FINALLY BBC COVERAGE

[captain74]

[quote="Rog"]Members like WoodieG are simply here to mock and taunt others who are affected by the unfair ruling of the Home Office."

I would add another member to the list here - shockboy.

WoodieG and shockboy - it would be good if you could have a little more understanding attitude to those who have been severely affected b the changes in the rules.

Most points you two make are 'technically correct'. However, the confrontational tone does not help and is in a way deserving of similar rubbishing that you have been doing with others' comments. I agree that some people are getting overly emotional over the issue but then I also think you are being overly clinical in your assessments.

This is not a matter of physical sciences where 2+2 equals 4 for sure and there is a rational cause - effect relationship in every phenomenon as you seem to believe. This is a matter of social science which involves human beings with all the related complexities - and some of the human beings are affected really badly with the changes in rules. I do not think being clinical helps here.

In any case, I fail to see why it is so difficult to understand for bright people like you that all those against the changes are really protesting against the retrospective nature of the changes and not the right of a sovereign nation to make and change rules that suit the needs of its citizens. We are not all as sharp as you two so may have digressed from the point of retrospective use sometimes in our posts but surely you need not pounce an dissect each post every time.

C'mon, give us a break and allow those who are suffering to let it out!

[rizwan567]

Rich ZA..... Even agreeing with your points:

- the previous regulations were very vague
- imporoved the robustness and fairness of the HSMP system
- The problem with prior experience has always been the resources required
- etc etc

Everything sounds good from government point of view, everybody likes improvements indeed. But government could have continue with this new policies (Dec 5) without affecting the prvious HSMP holders.

If the previous policy was not robust and fair for HSMP system then this does not give you a license to start playing with lives of 100,000 HSMP holder in order to make system robust. If prvious policy was not robust and fair by government then whose mistake is it.... mine, yours, all HSMP holder.... IT IS GOVERNMENT MISTAKE AND THEY NEED TO PAY FOR IT NOT US!!!!

But what about this statement of WoodieG ""if i got approval as per old rule why should i gate extension as per new rule....u didnt told me that time"

When the new policy and rules come, the old policy holders are not disqualified. If it is like this then it is a truly a deception just like STABBING FROM THE BACK.

And this statement is 100% true.. let me prove you this by giving a simple example.... All the HSMP initial approval cases which are under review (experience, income, age categories etc) are still being reviewed under old policy. Whenever changes come, previous applications are dealt under previous criteria because those applications were received under old guidance.

Now, kindly consider this scenarios:

A HSMP holder of 35 years old comes to U.K by claiming points in following categories

Exp: 50
Income: 25

Even if he/she earns 100k a year can not qualify for 75 points extension.

This is just one scenario there are many more like above ones where previously qualified applicants are now disqualified by this new ROBUST AND FAIR HSMP system.

OUR POINT IS: The government could have continue with this new system for all those applications which are being approved after 5 Dec 2006.

All we know is: WE ARE STABBED FROM THE BACK BY THIS GOVT! We are used and then abused!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Markie]

let's wait and see what will happen after the judicial review is completed...there is definitely a very wide area of horizon about this issue - a very diversified view from all of the HSMP visa holders.

it is hard for those that are affected (including me of course) but for others that who are not affected...who knows in 1-2 years time you will also be affected just like we are today.

we really have to face the reality and move on.

[shockboy2000]

Members like WoodieG are simply here to mock and taunt others who are affected by the unfair ruling of the Home Office."

I would add another member to the list here - shockboy.

WoodieG and shockboy - it would be good if you could have a little more understanding attitude to those who have been severely affected b the changes in the rules.

well, now that you've decided to single me out too, i wont bother keeping quiet as i did all yesterday (god it was killing me though).

Just as some of you with 1 viewpoint are "letting it out", i feel like i really need to let out my views when i read some of the wild speculation on here.
If you dont like what others think - dont post/read on public forum. We are here to discuss HSMP, not listen to your viewpoint only.

I can see how people think it is unfair. I can also see why the govt are making it affect EVERYONE to ensure they are working under HSMP as per they should have been from day1...i.e. not just occupying any job for 4 or 5 years to get a free ride to ILR.

There was no contract stating your renewal would be under the rules in place when you got initial HSMP. Certainly not with my visa or letters, i checked them again last night. I assumed my renewal would be under the old rules, until they got changed of course..but that was my assumption - nothing more.

Nobody forced you to sell your house back in country XYZ. I came over here with no money at all, and chose to keep my house back home since that visa in my passport says "Limited Leave to Remain".
Nothing said i had permanent residency OR guaranteed permanent residency.

there is nothing confrontational about my 'tone'.
If you choose to read it that way, thats your decision...i am not putting smiley faces after every second word however.
I'm just stating facts just as Woodie + RichZA are trying to too, rather than continue with the speculative comments.

