let us challenge new rules in the court

[shahbazali]

rather than waiting for refusals. let us join together and challenge the new rules in the court. can someone guide how to do that.


thanks

[tuliprose]

rather than waiting for refusals. let us join together and challenge the new rules in the court. can someone guide how to do that.


thanks

Well, these new rules can be challenged as HSMP Judicial Review. But you need strong support from many applicants.

In this scenario, some applicants would say that they have funds in place so they may not be bothered. But many of the applicants in actual are in trouble and at risk of visa refusals.

By challenging new rules in the High Court, we are not losing anything. I am in support of doing that.

[rizmir]

Yh i agree with u guys coz things r quite contradictory so definitly court will give against ukba

[RizKCB]

Entrepreneur visa has not only produced chaos for applicants but also hectic for UKBA itself.

Now to overcome their weaknesses in the system; they are going to implement interim amendments for new and ex applicants.

These rules could be challenged in true spirits.

[rizmir]

Yes even one single statement of policy guidance that the money needed for investment should only be invested when you apply for extension application of entrepreneur visa, now they asking that money invested for initial applicatin which is self contradictory and could easily be challenged

[suvalike]

Yes even one single statement of policy guidance that the money needed for investment should only be invested when you apply for extension application of entrepreneur visa, now they asking that money invested for initial applicatin which is self contradictory and could easily be challenged

Yes i do agree.Its totally bull shit from UKBA. How can they say money should be invested or present for the ex-applicants...what if i have already spent 5k into business..how will they check 5k was less because invested into business...its so confusing...i agree we should challenge these rules for existing applicants

[hham1224]

Yes even one single statement of policy guidance that the money needed for investment should only be invested when you apply for extension application of entrepreneur visa, now they asking that money invested for initial applicatin which is self contradictory and could easily be challenged

I agree with you all we should challenge the new rules as they are baseless on the ex applicants or for those whose applications are not decided yet.

But I dont understand the people who already applied, they applied to the rules which were in force at the date of application not any changes afterwards.

Best wishes

[RizKCB]

1- Investment funds' viability and credibility cannot rely only on the balance of statement in real. It is contrary to their own policy in Third Party's funds category. It could act as an application requirement which must not apply on applications before 31 Jan.

2- Business plans are made on probabilities which gives a road map of proposed business in ideal conditions but it could not be followed strictly. It would be a fun to provide a business plan for those businesses which are already in progress and making money. Business plan was not required before.

3- UKBA had no checks on viability and credibility of funds in Third Party's funding before application decision. It shows their own weakness.

4- System abuse with evidences is definitely a strong reason for UKBA but it must not be addressed by new amended requirements in the whole policy for submitted genuine applications as well. If they claim to have strong evidences about some applications, they should address them.

5- Their every check is applicable once issuing the visa which can produce results to prove viability and credibility of every step by applicant.

[solomondid]

Lets do it! Chose a barrister and we can share the fee even lets do it I am IN

[la]

I am suffering from the same. I have full support for your guys. UK BA is totally rubbish.

[buntyz]

yea thats great somebody needs to take lead we will share the cost.

[tony.montana]

I am in too..

[alik28]

I am in as well. We also need to push them about processing time as many of us have been waiting for so long and we all got plans but stuck.
In my case my Father is in a hospital due to the heart attack, I have sent them so many letters but no reply from. This is against humanity. When I called them up they said you can withdraw your application which is unfair as i have paid fee and waited for more than a 6 months.

We can all arrange a barrister and take them to the court. I am happy to share the cost.

[rizwan567]

I already started a thread about checking the validity of challenging these changes but no one contributed substantially.

http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewto ... ht=#775517

It will be nice if gurus/moderators can give their opinion on the validity of this proposed challenge.

[Sar78]

Instead of taking legal action, why not put the money back into your accounts (if you have withdrawn it)? There are several sensible ways to account for the funds, and if you did originally have access to the requisite funds, there should be no need for you to go to court.
The UKBA will probably not be as harsh on applicants who applied before or on 30 Jan, if overall your application comes across as legitimate. The new rules are a way of targeting applicants who thought that they could outsmart the UKBA, and not those applicants who overall sent genuine applications.

[dd156]

1- Investment funds' viability and credibility cannot rely only on the balance of statement in real. It is contrary to their own policy in Third Party's funds category. It could act as an application requirement which must not apply on applications before 31 Jan.

2- Business plans are made on probabilities which gives a road map of proposed business in ideal conditions but it could not be followed strictly. It would be a fun to provide a business plan for those businesses which are already in progress and making money. Business plan was not required before.

3- UKBA had no checks on viability and credibility of funds in Third Party's funding before application decision. It shows their own weakness.

4- System abuse with evidences is definitely a strong reason for UKBA but it must not be addressed by new amended requirements in the whole policy for submitted genuine applications as well. If they claim to have strong evidences about some applications, they should address them.

5- Their every check is applicable once issuing the visa which can produce results to prove viability and credibility of every step by applicant.

I'm wondering if UKBA might close down the third party funding's route

[la]

I applied for the visa on 200k and under assumption that money can be invested on need basis for business over three years . If business does not grow properly, then I thought going back to my home country as I will not be eligible to extension.This is what UK BA old rules says.

Current UK BA rules are quick contradictory to previous rules.

I can not get that huge money 200k in 28 working days to the account and maintain through out three years even if business does not require it.

Certainly a true business man will invest the money when business needs it but not on force that to maintaining 200k huge money through out three years in the bank accounts for the sake of bull shit visa extension which would be financial loss to the true business man .

I will definitely go to court on this. It impacted my career. Wasting my time.

[shahbazali]

it looks very good that we are ready to challenge.
it does not make any sense that business man hold 200k in bank for so many days. it is loss.

now Please someone guide which barrister to be hired and if there is any free govt. service for such cases.

how to collect the cost from all applicants.

I shall personally see and ask some solicitors about that and will update on this thread.

thanks to all

[Navi]

I'm in Guys...

[tuliprose]

I am with you guys.

[adilzia]

i m wd u guyz....... whatever action u take....jst let me know......i wll contribute.

[RizKCB]

I contacted a firm and they replied as follow:


Thank-you for contacting Richmond Chambers Immigration Barristers.

In my opinion there is no way in which the changes to the Immigration Rules for entrepreneurs can be challenged. However, please note that the new rules do not state that a CV/business plan etc must be submitted with an application. If the UKBA require this then they will contact applicants and allow then 28 days in which to submit the requested information. Therefore, the fact that such evidence has not been submitted to date is not fatal.

If you require any further advice in due course then please do not hesitate to contact me again.

Kind regards,

Paul Richmond
LL.B (Hons), LL.M, Barrister


Seven Henrietta Street | Covent Garden | London | WC2E 8PS

' +44 (0)203 617 9173 6 +44 (0)203 004 1611

www.immigrationbarrister.co.uk

[la]

Hi RizKCB,


Main problem is with Money 200k - How can we get such huge money in 28 days - We thought of investing the money over three years.

UK BA said we need to have ongoing access to 200k means Money needs to be in the bank account till we invest it in the business - This rule is not there earlier. Can not we challenge this one. Did you check this rule with Richmond Chambers Immigration Barristers

Regards,

[kingraja]

i think we should challenge that people who are already on tier 1 entrepreneur visa & who apply before 31 Jan should not be effected with these new changes because when they apply they don't know about these rules if they know then may be they won't apply so my point is that they should apply new rules to new applicant not the old ones...r u guys agree with me?

[RizKCB]

Actually I inquired the same through email if a group of people could challenge new rules about their efficacy on old applicants.