- 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
Guys we should go to supreme court if supreme court will not give us visa we will go in european court of human rights. We got the equal qualification. Why are they not treating us like other graduate students.msk47 wrote:I agree with you hassan. I got similar points in my head.
1st is we all know that people have been granted visa on the basis on acca qualification
After apeal at ftt.And HO did not persue their cases any further but granted them visas rightly or wrongly that is another debate. Now my objection is you can't hang one person for murder and leave another person who has comitted murder in exactly the same kind ofcircumstances. It just NOT FAIR.
2nd is because the HO granted visas to some people with acca qualification this gave an impression to rest of us who applied later that if HO accepted one persons acca then it should accept everybody's acca qualification. I think if it was not an acceptable qualification then the HO should have denied giving decision. They gave us the impression that it is possible then started denying everything.
Guys who ever is afected with the same circumstances plz pm me if all go together to high court as one unit it will cost effective.
can we go for student visa now do u knw and wat will b the requirment??PaperPusher wrote:The appeal has to be based on an error of law, and I don't think "it is not fair" will work. Some people won their cases, and the UKBA didn't appeal that decision. This does not mean you are entitled to PSW.
On a serious note, big rule changes often happen in April. If there is any other route you qualify for now you may want to consider using it before it is changed. UKBA have already said they think there is abuse of Tier 1 Entrepreneur. Routes won't stick around forever with a government who want to cut net migration.
plz check yr PM .. i m with you guys and one thing my lawyer is very good and i knw he can help us a lot but he cant go to COA coz hes nt barriester.. but this is really good point we all should go togther and it will help a lotmsk47 wrote:I agree with you hassan. I got similar points in my head.
1st is we all know that people have been granted visa on the basis on acca qualification
After apeal at ftt.And HO did not persue their cases any further but granted them visas rightly or wrongly that is another debate. Now my objection is you can't hang one person for murder and leave another person who has comitted murder in exactly the same kind ofcircumstances. It just NOT FAIR.
2nd is because the HO granted visas to some people with acca qualification this gave an impression to rest of us who applied later that if HO accepted one persons acca then it should accept everybody's acca qualification. I think if it was not an acceptable qualification then the HO should have denied giving decision. They gave us the impression that it is possible then started denying everything.
Guys who ever is afected with the same circumstances plz pm me if all go together to high court as one unit it will cost effective.
Which bit of the Alvi case helps you, and how?NAHID wrote:some people going over board..
as it stated earlier post that case worker or judges made mistake that means respectable Sir/madam's are thick headed and without using proper knowledge they allowed other's case. One Mirza came in lime light does not change the fact that other people who allowed cases either upper tribunal or Ftt did not considered their cases carefully.
I know even UKBA challenge decision to UP but UP allowed again on favor of Appellant. does it seems that honorable Judge were misguided by their lawyer.
it is SO funny... need to change our thought and should respect their action. Mirza was good enough to fight his case but due to lack of expertise he lost his case and how about the panel , they did not adhere the SSHD's instruction in light with Alvi guidance... do you thing it is reasonable decision when they minus a government's instructed policy.
we need to think carefully...before we say something
Guy's hire best barrister to get your remedy.... remember cheap product never give the test of expensive product. good lawyer will always charge high becasue of their expertise and hard work and it also give better remedy. join together and defend your case becasue its irrational in terms of law..... rationality will be one of the points you can try to bite on in HC
But they should consider the first Alvi guidence which was published in september but they have changed again Alvi guidence in January 2013 which is not to take considered our cases because case worker did not consider which they should have....Greenie wrote:The alvi guidance essentially reiterates the immigration rules, which is what the panel in mirza considered when finding that the appellant did not qualify for psw.
