subject: new immigration rules - effect on HSMP extension
>
> Dear Sir/Madam,
>
> I have noticed that in the new migration policy Indefinite Leave to
> Remain has been increased to 5 years instead of 4. I am on HSMP and
> granted for 1 year. My extension is due in sometime. Can you let me know how much extension i will be getting ? is it going to be 3 years( as per old policy) OR 4 years OR ??
>
> Hope i made it clear.
>
> Thanks for your time and awaiting for your response.
>
>

[tvt]

What a detailed answer you got from the HO. My cat could have given you a better answer.

[mariosh05]

Finally and for the first time in a major UK media, an article was published today in page 18 of the Times (Letters to the Editor section) on the subject of the new ILR rule. The article title is "Overseas workers deserve better treatment" written by Jana Bakunia, a russian living and working in the UK.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 83,00.html

I am planning to send the article by email to MPs, Home Office, other newspapers etc.......

[bbdivo]

Not really an article! But at least theres something in print! Lets hope it gets read by the right people!

[Smit]

I read the letter in yesterday's hard copy of the Times. Whilst it is commendable that it got published, it doesn't say anything about the unfair retrospective rules being applied against legitimate expectations, this should be the main focus for challenge.

S

[gunslinger]

Hi All

I had written to my MP. Not received a reply so far!

Has anybody else had any luck?

What is the status of legal action? Please let me know if we are going ahead. I am willing to contribute funds and time if need be!

[Rohan]

I received a letter from MP saying that he has written to Charles Clark/Sec.of State/HO and he will let me know once he gets a reply.

Rohan

[minny]

No doubt these news will come as a disappointment to those here on HSMP whose 4 year period comes up after April 2006.

I guess those who are on the 3 year extension will need to make another FLR application for atleast 1 year and yet the Govt is proposing to give ILR to tier 1 applicants after only 2 years.
This announcement in my opinion shows a flaw and contradiction in the Govt. policy at least as fas as existing HSMP visa holders are concerned. But I add that I haven't yet read the full rules thanks to the problems with the IND website.

Hi,

Where does it mention that ILR will be granted after 2 years for tier 1 applicants and if so when will this be implemented?

Thanks

Minny

[bbdivo]

No doubt these news will come as a disappointment to those here on HSMP whose 4 year period comes up after April 2006.

I guess those who are on the 3 year extension will need to make another FLR application for atleast 1 year and yet the Govt is proposing to give ILR to tier 1 applicants after only 2 years.
This announcement in my opinion shows a flaw and contradiction in the Govt. policy at least as fas as existing HSMP visa holders are concerned. But I add that I haven't yet read the full rules thanks to the problems with the IND website.

Hi,

Where does it mention that ILR will be granted after 2 years for tier 1 applicants and if so when will this be implemented?

Thanks

Minny

It is in the command paper the govt released a few weeks back, also they say they are only considering it, if it comes into effect it will only happen when the new rules are implemented and that, according to the Govt, is some time next year.

[aj77]

When I got my 3 years Extension last year,I also recived a letter from HO that at the end of 3 year period ,I can apply for ILR according to 135G(i).

I also remember that in FAQ of the immigration policy before 1s tNov 2003,it was clearly written in an answer of one question that future policy changes wont effect our status.Now they are not doing whatever has been promised to us.

Considering the changes has been made by Parliament ,can we take any legal action.Any opinion from any solicitor?

[supertiger]

I think there are many people want to take the legal action. From the meeting I had last week with our solicitor from O'Hara Solicitors suggested in some of the early posts in this topic, he is collecting evidence at this stage and will submit to the supreme court between early Apr to early May. The organisors are still working on the budget and some details I am sure they will post notice once everything done... Meanwhile dont; know if you have written to yr MP yet, if not can send a letter at least make more MPs aware of this issue. Or any other organisations or media could be helpful...- that's also what the solicitor suggested.

[RobinLondon]

I posted the following under another topic in this forum. This speaks to evidence of upholding conditions for current migrants.

Hi there-

When the proposed changes to the immigration rules were made last year, I sent the following letter to my MP, Tessa Jowell (Southwark):

(09 February 2005)

Dear Ms Jowell,

I am a Canadian national currently in my second year of living and working in the UK. I am able to do so through the UK ancestry scheme in which Commonwealth citizens with a UK grandparent are allowed to work in the UK for for years, after which they may apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR).

Following the provisions announced by the Home Secretary yesterday, I have two questions. The first is whether the provision for UK ancestry will now be abolished subject to the Government's intention to initiate a "four-tier" system of vetting migrants. Secondly, as I have been allowed into the country under the previous rules of four years' working allowing one to apply for ILR, will I now have to wait until I complete five years as put forth by the Home Secretary? This creates a strange situation, as I would now have to apply for an additional one year's leave (at £335) only to apply the following year for ILR (at another £335 or more).

