ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

5 years for ILR rule implemented

General UK immigration & work permits; don't post job search or family related topics!

Please use this section of the board if there is no specific section for your query.

Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator

Locked
badhorse
Newbie
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm
Location: LIVERPOOL

7/11 is evidence against 4-5 changes

Post by badhorse » Tue Nov 14, 2006 12:29 pm

I agree with Smit. 7/11 change is an evidence against 4-5 change.

The 7/11 change has demonstrated clearly that the 4-5 change IS ALREADY HAVING a detrimental effect on many HSMPs. This is a strong argument on the court and can be used as an evidence to overrule the 4-5 change (for existing HSMPs). The Home Office is stupid and bold enough to produce this evidence themselves!

What, they think we are all slaves? We are brainless? We don't understand the system? Even the drug edict prisoners are treated better than us, after they sued the government!

Anyone who cannot extend their 5th year due to the 7/11 change therefore SHOULD go to the court and challenge both 7/11 and 4-5 changes in their individual JR. Hopefully, the court in this country can have some sense.

The JR initiated by SK should not stop us as individuals from going to court for our own cases. Six prisoners sued the government for not providing drugs to them in the prison! And yesterday the government agreed to compensate them. Now >100 prisoners are suing the goverment. Imagine using our tax to pay prisoners!

I believe individuals can make a change! The only thing the HO is afraid of is the court. If we don't sue the government, we will have to go back after 4 years' of hard working and final humiliation!

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:32 pm

We need to file a court case anyway.
If not, many HSMP holders will have to leave the country.
If a court case it actioned, one should automatically get grant for stay till case is heard - which will often take several months.

HO has lost court cases on several trivial grounds. And this is a SERIOUS issue affecting THOUSANDS of people (incl. their family members).

Also, the case should combine 4-5 year change & HSMP change.

HSMPnUK
Newbie
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 2:31 pm

Post by HSMPnUK » Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:38 pm

Hi,

With all this immigration rules getting stricted, Home Office has lost a case in Court against drug-addicted prisoners. It seems that these prisoners were forced not to take drugs for which they have filed a case (?!!) and have won too. Now HO has to pay £750,000. Find the link.

http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?cp- ... id=1266458

All hard-earned tax money from us, immigrants??????? What do they want - call us saying there would be a better future for us in UK, then scratch each & every penny from us through tax, NI, high university fees, high mortgage rates and then just chuck us out of UK one fine day?

Mates,Wake up!!!!!

Cheers
HSMPnUK

mahin1110
Newbie
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:14 am

Re: 7/11 is evidence against 4-5 changes

Post by mahin1110 » Wed Nov 15, 2006 8:58 pm

I have completed (1+3) 4 years under hsmp on 12 Nov. 2006. Applied for extension using FLR(IED) under old rules on 10th Nov. The initial declaration by IND said old form would still be accepted until 4th Dec. But, after applying I saw that they gave another announcement ( on 10th) saying applicants who used FLR(IED) would be returned!

I have salary income and business income during last 1 year but I have failed to get 75 points and trying to avail of the transitional arrangement under self-employment.

Can anyone suggest me what should I do in this position if they return my application / reject my application.


---------------------------------------------------------


badhorse wrote:I agree with Smit. 7/11 change is an evidence against 4-5 change.

The 7/11 change has demonstrated clearly that the 4-5 change IS ALREADY HAVING a detrimental effect on many HSMPs. This is a strong argument on the court and can be used as an evidence to overrule the 4-5 change (for existing HSMPs). The Home Office is stupid and bold enough to produce this evidence themselves!

What, they think we are all slaves? We are brainless? We don't understand the system? Even the drug edict prisoners are treated better than us, after they sued the government!

Anyone who cannot extend their 5th year due to the 7/11 change therefore SHOULD go to the court and challenge both 7/11 and 4-5 changes in their individual JR. Hopefully, the court in this country can have some sense.

The JR initiated by SK should not stop us as individuals from going to court for our own cases. Six prisoners sued the government for not providing drugs to them in the prison! And yesterday the government agreed to compensate them. Now >100 prisoners are suing the goverment. Imagine using our tax to pay prisoners!

