Settlement requirements for PBS migrants from April 2011

[xyz123]

ISome of the rules will be challenged in court if it is pass into law and he should know better that any retrospective changes will result in wasting taxpayers money.

[/quote]

I disagree that it will be a waste of taxpayers money. Govt lost HSMP case as they effectively gave the incoming migrants a gurantee that one can get ILR after certain number of years. Losing HSMP doesnt mean any future changes to settlement duration will be thrown out by courts. (as proven when judicial review for HSMP was only for HSMP and not for WP holders who simply had to comply with extended duration)

All new applicants and those who extend./switch their visa are told that rules may change at any time in future.

Most of the people live into their 80s these days and spending 2-3-4 years in another country is not a long term commitment.

i understand its frustrating, but we need to remember that at the end of the day coming to UK is a choice made by all of us and with it comes the risk of changes to rules. just relax and enjoy the time here!

[cuberoot]

ISome of the rules will be challenged in court if it is pass into law and he should know better that any retrospective changes will result in wasting taxpayers money.

I disagree that it will be a waste of taxpayers money. Govt lost HSMP case as they effectively gave the incoming migrants a gurantee that one can get ILR after certain number of years. Losing HSMP doesnt mean any future changes to settlement duration will be thrown out by courts. (as proven when judicial review for HSMP was only for HSMP and not for WP holders who simply had to comply with extended duration)

All new applicants and those who extend./switch their visa are told that rules may change at any time in future.

Most of the people live into their 80s these days and spending 2-3-4 years in another country is not a long term commitment.

i understand its frustrating, but we need to remember that at the end of the day coming to UK is a choice made by all of us and with it comes the risk of changes to rules. just relax and enjoy the time here!

I disagree with this argument.

I have no problem with the Govt changing the law for new entrants. This makes sense. If the rules are clear at application time and stable for the lifetime of that applicants time in the UK then nobody will be under false assumptions on their future and nobody should have any right to be upset if they are not granted ILR because the rules would have stated that there would be no ILR right from the offset. This is how immigration works in Australia and New Zealand. The rules are clear in black and white from the beginning. I hope this is what the outcome of the consultation on settlement will be. To clarify and simplify the rules to settlement. Make them clear and unambiguous like the rules of a professional immigration system should be.

In the UK, the rules are gray. This causes big problems for the many applicants that have been "grandfathered" through the system. I was initially granted HSMP for 2 years. This was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years. The rules then changed when I had to extend (causing me great stress I might add). Thankfully, the Govt introduced transitional measures and moved me onto the wonderful Tier 1 (General) visa for 3 years. Note that I had no opportunity to stay on HSMP with the same rules, the Govt essentially forced me to move onto Tier 1 (I could have left the UK, but this was not my intention, after all I came to the UK on HSMP and was intending to settle by following all the rules). Again, Tier 1 was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years, but they introduced some "grayness" to the rules by mentioning that the rules were subject to change. Sneaky. Who would sign up for an immigration visa like this, where the rules are gray? I know that I would not have signed up for it if these were the initial rules I was presented with. Would you commit to purchase a car with a service plan that is presented as lasting 5 years, but subject to review? No, of course not. Would you start studying a 3 year degree and then be told in the 3rd year that they have changed their minds and now the qualification takes 5 years? No, of course not.

So my argument is strongly against retrospective changes for people who came to the UK with certain conditions and risk, but then having these conditions changed midway through the visa. I was not told when my initial leave was granted that the rules could and would change. I think that is very unfair and against the initial spirit of the visa that I was initially granted.

[xyz123]

[quote="cuberoot

I disagree with this argument.

I have no problem with the Govt changing the law for new entrants. This makes sense. If the rules are clear at application time and stable for the lifetime of that applicants time in the UK then nobody will be under false assumptions on their future and nobody should have any right to be upset if they are not granted ILR because the rules would have stated that there would be no ILR right from the offset. This is how immigration works in Australia and New Zealand. The rules are clear in black and white from the beginning. I hope this is what the outcome of the consultation on settlement will be. To clarify and simplify the rules to settlement. Make them clear and unambiguous like the rules of a professional immigration system should be.

In the UK, the rules are gray. This causes big problems for the many applicants that have been "grandfathered" through the system. I was initially granted HSMP for 2 years. This was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years. The rules then changed when I had to extend (causing me great stress I might add). Thankfully, the Govt introduced transitional measures and moved me onto the wonderful Tier 1 (General) visa for 3 years. Note that I had no opportunity to stay on HSMP with the same rules, the Govt essentially forced me to move onto Tier 1 (I could have left the UK, but this was not my intention, after all I came to the UK on HSMP and was intending to settle by following all the rules). Again, Tier 1 was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years, but they introduced some "grayness" to the rules by mentioning that the rules were subject to change. Sneaky. Who would sign up for an immigration visa like this, where the rules are gray? I know that I would not have signed up for it if these were the initial rules I was presented with. Would you commit to purchase a car with a service plan that is presented as lasting 5 years, but subject to review? No, of course not. Would you start studying a 3 year degree and then be told in the 3rd year that they have changed their minds and now the qualification takes 5 years? No, of course not.