Please do let me know if (1) the provisions of the UK ancestry scheme are intended by this Government to continue and (2) if the rules under which one previously entered the country will continue to apply to applicants already in the process leading to settlement.

Thank you very much for your assistance

Yours sincerely, (etc)...

[abcd1]

Another link on this topic

http://www.linkchinese.net/news/2006031 ... rule.shtml

[FKarim]

I was reading through some of the posts on this topic suggesting legal action. I am completing my 4 years later this year, unfortunately a few months after April and was very disappointed to learn that the new 5 year ILR rule will apply to even those already here. Adding one more year doesn't make any sense and wouldn't help any cause - integration or otherwise. Especially, victimising existing residents using this rule doesn't serve any purpose other than making more and more money as some of you have suggested.

We all know this is unfair, politically motivated (to show that some "steps" have been taken to restrict immigration and settlement while other political parties are trying to win public support over this sensitive issue) and a complete rip-off. The question is, is it REALLY illegal? Promises have certainly been broken but does this classify as unlawful? I ask this because my knowledge of law is very limited.

[supertiger]

FKarim, I think that's what we are all trying hard to work out. If it is clearly an illegal act HO definitely wouldn't do, but laws are very vague in this area which makes it tricky... but it is apparently very argueable. It won;t be a simple answer, but if you don;t work for yr own rights nobody else will do. Brits are not bothered. In terms of time you may need to spend, comparing to another year it is really nothing. So really worth trying our best!

[morerightsformigrants]

read this:

http://www.lawfirmuk.net/english/newchanges.htm

[supertiger]

Below is a meeting minute from another discussion board FYI:

http://lkcn.net/eubbs/index.php?showtopic=102162&st=180

louis 发表于: 28 Mar 2006, 14:35

组别: Members
发表总数: 113

注册日期: 20-June 04


Time: 12:00~13:00 Tue, 28 Mar. 06
Attendee: Louis, G******y
Topic: Legal Advising about extending ILR qualifying years from 4 to 5

Minutes:
1. Mr G******y H*****g is the senior immigration caseworker of Barnet Law Centre. Before working for law centre, he was a charted barrister. Barnet Law Centre is part of community legal service sponsored by Barnet council.
2. By English law, any new policy/law must be reviewed and consulted by public. As far as the adviser knew, many immigration organizations expressed serious concerns about the changes but Home Office still decided to push the 4->5 regardless any critics. “The home office consulted us because they had to do so by law, but they never listen actually”. There is no way to make them change minds in fact.
3. Home Office has to sustain themselves by income from passport application fees and visa application fees, so they intend to enlarge qualifying period to make more money from that. Many unexposed reasons/trade-offs make immigrants harder.
4. Immigration law is particularly unfair part in whole English law, because only affected persons are immigrants…
5. The deadline of suing is within 3 months after refused decision made from Home Office.
6. If any person wins in Court, this case can be directly applied to others with similar situation. (One wins, all wins)
7. Non-retrospective is a major principle in English law. If the barrister can prove the change is retrospective, he/she will definitely win in the court. But Home Office can argue that the application for ILR is a different application for work permit/HSMP, so the 4 to 5 years change to current WP/HSMP holders is not retrospective at all. Only judge can make the final decision.
8. Louis got an immigrant-specific solicitor’s phone number and would try to have a talk with them then.

[djbabyboom]

The following statements from the Q&A section of the HSMP leaflet can be potentially used to refute application of the proposed changes to those already entered the UK on the "4 years basis":

24.9 Q: What if the scheme changes?
A: As with any immigration scheme we reserve the right to adapt some of the criteria or documentation associated
with the scheme and will inform you via our websites of any such changes. All applications will be treated on the
basis of the HSMP provisions at the time that they were submitted.

24.10 Q: I have already applied successfully under HSMP. How does the revised HSMP affect me?
A: Not at all. It is important to note that once you have entered under the programme you are in a category that has
an avenue to settlement. Those who have already entered under HSMP will be allowed to stay and apply for
settlement after four years qualifying residence regardless of these revisions to HSMP.

This document is still available on the FCO webstite:

http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/Skilled%20Migrant.pdf

[indian_in_uk]

After reading all these posts, I am confident that something still can be done but we need to get together and act ASAP.

[Smit]

Well, no doubt the Home Office has consulted it's lawyers and been advised that the turnaround will not have any legal impact on it.

At the very least, the correspondence between Tessa Jowell, Charles Clark and RobF would help in a personal misrepresentation action by RobF against Charles Clark (the outcome having a likely impact on the wider community.