I believe individuals can make a change! The only thing the HO is afraid of is the court. If we don't sue the government, we will have to go back after 4 years' of hard working and final humiliation!

badhorse
Newbie
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm
Location: LIVERPOOL

Post by badhorse » Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:38 pm

I think you should consider approaching lawyers (good ones, not the ones just know how to earn money from you).

HO's behaviour is very irresponsible. It disturbs our live so much.

Their wrong doing is apparent and should be challenged in the court.

They cannot play our lives just like that! We have family, job, home, responsibilities and investment here. How can they just change the rules time and time again without transitional arrangement?

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:25 am

This government is dearly beloved. No control over white un-skilled immigrants, but extremely strict (even unfair) control over skilled coloured immigrants. please read the following article.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... rtComments

Government has no idea of immigrant numbers, says Bank of England chiefBy JAMES SLACK

Last updated at 10:09am on 2nd November 2006

Bank of England chief Mervyn King yesterday criticised the Government for having no idea how many migrants have flooded into the country.

He warned its inability to say exactly how many immigrants are living here is even hindering the Bank's ability to set interest rates.

Read more...
Eastern European immigrants carry out tenth of crime


The intervention of such a senior and politically-impartial figure is a serious blow for Home Secretary John Reid.

It shows that - as well as being acutely embarrassing for the Government - not keeping track of who is entering and leaving the UK is hampering decision-making at the very highest level.

Mr King said the Bank's problems started with the badly-flawed 2001 Census, which is believed to have under-estimated the population by around one million.

But it has been compounded by the huge influx of eastern Europeans since the controversial expansion of the EU on May 1, 2004.

The Government believes around 600,000 have flooded in - more than 25 times its original estimate - but there is no accurate figure.

Ministers also do not know how many are unemployed, as most of the eastern Europeans are not entitled to claim benefits.

As a result, the Bank has been left with no idea how many people are living in the country. And, because this means it does not know how many are out of work, this makes it far harder to set interest rates.

One of the key factors in setting the rate - which decides how much people pay on their mortgage each month - is whether slack in the jobs market is likely to drive wages up or down.

Mr King said: "We just don't know how big the population of the UK is because the composition of the population - between young and old, immigrants versus ordinary residents - has changed in recent years.

"It may be that the statistics are not giving an accurate reading."

He added: "We need to know how big the population is, and how large the number of migrant workers is, in order to help us form a judgment about the pressure of demand on capacity.

"We have always relied on the national census, but there were difficulties in the last census."

The Governor told a House of Lords committee that the 2001 census had made mistakes and said it was vital that the Government ensured that the next population count in 2011 was "adequately resourced".

The Office of National Statistics has tried to make-up for the shortcomings of the Government and Census by tracking passenger movements in and out of the UK.

But this is based on a sample survey of people arriving in, and leaving, the country. It relies on migrants giving accurate answers on how long they intend to stay here.

Its latest figures, due to be published today, are expected to show there were 250,000 more arrivals last year than departures.

Mr King said the huge number of eastern European arrivals had made its efforts to track population changes through its international passenger survey insufficient.

He added: "It's just not adequate as a basis. We need to know both those coming in and going out.

Even on the best guesses of the ONS, the increase in the population arising from net migration is two to three times that of the natural increase in the population from births and deaths.

It's become in the last two to three years a quantitatively more important phenomenon.

"Because the comparisons and the split between different groups of workers - young and old, migrant and ordinarily resident - has changed in recent years, the statistics may not be that accurate." Damian Green, shadow immigration minister, said: "This shows how disastrous it is that the Government does not collect proper information about the level of immigration.

"If it is even making it impossible for the Bank of England to take proper economic decisions, then it is clearly a problem that is becoming ever more serious.

"This fog of uncertainty in policy making is because of the failure of the Government and of successive Home Secretaries."

The Home Office is planning to re-instate embarkation controls to check people in and out of the country, but this will not be complete until 2014.

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:37 am

This govt is dearly beloved. highly skilled coloured people to get lost. bigger EU is in our benefit. Here is the report which shows the percentage of criminals. I can bet that you will not find any skilled immigrant/ work permit holder even international student in this list. I want to say to HO, just wait a bit and see when new EU immigrants will be able to apply for benefits.
Are skilled immigrants interested in unemployment benefits?? no I dont think so..we can earn much higher by working.. unemployment benefits are nothing..