About the only thing of sense written yesterday was the comment about Diplomat working overseas not qualifying for HSMP. I guess thats just the problem with working for the public service, they always pay far below private industry...but its got me thinking.

[AC77]

[quote="shockboy2000"][quote="captain74"][quote="Rog"]Members like WoodieG are simply here to mock and taunt others who are affected by the unfair ruling of the Home Office."

I would add another member to the list here - shockboy.

WoodieG and shockboy - it would be good if you could have a little more understanding attitude to those who have been severely affected b the changes in the rules.
[/quote]

well, now that you've decided to single me out too, i wont bother keeping quiet as i did all yesterday (god it was killing me though).

Just as some of you with 1 viewpoint are "letting it out", i feel like i really need to let out my views when i read some of the wild speculation on here.
If you dont like what others think - dont post/read on public forum. We are here to discuss HSMP, not listen to your viewpoint only.

I can see how people think it is unfair. I can also see why the govt are making it affect EVERYONE to ensure they are working under HSMP as per they should have been from day1...i.e. not just occupying any job for 4 or 5 years to get a free ride to ILR.

There was no contract stating your renewal would be under the rules in place when you got initial HSMP. Certainly not with my visa or letters, i checked them again last night. I assumed my renewal would be under the old rules, until they got changed of course..but that was my assumption - nothing more.

Nobody forced you to sell your house back in country XYZ. I came over here with no money at all, and chose to keep my house back home since that visa in my passport says "Limited Leave to Remain".
Nothing said i had permanent residency OR guaranteed permanent residency.

there is nothing confrontational about my 'tone'.
If you choose to read it that way, thats your decision...i am not putting smiley faces after every second word however.
I'm just stating facts just as Woodie + RichZA are trying to too, rather than continue with the speculative comments.

About the only thing of sense written yesterday was the comment about Diplomat working overseas not qualifying for HSMP. I guess thats just the problem with working for the public service, they always pay far below private industry...but its got me thinking.[/quote]

The previous HSMP terms did ask people to stay economically active in their chosen professions, which was also metioned in the intial applications. So, it's not a question of someone getting FLR (or ILR) doing any job, even under the last terms. May be, HO could be more strict assessing that (working in chosen area) when applications come in for FLR (or ILR), instead of introducing a totally new points criteria retrospectively.

But, as we have it, I guess there's no point taking this argument further and further.

[rg1]

Guys

Let's not fight among ourselves.

Nobody says that HO can't change the rules at anytime. But had they added following lines in their guidance things would been entirely different.

"We reserve the right to change the rules at ANYTIME and you need to RE-QUALIFY under existing rule when you apply for FLR."

But they actually stated (please check exact wording on FAQ on old HSMP guidance section)

"If the rule is changed, it will not affect you and will be applicable to new candidates only."

I am not arguing that PhD holders should work in McDonalds, but if HO did not make false promise, I'm sure many such people wouldn't be here in first place!

[shockboy2000]

Guys

But they actually stated (please check exact wording on FAQ on old HSMP guidance section)

"If the rule is changed, it will not affect you and will be applicable to new candidates only."

ah, see now thats exactly what we want to see - concrete evidence

will go and read it when i get out of meetings later...thanks

[rizwan567]

RG1, good work. Like that.

[shockboy2000]

where can we view this, is it on a webpage somewhere?

if not, can you email me a copy (i will PM you my email address), and i will put it on my website for everyone to view/download

[rg1]

Sorry guys, I don't have the exact copy of old HSMP documents/guides.

Probably they have removed the webpages now.

But I remember, in earlier version of HSMP, there was a FAQ section -where it was mentioned. In fact, I came to know from this forum few months back.

Even if you find that, it won't make any difference. I read somewhere in this very forum, that HO refuses to honour former Home Secretary Charles Clark's signatory proof on someones ILR after 4 years - they just claimed now rules have changed.

[duende]

But I still keep it.
Here is the exact text:

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.

How can I attach the whole document?

[duende]

And further down the text:

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

[sjgul]

This is an amazing piece of evidence. Can't this be used by HSMP Forum people in their judicial review.

I remember these were the attractions which prompted thousands of people around the world to come and work in UK.

[AC77]

Good work guys!!!!

I hope this piece of text is already in knowledge of the HSMP forum.

[Mini]

Shockboy / Woddie,
You seem to be arguing and being confrontational without making any effort to know the facts first. You say you are entitled to your opinions but you are airing opinions which have no basis.

I am a highly skilled migrant thankfully currently unaffected but I would be really delusional if I believed that the current retrospective rule change is anything but grossly unfair. If anyone (affected or not) thinks this is the end of rule change then they are possibly deluding themselves. If the current suit being filed by the HSMP Forum is not successful in overturning the retro rule then serious thought needs to be put to the future of all HSMs and if we would want to subject ourselves to the insecurity of future rule changes till we get ILR.