The IND is acting with impunity, see emails below between it and my friend:



-----Original Message-----
From: IND Public Enquiries [mailto:INDpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk]
Sent: 28 March 2006 17:18
To: xxx
Subject: RE: Controversial Home Office Policy



Dear xxx

Thank you for your enquiry.

If you need to apply for a years extension for yourself to complete the 5 year qualifying period, then you will need to pay the application fees that are stated on the application form.

Yours sincerely

Jxxx Sxxx

Managed Migration

If you intend to reply to this email please ensure that you re-send all the information from your original enquiry.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: xxx[SMTP:xxxxx]
> Sent: 21 March 2006 10:35
> To: IND Public Enquiries
> Subject: RE: Controversial Home Office Policy
>
> Many thanks for your reply below.
>
> Please could you confirm whether the additional 1 year extension will
> incur additional fees? It is highly regrettable that the increase to 5
> years is being applied retrospectively as I had a legitimate expectation
> that I was eligible to apply for ILR after 4 years, it would be unfair for
> me to fork out additional Home Office charges for the 1 year extension.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> xxx
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IND Public Enquiries
> [mailto:INDpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk]
> Sent: 20 March 2006 18:19
> To: xxx
> Subject: RE: Controversial Home Office Policy
>
> Dear xxx,
>
> Thank you for your enquiry of 14th March 2006.
>
> As of April 3rd 2006, a person needs to complete 5 years in the HSMP
> category prior to applying for indefinite leave to remain.
>
> Under the Immigration Rules you will need to obtain and complete a new
> application form to complete five years before you would be eligible to
> complete the latter.
>
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> Oxxx Gxxx
>
> Managed Migration.
> > If you intend to reply to this email please ensure that you re-send
> > all the information from your original enquiry.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xxx[SMTP:xxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 5:59 PM
> > To: indpublicenquiries@ind.homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
> > Subject: FW: Controversial Home Office Policy
> >
> > Please could IND clarify my doubts raised below:
> >
> > I am currently on a Highly Skilled Migrant Visa which was issued for 4
> > years to 2009 after which I was to apply for indefinite leave to
> > remain
> > ("ILR") in the UK.
> >
> > I am now advised that the Home Office has retrospectively increased
> > the 4 year qualifying period to 5 years. Will I now need to make
> > yet another application for further leave to remain for another year
> > which at the current fee level will be for £500 so that I can apply
> > for ILR again at a cost of £500 at current levels.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > xxx

[tvt]

Just want to remind you that there has never been a consultation bu the HO about raising the qualifying period from 4 years to 5 years. If you read all the consultation documents you'll clearly notice that.

Moreover, the HO failed to consult businesses about the increase it simply stated n the explanotory notice attached to the amendment to the Immigration Rules that "there is no impact on business" which is clearly not the case.

[RobinLondon]

If any of you are members of the Immigration Law Practitioners Association or know anyone who is, there will be a seminar on the ILR changes on Thursday, 30 March from 5pm to 7:15pm at the Fragomen Law offices in London.

It's on page 3 of this PDF file: http://www.ilpa.org.uk/CourseOutlines.pdf

From the ILPA website:

Statement of changes in Immigration Rules. The major change is that for all employment related categories of entry to the UK, the qualifying period for settlement will be 5 years. ILPA's training session 'Changes to business and employment streams including the new ILR and FLR procedures from 3 April 2006 (DT 909)' will be held on Thursday 30th March 2006, 5-7.15pm. Attendees will receive comprehensive advice on the new ILF/FLR provisions and changes they can expect as the new points based regime is rolled out .

***

If anyone can attend this, it would really help us to find out our options. It seems, however, that you must be an ILPA member to attend.

[supertiger]

I have contacted ILPA and think the training is also open to nnon-members. They said they also sent letters to minister regarding the rule change...


http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewto ... c&start=45

quote="supertiger"]I wrote to my MP and some relevant organisations got a reply from Immigration Law Practioners' Association yesterday, you can keep sending them emails checking progress...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "info" <info@ilpa.org.uk>
Subject: RE: Recent policy change on ILR
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:25:40 -0000


dear

ILPA has written to the minister about the changes and the way they are being made. Please see the March ILPA mailing which should reach you on Monday/tuesday.
We are also holding some training on March 30. Please see Training Programme on ILPA website.

ILPA
*****************[/quote]

[RobinLondon]

I'm going to ring them tomorrow and ask if I can attend. I also study, so perhaps I can get a cheaper rate. Moreover, I will tell them that I am representing about 100 (?) people who are considering a legal case, so maybe that will let us be present.

Any suggestions?