The report and its link is given below.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... rtComments

Eastern European immigrants carry out tenth of crime
A tenth of all crime in some parts of Britain is now committed by eastern European immigrants, shocking new figures reveal.

Police figures for the worst-affected areas show one in ten of all those arrested have come to the UK from the eight former Soviet states which joined the EU in 2004 - sending a massive wave of 600,000 immigrants flocking to this country.

Read more...
Government has no idea of immigrant numbers, says Bank of England chief


The figures emerged as a leaked Whitehall memo warned of an eastern European crime explosion on Britain's streets once Romania and Bulgaria become the latest states to join the EU in two months time.

The secret Cabinet Office paper sent to Tony Blair and senior ministers highlights the risk of a sharp rise in street violence, people-trafficking, prostitution, cash-machine thefts and fraud.

The document claims that Romanian crime gangs are behind an astonishing "80-85 per cent" of cash machine crime in Britain - even before the country joins the EU.

Last night opposition MPs demanded that ministers publish the leaked memo in full, claiming it had vital implications for public safety.

Romania and Bulgaria have a combined population of 30million, and it is estimated that up to 600,000 could head for Britain when they gain free movement within the EU on January 1 - including 45,000 known "undesirables" with links to crime.

Figures published yesterday by Westminster City Council - which is in the frontline of coping with hundreds of thousands of people arriving by coach from eastern Europe each year - showed that in one police division a tenth of arrests in the year to June 2006 - 400 out of 4,000 - involved "A8 Nationals" from the eight most recent EU accession states, with figures doubling year-on-year.

The report warns that "social unrest and anti-social behaviour has massively increased in the Victoria area and crimes, particularly shop-lifting, have increased."

A8 immigrants are "over-represented" in arrests for shoplifting, drunkenness, prostitution and burglary.

The true figures could be far higher, the report claims, as some larger stores "no longer call the police to A8 shoplifters", preferring to use their own security guards to keep known offenders out.

Council chiefs say half of all rough sleepers in central London are also A8 nationals - mostly Polish men - whose dreams of a better life in the UK have turned sour, and who are at risk of drifting into crime, prostitution and drug abuse.

With homeless charities "at breaking point", the council is urging ministers to continue special funding used to help destitute immigrants return home.

Yesterday's leaked Cabinet Office memo will bring little comfort for the Government.

According to the Sun newspaper it was drawn up by immigration minister Liam Byrne and Europe minister Geoff Hoon, and circulated to Tony Blair, Home Secretary John Reid, and the heads of MI5 and Scotland Yard.

The memo states: "There is concern that free movement will encourage people from Bulgaria and Romania to come to the UK, some of whom may be drawn towards organised criminal activities already well established in the UK."

On cashpoint crime, which cost Britons more than £60million last year, the documents states: "80 to 85 per cent of this nationally can be attributed to Romanian organised crime groups."

It goes on: "Aggressive begging, pick-pocketing and bag and mobile phone theft are particular activities which are cause for concern.

"There is a possibility of an increase in A2 [Romanian and Bulgarian] women trafficked into the vice trade."

Last night shadow Home Secretary David Davis wrote to John Reid demanding to know why ministers had failed to mention the leaked assessment in the Commons, adding: "Given the implications for public safety, I formally request that you publish any assessment you have made immediately."

Earlier this month John Reid announced plans to restrict the number of unskilled Romanians and Bulgarians allowed to work in Britain.

Critics claim the plans are meaningless, as all A2 nationals can enter the UK and are allowed to work if they are "self-employed."

Neither Downing Street nor the Home Office would comment on the leak, but a Home Office spokesman said tackling organised crime was a "top priority" for the Government.