[shockboy2000]

Shockboy / Woddie,
You seem to be arguing and being confrontational without making any effort to know the facts first. You say you are entitled to your opinions but you are airing opinions which have no basis.

blah blah blah

finished yet? everyone else has managed to move on...

there are plenty of opinions on various issues flying about without basis, just because someone doesnt agree with you 100% doesnt mean it is confrontational or that person is delusional.

To the rest of the people on the forum: this FAQ with 24.10 stating existing people wont be affected...it implies that some changes have been announced. At what date was this document effective, and what were the changes being introduced at the time ? I'm just trying to build up a picture of who said what and when.

[bilalsab]

here is the link

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

[Markie]

don't miss the preceding Q&A section...before the "will that affect me section"

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.


It can be viewed from here that changes will occur and may affect current visa holders...

[shockboy2000]

and 24.10 , *in my opinion*, is talking about people who have already got HSMP - will not be affected by THESE changes

i.e. they will not have to submit another initial application to meet the 65 points change introduced at that time.

in other words, Home Office will 'honor' the initial HSMP leave granted under the rules prior to 31OCT2003.

26.6 is where they start to talk about extensions

[rizwan567]

Shockboy, Even agreeing with government points:

- the previous regulations were very vague
- imporoved the robustness and fairness of the HSMP system
- The problem with prior experience has always been the resources required
- etc etc

Could you please answer and satisfy some of my given concerns:

Everything sounds good from government point of view, everybody likes improvements indeed. But government should/could have continue with the new policies (Dec 5) without affecting the prvious HSMP holders.


If the previous policy was not robust and fair for HSMP system then this does not give you a license to start playing with lives of 100,000 HSMP holder in order to make system robust. If prvious policy was not robust and fair by government then whose mistake is it.... mine, yours, all HSMP holders.... IT IS GOVERNMENT MISTAKE AND THEY NEED TO PAY FOR IT NOT US!!!! They need to make a full proof system for everyone. For old ones and for new ones.

When the new policy and rules come, the old policy holders are not disqualified. If it is like this then it is a truly a deception just like STABBING FROM THE BACK.

And this statement is 100% true.. let me prove you this by giving a simple example.... All the HSMP initial approval cases which are under review (experience, income, age categories etc) are still being reviewed under old policy. Whenever changes come, previous applications are dealt under previous criteria because those applications were received under old guidance. If the policty has been changed then when applications which are under review are still being treated under old guidance and given points for experience under review. If the policies have changed then old applications also should be treated under new guidance. Why these double standards!!!!!!

Now, kindly consider this scenario:

A 35 years HSMP holder comes to U.K by claiming points for initial approval in following categories

Exp: 50
Income: 25

Even if he/she earns 100k a year can not qualify for 75 points extension.

I tell you, that even government and HO have not done their full home working and considered all possible scenarios like one mentioned above. New guidance and notes do not tell anything about such scenarios. I called home office, even their staff is not yet aware of all such situations. They are not yet trained. Actually, they will get training by dragging and experimenting policy holders like us.

This is just one scenario, there are many more like above ones where previously qualified applicants are now disqualified by this new ROBUST AND FAIR HSMP system.


OUR POINT IS: The government could have continue with this new system for all those applications which are being approved after 5 Dec 2006.

All we know is: WE ARE STABBED FROM THE BACK BY THIS GOVT! We are used and then abused!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Even agreeing with your point that government reserves the right to make changes any time then it is clear.. Govt has a policy: Use and abuse........... And belive me or not.. sooon they will have to pay for it, one way or the other....................

[shockboy2000]

I'm not even going to read your message in full, let alone respond.

There's far too much anger in this thread.

Lets just stick to the facts, i.e. what is (or has been) written in the Guidelines/application forms over the years - how legally binding that may be etc, and discuss that maturely

[AC77]

Do the forum members think something positive could come out of the current India visit by Gordon Brown and a huge flock british businessmen?

I am just hoping they could persuade them to do something about the retrospective changes....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6269653.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6267387.stm

[rogerroger]

just saw this on times of india

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/NEWS ... urpg-2.cms

[Rog]

Its a pity that the government of India is more interested to protest against the insignificant issue of Big Brother (she just has to walk out of the show if she is mistreated) rather than take up the serious issues of HSMP holders.

[olisun]

Its a pity that the government of India is more interested to protest against the insignificant issue of Big Brother (she just has to walk out of the show if she is mistreated) rather than take up the serious issues of HSMP holders.

Why would the Indian govt. help HSMP candidates / Skilled people to leave India and settle in other countries???

In what way are the migrants helping India by settling in other countries?