- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
You might well be right, in that any new rules could only apply to new applicants when they come to extend in the future. But the HSMP JR turned on the particular representations made to people who applied for that visa, so it can't be automatically assumed to apply to all current visa holders.hoping_for_HSMP wrote:
Tier-1... They may not be able to do much about those already in the country in light of the various JRs that have already been given... Please remember we signed on a declaration in the HSMP application form to make UK our permanent home and if this is not legitimate expectation of settlement then I do not know what is... For new applicants they may either finish Tier-1 General or raise the bar...
So do you mean that students who has expections of setteling in UK after study (i.e. come to UK to "actually" study and not do low skilled job) esp. after they have spent fortune to pay the international fees are not genuine?wunder wrote:I don't think it will affect genuine students - the ones who come here to actually study.Wright wrote:I guess it will make student/high skilled migrants will think twice before coming to Uk.
But PSW and ICT categories do not lead to settlement so there is nothing to break the link (unless if one's switch to Tier 1 general or Tier 2)...littlerice wrote:Found something else as well, on the MAC consultation paper, on page 7 section 2.20, it defines only PSW and ICT as "temporary migration", and I think that's what Theresa May meant when she said "temporary work should not lead to permanent settlement.
That means those already holding Tier1 & 2 are safe, right?
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitec ... ual-limit/
Comments welcome.
If you ask me, I'd say that's the whole point. She said all this in a speech, it's all about sound-bite, do you think the British public would understand all this details? No they don't, all they need to hear is politician promising them something, which is actually already happening, as we (the lowly immigrants) would all know, but when it comes down to substance, I doubt she would dare to challenge European directive.But PSW and ICT categories do not lead to settlement so there is nothing to break the link
I don't quite get that. Of course, it's important for some people. But others want to work in another country, live there, etc, for a while, not forever.GSOtodd wrote:
Who would want to come here if they knew they couldnt settle.
PR is irrelevant, here. PR relates to EU / EEA applications, nothing to do with students, tier 1, etclittlerice wrote:On UKBA's website, there is a page listing all the kinds of visa that could eventually lead to PR, it did say the number of years needed before applying for PR may subject to change (possible but highly unlikely because of the restriction from European directive), but the expectation those that already got these visas that you eventually WILL get your PR is legitimate I think.
Any expert please comment if I am right about this?
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/settl ... tiontypes/
Maybe look at it this way:avjones wrote:I don't quite get that. Of course, it's important for some people. But others want to work in another country, live there, etc, for a while, not forever.GSOtodd wrote:
Who would want to come here if they knew they couldnt settle.
I don't think it's always the case. I completely understand your reasoning, of course.saayinla wrote:
My point is most of the people I know came here mainly because of the prospect of settlement, not that they wil not come if settlement is not involved but a considerable amount of their earnings will not benefit the UK economy.
Everyone has a home, it is also nice to get an experience in a different country and culture for year or so. For a short work experience people dont make plans to move their family or want to settle down in a place where they know that their work is only for short term.avjones wrote:I don't think it's always the case. I completely understand your reasoning, of course.saayinla wrote:
My point is most of the people I know came here mainly because of the prospect of settlement, not that they wil not come if settlement is not involved but a considerable amount of their earnings will not benefit the UK economy.
I worked in Poland for a year, my best friend worked in the Czech Republic for a year, my other half worked in India for 9 months, OH's best mate worked in Japan for 2 years, my younger brother's currently in Korea for 18 months, working.
None of us ever intended to settle. It was purely a chance to live in and experience a different culture.
Sorry, by PR I meant ILRavjones wrote:PR is irrelevant, here. PR relates to EU / EEA applications, nothing to do with students, tier 1, etclittlerice wrote:On UKBA's website, there is a page listing all the kinds of visa that could eventually lead to PR, it did say the number of years needed before applying for PR may subject to change (possible but highly unlikely because of the restriction from European directive), but the expectation those that already got these visas that you eventually WILL get your PR is legitimate I think.
Any expert please comment if I am right about this?
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/settl ... tiontypes/
what law is that?xleft wrote:I don't think they will dare touch the route of 10 years legal stay leading to ILR because it is part of wider Human Rights EU law signed by UK many years ago.
avjones wrote:what law is that?xleft wrote:I don't think they will dare touch the route of 10 years legal stay leading to ILR because it is part of wider Human Rights EU law signed by UK many years ago.
Ok, maybe I was not very certain in my description but you confirm my idea in general. So you say it's European Convention on Human Rights. Ok, I am not solicitor but for me it sounds quite serious and I was told by other solicitors it's serious.avjones wrote:the European Convention on Human Rights isn't part of the EU, and isn't closely related to EU law, either.