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:49 am

New WP scheme (from previous published command paper - HSMP changes followed exactly as were outlined in this command paper)

Pass mark 50

Education NVQ3 5, Bachelor/Master 10, PhD 15
Prospective Earning £15-18k 5 £18-19.5k 10 £19.5-21 15 £21k+ 20
Job Requirement
Shortage occupation 50
Not shortage list but passes resident labor market 30
Intra Company transfer 50

hvac2006
Newly Registered
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:41 am

Post by hvac2006 » Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:23 pm

A group has been formed to protest against these changes. Please help HSMP2006 all effectees both morally and financially for any action aganst ilegal changes.

badhorse
Newbie
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm
Location: LIVERPOOL

Post by badhorse » Fri Nov 17, 2006 2:49 pm

rg1 wrote:New WP scheme (from previous published command paper - HSMP changes followed exactly as were outlined in this command paper)

Pass mark 50

Education NVQ3 5, Bachelor/Master 10, PhD 15
Prospective Earning £15-18k 5 £18-19.5k 10 £19.5-21 15 £21k+ 20
Job Requirement
Shortage occupation 50
Not shortage list but passes resident labor market 30
Intra Company transfer 50
Could you give the source for this please? Thanks!

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Fri Nov 17, 2006 3:07 pm


badhorse
Newbie
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm
Location: LIVERPOOL

HSMPs are acting!

Post by badhorse » Sun Nov 19, 2006 10:05 am

HSMPs are united in action! See emails from the HSMP Group copied below.

I think the group have learned from the lessons that VBSI learned and moved very quickly towards legal approach.

The HO must be challenged in the court!

I know many HSMPs thought previously that the 4-5 change doesn't affect them much! Now HO's real attention has just been revealed (buy one extra year's time and through 4-5 change get rid of large propotion of HSMPs in the final year)! I hope HSMPs and WP holders can unite to challenge the 4-5 change in court, which is the root of the problem.
________________________________________
Below is copied email from the HSMP Group
________________________________________
Re: [HSMP2006] Minutes of Both meetings

thanks jay and i have forwarded to the reading group as well

jay dave <h.jayvardhan@...> wrote:
WE HAVE TAKEN A DECISION TO CONTACT LAWYER EARLY NEXT WEEK. OPENING BANK ACCOUNT AND MOVING FORWARD. NEXT SATURADAY 25TH ANOTHER MEETING IS THERE AT TRAFALGAR SQR TO DECIDE AND FINALISE THE WEDNESDAY 29TH NOVEMBER PROTEST AGENDA. WE ARE MOVING FORWARD RAPIDLY.

WE ARE GOING TO CONTACT EGYPTIAN AND CHINESE GROUP AS WELL TO JOIN US ON THIS SATURDAY.

LETS MOVE FORWARD TOGETHER TO FIGHT FOR OUR JUSTICE. SPREAD THE MESSAGE ACROSS TO AS MANY PEOPLE AS YOU CAN...

RGDS
JAY


On 11/19/06, Jide Ayorinde <jideayorinde@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Jay,

Many thanks for your effort on the updates. Pls. what is the decision on the LEGAL processes we adopted in the TS Afternoon meeting.

Rgds.

JA

jay <h.jayvardhan@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All

Thank you all for making the event successful today at trafalgar
square in the after noon.

I have atteneded another meeting in the aldgate east. The group was
very big and meeting was successful there as well.

We have formed a committee to work on behalf of the group. I will
forward the minutes of the both meeting latest by monday as i have
just came back home from meeting.

We are going to open bank account early next week. We are meeting
again on Saturday 25th november at 01:00 P.M at trafalgar sqr
together as a one group ( Group met in the Afternoon and group met
in the evening)

We are going to inform chinese and egiptian group to join us as some
people are already in contact. We have decided to do protest march
on November 29th 2006 on Wednesday to bring the attention of all
commercial concerns, legal and political as well.

PLEASE DO JOIN THE MEETING ON SATURDAY AND PLEASE DO JOIN PROTEST ON
WEDNESDAY AS IT IS GOING TO DECIDE OUT FATE IN THIS COUNTRY.

YOU WILL BE INFORMED ON MONDAY WITH THE MINUTES OF TODAY'S BOTH
MEETING AND OTHER FORTH COMMING PROGRAMMES AS WELL IN DETAIL

Best Regards

Jay

fountain
Newly Registered
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:15 pm

FIGHTS DOR OUR RIGHTS

Post by fountain » Sun Nov 19, 2006 8:35 pm

THANKS FOR YOUR EFERTS

We should act together , dont bother what you hear but we should take legal action against home office together or indiviually ,if we not defend our right in first place againts the decision which was time limit extension from 4 years to 5 years we can loose every right accordingly new rules.

Although as far as i understood i am not effected from new point system because i have 5 years for work-permit but i aeffected by time extension limit decision.So i am ready to contribute maoney to legal action and hopefully i can some from around...

