- 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
Another effort to establish a new organisation. Again end up helping someone establish an organisation/company without actually acheiving what actually we wanted(legal action).rooi_ding wrote:BadPaul
I personally suggested creating a separate organization but if the active members think they can facilitate the sub committee then I would back it.
It is not true. A lot of effort has been put into sorting the misunderstanding and misinterpetations out on this forum. Legal alternative is considered, but it is not at the forefront of the activities at the moment.BadPaul wrote:VBSI although claims it represents the skilled immigrants, fails to recognize and to consider the legal alternative.
Please, let's choose adjectives carefuly and try not to upset anyone. As far as I understand, we are already working together towards a common goal and even within the same organisation. Let's not assume people intentionally behave badly. If you dislike something about the way people express themselves, let's make an effort to move towards a more civil conversation together.I am sorry to say this but I find it very arrogant for an organization claiming to fight for the rights of immigrants to dismiss our suggestions and imply things like " if you don't like our decision go and form your own organization ".
Splendid!- all of us in favour of legal action should join VBSI, form a working group within the organization and explore the legal route.
- we will coordinate with the " lobbying group", making sure we are working towards a common goal and help rather than fight each other
Exactly!Exploring the legal route doesn’t mean we are going to sue the HO tomorrow,
This has already been done with CL. Let's involve more professionals!but rather get advice from professionals and prepare a potential case.
I believe SK has done just this. It would not be sensible, I think, to threaten LB with a court action during the meeting. The fact that the HO/IND is talking to us already means that they are starting to take us seriously.This should also provide all of us with „ammunition “ in our negotiation with the HO.
I believe the hint/s have already been placed. It is very well said, we do not need threats right now. And hints should be very well placed.I personally believe a well placed hint to the HO during the negotiations that we are also seeking legal advice and consider taking them to court if negotiations fails, will help.
He did say he did. We do not yet know on what grounds - whether he challenged the law (I think unlikely) or particular client's ILR refusals. It was posted here a few weeks ago that the HO is expected to reply to his legal challenge on 4 August. Latest correspondence with SK:Finally, with regards to the famous 3 months, what we need to clarify is whether Stephen kong has already submitted a JR application or not.
So far the VBSI is formally not involved in any legal proceedings. We believe this is the reason the HO/IND is talking to us. Please join the VBSI and we will discuss everything thoroughly.If the answer is yes, then I will quote what a reputable solicitors firm told me with regards to the VBSI taking part in the JR although they were not part the initial application : " That is good news. VBSI could be detailed in the judicial review as an interested party. However, it could be liable to costs if the judicial review is not successful. Please keep me updated with the judicial review application as you have news. This will be of extreme interest to a lot of people. "
I provided a link to this document already last week. I also sent some comments by e-mail to the provided address, but I have received repeated messages from my server that the Home Office server is not accepting any messages.stevej wrote:A new proposal has been handed to House of Commons by John Reid, please click below for the full document
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ ... iew=Binary
In the end of this document, states, 4.17 In the meantime, we would welcome any immediate comments on this document. These can be sent to
indreviewcomments@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
I will send some of my concerns to home office shortly.
stevej wrote:A new proposal has been handed to House of Commons by John Reid, please click below for the full document
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ ... iew=Binary
In the end of this document, states, 4.17 In the meantime, we would welcome any immediate comments on this document. These can be sent to
indreviewcomments@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
I will send some of my concerns to home office shortly.
BadPaul wrote:Dear all,
I just returned from holiday and went through the posts in the last 3 weeks and I have to say I am very surprised to find out that VBSI although claims it represents the skilled immigrants, fails to recognize and to consider the legal alternative. I am sorry to say this but I find it very arrogant for an organization claiming to fight for the rights of immigrants to dismiss our suggestions and imply things like " if you don't like our decision go and form your own organization ".
I do not think this kind of arguments serve any purpose; therefore I would like to make a suggestion:
- all of us in favour of legal action should join VBSI, form a working group within the organization and explore the legal route.
- we will coordinate with the " lobbying group", making sure we are working towards a common goal and help rather than fight each other
Exploring the legal route doesn’t mean we are going to sue the HO tomorrow, but rather get advice from professionals and prepare a potential case.
This should also provide all of us with „ammunition “ in our negotiation with the HO.
I personally believe a well placed hint to the HO during the negotiations that we are also seeking legal advice and consider taking them to court if negotiations fails, will help. Doctors' case is relevant for how the HO think: they didn't take them seriously up until they faced a court case. And by the way, I know who is representing BAPIO, a top QC who defeated HO in many high profile cases, so I can understand why HO is thinking now of changing the rules rather than face another defeat in court.
Finally, with regards to the famous 3 months, what we need to clarify is whether Stephen kong has already submitted a JR application or not.
If the answer is yes, then I will quote what a reputable solicitors firm told me with regards to the VBSI taking part in the JR although they were not part the initial application : " That is good news. VBSI could be detailed in the judicial review as an interested party. However, it could be liable to costs if the judicial review is not successful. Please keep me updated with the judicial review application as you have news. This will be of extreme interest to a lot of people. "
So, what do you think of my suggestion?
BR,
Paul
Exactly! There is no barrier for joining. Or, rather, the barrier is purely psychological. All it takes an email to info at vbsi.org.uk . No one needs anyone's permission to do anything. The VBSI exists to join and to coordinate efforts and resourses. Anyone can do it. There is no management and there has never been any leadership vote. Anyone can initiate an activity or "take over" if they like.stevej wrote:I suppose if people want to start a sub -group in VBSI , there is no need to get anyone's premission!