So my argument is strongly against retrospective changes for people who came to the UK with certain conditions and risk, but then having these conditions changed midway through the visa. I was not told when my initial leave was granted that the rules could and would change. I think that is very unfair and against the initial spirit of the visa that I was initially granted.[/quote]

When did you come to this Country?

Anyone who came to this country or extended their visa after April 2006 must be aware of potential risk of rule changes (in April 2006 ILR requirements increased from 4 years to 5 years). and anyone who came before april 2006, should be getting their ILR in next 3-4 weeks or so and hence should not be affected by any forthcoming changes.

So in summary you knew after 2 years that rules are chagning. if you are still living in this country that means you have made a choice of living with the risk.

its always easy to compare one country's immigration system to other countrys and if you think that Australia and New Zealan has a much better system then why are we all here in UK. Shouldnt we be there? we all made a choice to come and live in this country so along with that choice comes the risk.

i am not against or in support of changes by government. at the end of the day we go to otehr countries for better opportunities. so all i am saying is that do not stress yourself to death with the worries. you get some you lose some!

[cuberoot]

I disagree with this argument.

I have no problem with the Govt changing the law for new entrants. This makes sense. If the rules are clear at application time and stable for the lifetime of that applicants time in the UK then nobody will be under false assumptions on their future and nobody should have any right to be upset if they are not granted ILR because the rules would have stated that there would be no ILR right from the offset. This is how immigration works in Australia and New Zealand. The rules are clear in black and white from the beginning. I hope this is what the outcome of the consultation on settlement will be. To clarify and simplify the rules to settlement. Make them clear and unambiguous like the rules of a professional immigration system should be.

In the UK, the rules are gray. This causes big problems for the many applicants that have been "grandfathered" through the system. I was initially granted HSMP for 2 years. This was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years. The rules then changed when I had to extend (causing me great stress I might add). Thankfully, the Govt introduced transitional measures and moved me onto the wonderful Tier 1 (General) visa for 3 years. Note that I had no opportunity to stay on HSMP with the same rules, the Govt essentially forced me to move onto Tier 1 (I could have left the UK, but this was not my intention, after all I came to the UK on HSMP and was intending to settle by following all the rules). Again, Tier 1 was presented as a route to settlement after 5 years, but they introduced some "grayness" to the rules by mentioning that the rules were subject to change. Sneaky. Who would sign up for an immigration visa like this, where the rules are gray? I know that I would not have signed up for it if these were the initial rules I was presented with. Would you commit to purchase a car with a service plan that is presented as lasting 5 years, but subject to review? No, of course not. Would you start studying a 3 year degree and then be told in the 3rd year that they have changed their minds and now the qualification takes 5 years? No, of course not.

So my argument is strongly against retrospective changes for people who came to the UK with certain conditions and risk, but then having these conditions changed midway through the visa. I was not told when my initial leave was granted that the rules could and would change. I think that is very unfair and against the initial spirit of the visa that I was initially granted.

When did you come to this Country?

Anyone who came to this country or extended their visa after April 2006 must be aware of potential risk of rule changes (in April 2006 ILR requirements increased from 4 years to 5 years). and anyone who came before april 2006, should be getting their ILR in next 3-4 weeks or so and hence should not be affected by any forthcoming changes.

So in summary you knew after 2 years that rules are chagning. if you are still living in this country that means you have made a choice of living with the risk.

its always easy to compare one country's immigration system to other countrys and if you think that Australia and New Zealan has a much better system then why are we all here in UK. Shouldnt we be there? we all made a choice to come and live in this country so along with that choice comes the risk.

i am not against or in support of changes by government. at the end of the day we go to otehr countries for better opportunities. so all i am saying is that do not stress yourself to death with the worries. you get some you lose some!

I came to the UK in Dec 2006. I was presented with a clear route to settlement after 5 years if I met certain conditions. I was not told that these conditions could be changed midway through my stay. I dont think I would have taken the risk if this was made clear from the beginning.

I think the Govt has made this uncertainty much clearer now with the new rules for Tier 2 (General) coming in April. So they have actually been fixing and improving the system and I think its actually a lot more robust.

You seem to forget that the biggest risk is taken at the initial application. This is where you decide the "mindset" you will adhere to when in the UK. My intention was to immigrate to the UK and I made this decision and took this risk with my initial HSMP application. I committed to a permanent stay in the UK, not a temporary stay.