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Mon Nov 20, 2006 9:18 pm

My ILR is due in 6 months time, but I am ready to contribute for the sake of justice.
One question I want to ask. Suppose, if we win the case, will our ILR will be stamped back dated?

Rog
Member of Standing
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:21 pm
Location: London

Post by Rog » Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:42 am

Dear WP_Holder_05_2002, let us not count our chickens before they are hatched. It will be a long and prolonged fight.

Even those HSMP holders who have got a 4 year extension after 1 year may be under the impression that they are clear through to ILR at the end of their extension, but knowing the Home Office tendancy to retrospectively pass any law even they can expect an nasty surprise at the end of 5 years hence they should also actively support any movement to make HO see the unfairness in their actions

tobiashomer
Junior Member
Posts: 92
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2006 6:24 pm

Post by tobiashomer » Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 am

I agree with Rog: so far all the hurdles have been put up to stop people getting to the ILR stage; but when they realise that many will get there anyway despite inconvenience and hardship in some cases, they will have no other way to produce the reduced ILR numbers that are at the root of all this, but to change the ILR criteria. My guess is points will apply there too (let's hope they don't read this forum for ideas).

morerightsformigrants
Junior Member
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:21 pm

Post by morerightsformigrants » Tue Nov 21, 2006 3:14 pm

tobiashomer wrote:I agree with Rog: so far all the hurdles have been put up to stop people getting to the ILR stage; but when they realise that many will get there anyway despite inconvenience and hardship in some cases, they will have no other way to produce the reduced ILR numbers that are at the root of all this, but to change the ILR criteria. My guess is points will apply there too (let's hope they don't read this forum for ideas).

i wouldn't be surprise if they asked you to have enough points to qualify for ilr which i personally think it's their aim otherwise the 4-5yrs rule doesn't make any sense

jayj
Junior Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by jayj » Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:10 pm

now hang on guys , if they were gona introduce the points system to ilr what are they base it on? it's understandable that they can pu the WP/HSMP on a points based system but ILR...they can't cos it affects alot things like ancestry etc...

Rog
Member of Standing
Posts: 254
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:21 pm
Location: London

Post by Rog » Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:17 pm

There is nothing stopping them from increasing the period of ILR itself or taking ILR further and further away from skilled migrants (HSMP and WP both) by bringing in newer legislation whenever they feel like it. After one year the new EU countries of Romania and Bulgaria would have joined EU and there would be throngs of migrants from these countries. Just as they grossly underestimated the number of Polish people (more than 600k in UK) it may happen for these other countries. As the public outcry against immigrants in general increases they will tighten the skilled immigration to show their voters they have done something as this is the only section they can touch.

rg1
Member of Standing
Posts: 298
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:08 pm

Post by rg1 » Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:25 pm

as this is the only section they can touch
Unfortunately the whole EU concept is bogus! It simply means flow of people from East to West Europe.

ansaggart
Newly Registered
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:18 pm
Location: London

Post by ansaggart » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:36 pm

lads,

a lot of the poeple on this forum are from eastern europe.....

vic
Newbie
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 9:22 am
Location: Reading

Absences allowed during 5 year qualifying period for ILR

Post by vic » Wed Nov 22, 2006 9:28 am

Just thought I will update you guys regarding the total leaves (abroad) allowed during the 5 year qualifying period for ILR. Following is the response that I recieved today from the HO, under the Freedom of Information Act. Im sure you will be as amazed as I am to notice that the permitted absences now fall short of even the paid leaves during the 5 year run-up !!



Dear Mr. Sharma,

Thank you for your emails of 16 November, 17 November 10:17 and 10:20. I have responded below to your most recent email.

Q. 1). Prior to March 2006 when the qualifying period for ILR for work permit holders was 4 years, they were permitted short absences abroad provided that these absences did not exceed 3 months duration, and they did not amount to more than 6 months in all. In light of the recent increase in the qualifying period for ILR for Work Permit holders from 4 to 5 years, what is the total duration of absences abroad that are now allowed in this 5 year qualifying period?

A) The total duration of absences abroad that are allowed in the 5 year qualifying period have remained the same as under the 4 year qualifying period. That is the total duration of absences abroad that are allowed in the 5 year qualifying period for ILR for Work Permit holders is 6 months. Please note that absences should not exceed 3 months at a time and should not amount to more than 6 months in all.