Greenie has already posted links to the immigration rules and appendix A in the rules. Plus I have posted a link to ACCA's royal charter, a link to Mirza, a link to guidance about reported cases. There are also links to information about what royal charters mean, the Alvi guidance and so on.sfkakbar wrote:Greene can you post link of the rules for psw on UKBA website? Show me rules on ukba website. Please don't show me what is there in paragraph 53 & 59. The only thing that was available on UKBA website was that thing. Where there was not mentioned that equivalent qualification don't qualify for psw. What he showed us in court room was clearly mentioned that equivalent do not qualify for psw. Now what I am saying this rule was not there on UKBA WEBSITE. At time of application to 31st Mar 2012 was UKBA policy Version 04/12 Page 1 to 27 and an Addendum which I followed according to which paragraph 59 professional qualification don't qualify for psw but ACCA is exempt from this becoz it is equivalent to bachelor degree. So i applied on that base.
I am repeating there os not mentioned any thing like this that equivalent qualification don't qualify. But in court he give us rules where it was clearly mentioned. So my point is that those rules don't apply on my application. Becoz at time i made my application it doesn't apply on my case. Thanks
Where does it say equivalent qualifications are allowed?The applicant has been awarded:
(a) a UK recognised bachelor or postgraduate degree, or
(b) a UK postgraduate certificate in education or Professional Graduate Diploma of Education, or
(c) a Higher National Diploma ('HND') from a Scottish institution.
i think HO is going to take everyone to High court whether u have won appeal in FTT or no....last monday my decision dismissed in FTT and i know 2 of my friend whose decision has been dismissedkool99 wrote:hi guys i do feel sorry for you lot. I been to FTT at the end of Nov 2012 and won the appeal. I hv nt heard anything from HO yet.
Bananas aren't part of the criteria in appendix A, that means if you don't have a degree but do have a bunch of bananas awarded by a suitable college you still don't get PSW.sfkakbar wrote:But it either d0esn't say that equivalent is not allowed.. I told you before pls dont refer paragraph 53 to me.. You didnt get my point I think.. The word "equivalent" is not mrntioned anywhere. Thats the point.
But in court room he presented rules which clearly mentioned that equivalent qualification is not allowed. And so what I argued that it doesnt apply on my case becoz at time Of my application there is no such thing of equivalent. Which in reality is not there on website even now.
So tell me why HO betrying innocents student like us?? M not gonna debate on this anymore. My point is clear. Don't put me in jargons. My concept is quite clear.
In last above all, forget the rules.. Why UKBA is cherry picking by giving PSW to some students and refusing others? Isn't it discrimination? Why only myself suffering when others enjoyed PSW on ACCA. I applied with in time frame before closing date. So its against law as well to discriminate in cases. All of those who applied on basis of ACCA should hv been treated the same. Thanks
i received my decision on 28th januaray and from FTT, decision has been dismissed....who is ur solicitor plzkool99 wrote:When did you attend your FTT. My solicitor informed me that HO has less than 15 days to appeal against FTT decision.
if bananas r not part of appendix A criteria then why HO has distributed banans to some acca students????? and do not want to distribute to othersPaperPusher wrote:Bananas aren't part of the criteria in appendix A, that means if you don't have a degree but do have a bunch of bananas awarded by a suitable college you still don't get PSW.sfkakbar wrote:But it either d0esn't say that equivalent is not allowed.. I told you before pls dont refer paragraph 53 to me.. You didnt get my point I think.. The word "equivalent" is not mrntioned anywhere. Thats the point.
But in court room he presented rules which clearly mentioned that equivalent qualification is not allowed. And so what I argued that it doesnt apply on my case becoz at time Of my application there is no such thing of equivalent. Which in reality is not there on website even now.
So tell me why HO betrying innocents student like us?? M not gonna debate on this anymore. My point is clear. Don't put me in jargons. My concept is quite clear.
In last above all, forget the rules.. Why UKBA is cherry picking by giving PSW to some students and refusing others? Isn't it discrimination? Why only myself suffering when others enjoyed PSW on ACCA. I applied with in time frame before closing date. So its against law as well to discriminate in cases. All of those who applied on basis of ACCA should hv been treated the same. Thanks