Q.2). The current Annex F refers to the old 4 year qualifying period for ILR and has, obviously, not been updated in light of the recent change in the qualifying period earlier this year. What is the new Home Office formula for caseworkers for calculating the 'Five year continuous stay' requirement for eligibility for Settlement/ ILR for work permit holders ?

A) Please note that Annex F, Paragraph 3 - Calculation of the Four Year Period for settlement - whilst referring to the 4 year qualifying period is also currently applicable to the 5 year qualifying period.

I hope this is of help to you. If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our handling of your request by submitting your complaint to:

IND Complaints Unit
11th Floor, West Wing
Block 'C'
Whitgift Centre
Wellesley Road
Croydon
CR9 1AT


During the independent review, the department's handling of your information request will be reassessed by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.


Kind Regards,


Sandra
Sandra Birkinshaw
Freedom of Information
Work Permits (UK)
Vic

WP_Holder_05_2002
Newbie
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:19 am

Post by WP_Holder_05_2002 » Wed Nov 22, 2006 9:32 am

Rog wrote:Dear WP_Holder_05_2002, let us not count our chickens before they are hatched. It will be a long and prolonged fight.

Even those HSMP holders who have got a 4 year extension after 1 year may be under the impression that they are clear through to ILR at the end of their extension, but knowing the Home Office tendancy to retrospectively pass any law even they can expect an nasty surprise at the end of 5 years hence they should also actively support any movement to make HO see the unfairness in their actions
I wanted to say that if our ILR are not going to back dated (in case we win legal battle) then government will achieve the political objective (showing statistics better for naturalisation for year 2007/08) and may not be that much willing to enforce this unfair retrospective change.

nonothing
Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:04 am

Re: Absences allowed during 5 year qualifying period for ILR

Post by nonothing » Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:20 pm

thanks for sharing it. could you please provide an official link for the abroad absences allowance? cheers.
vic wrote:Just thought I will update you guys regarding the total leaves (abroad) allowed during the 5 year qualifying period for ILR. Following is the response that I recieved today from the HO, under the Freedom of Information Act. Im sure you will be as amazed as I am to notice that the permitted absences now fall short of even the paid leaves during the 5 year run-up !!



Dear Mr. Sharma,

Thank you for your emails of 16 November, 17 November 10:17 and 10:20. I have responded below to your most recent email.

Q. 1). Prior to March 2006 when the qualifying period for ILR for work permit holders was 4 years, they were permitted short absences abroad provided that these absences did not exceed 3 months duration, and they did not amount to more than 6 months in all. In light of the recent increase in the qualifying period for ILR for Work Permit holders from 4 to 5 years, what is the total duration of absences abroad that are now allowed in this 5 year qualifying period?

A) The total duration of absences abroad that are allowed in the 5 year qualifying period have remained the same as under the 4 year qualifying period. That is the total duration of absences abroad that are allowed in the 5 year qualifying period for ILR for Work Permit holders is 6 months. Please note that absences should not exceed 3 months at a time and should not amount to more than 6 months in all.

Q.2). The current Annex F refers to the old 4 year qualifying period for ILR and has, obviously, not been updated in light of the recent change in the qualifying period earlier this year. What is the new Home Office formula for caseworkers for calculating the 'Five year continuous stay' requirement for eligibility for Settlement/ ILR for work permit holders ?

A) Please note that Annex F, Paragraph 3 - Calculation of the Four Year Period for settlement - whilst referring to the 4 year qualifying period is also currently applicable to the 5 year qualifying period.

I hope this is of help to you. If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review of our handling of your request by submitting your complaint to:

IND Complaints Unit
11th Floor, West Wing
Block 'C'
Whitgift Centre
Wellesley Road
Croydon
CR9 1AT


During the independent review, the department's handling of your information request will be reassessed by staff who were not involved in providing you with this response. Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a right of complaint to the Information Commissioner as established by section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act.


Kind Regards,


Sandra
Sandra Birkinshaw
Freedom of Information
Work Permits (UK)
Vic

hsmporwp
Junior Member
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 10:38 am

Post by hsmporwp » Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:14 am

Any updates?

Locked