I agree with your opinion and "mindset" on the current immigration situation for Tier 1 and Tier 2. If I had come to the UK originally on Tier 1 I would have a much more relaxed opinion, because I would never have invested so heavily in the UK if I knew that my future here was uncertain. I would never have bought my flat or bought so many investments here. I would have treated my stay here as temporary and not permanent. Its a subtle distinction, but I'm trying to get across that my lifestyle and mindset would have been much different if I knew that my stay was only temporary.

My point is not that one country's immigration system is better than another's. My point is that if a country is going to have a successful immigration system it needs to be trusted and the applicants need to have confidence in the system. For this to happen the rules must be clear right from the beginning and they should be fixed for the duration of your stay (as long as you adhere to the conditions of course). They should not be in flux throughout your stay. If they are in flux, they are not very professional are they? Its hard to have confidence in an immigration system that is constantly in flux.

I think the new Govt understands this and hopefully they clarify everything for new and existing immigrants.

[eager2learn]

the backpage of my initial wp says i can apply for ILR after 4 years and it was changed within 2 months of me coming to UK, april 2006. It was a retrospective change. I think it already went to court but govt won, simply because no unequivocal promise was given, it says "you may apply after 4 years" not that "we will be bound to give you ILR after 4 years".

[xyz123]

I came to the UK in Dec 2006.

so you knew that UK government changes rules.

I was presented with a clear route to settlement after 5 years if I met certain conditions.

How? all you had that "one may apply for ILR after X years" may being the key word.

I committed to a permanent stay in the UK, not a temporary stay.

You are saying as if it's our right to just go to any other country, live there for X no of years and get citizenship. Our commitments alone doesn't matter at all. The country that we go to has right to decide whether we can stay here permanently or not.

[Son_of_Soil]

Is the new rules r set or they can still change? I mean if it has been approved by the gov or not? What does it take to set these rule as standard? If they can still change/ modified, when the earliest it can be done considering rules will be in place from April onwards!

[jockey]

[quote="lavkir"]The introduction of the [u]Criminality threshold [/u]for settlement to bring it more in line with that for citizenship (naturalisation) applicants sounds the deathknell for ILR applicants like me who have unspent motoring convictions. Applicants currently applying for citizenship (naturalisation) have to be clear of all criminal convictions (including motoring).

I am currently on my Tier1 extension, so to be eligible for ILR, I will need another Tier1 extension which seems unlikely even for in country applicants. Moderators - your views please.[/quote]

fixed penalty speeding offence is not a criminal unspent conviction. this is clearly stated in ukba website- see link http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/briti ... character/

[jockey]

[quote="mac456"][quote="abhijack"][quote="lavkir"]The introduction of the [u]Criminality threshold [/u]for settlement to bring it more in line with that for citizenship (naturalisation) applicants sounds the deathknell for ILR applicants like me who have unspent motoring convictions. Applicants currently applying for citizenship (naturalisation) have to be clear of all criminal convictions (including motoring).

I am currently on my Tier1 extension, so to be eligible for ILR, I will need another Tier1 extension which seems unlikely even for in country applicants. Moderators - your views please.[/quote]

are you sure your motoring conviction is 'unspent' ?
the rules do allow you to have spent convictions.....[/quote]

if you get a fine(from a court; like magistrates court or crown court) for a motoring offence they are spent AFTER 5 years from date of conviction. According to Nationality guide homeoffice will ignore your minor motoring offences which resulted in minor fine. Please see the AN guideline ( for Nationality ). Dont know if that will be exactly similar for settlement, looks like it will be.

Anyhow I think people with motoring conviction can be refused ILR based on this new threshold (i.e clear of unspent convictions ).

Best to wait for full guidelines ( will be out in March) and see what they write in it.[/quote]
this link says about motoring offences for ilr http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/briti ... character/

[jockey]

[quote="blay1"]Hi All
I know this new laws are not really out yet but i am applying for IND in June.Can anyone tell me if 3pt on my licence for driving 38mph on a 30 speed limit zone is a minor or major offence[/quote]

ukba website clearly answers your question see this link http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/briti ... character/

[York123]

Hi All,
It is very difficult to challenge this case if the rules are once implemented , we need to act immediately on this. I tried to contact the MP from my constituency , I managed to get personal appointment on 11th of March. But it is not sufficient if one person meets one MP . One can meet only MP from their constituency if you people try to reach your local MP before mid of March & explain that it is very unfair to change to rules all of a sudden & for people who are already in the country it will help a lot. Even I spoke to solicitor , he said it will be helpful if we can tell about it to Local MP’s.
If you people could not get the appointment to meet the MP atleast send an email to his id, they will atleast check it, if we can convience as many MP as possible then they may vote in favor to us & the bill may not be passed.
Please find out your local MP from your contituency from below link:
http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/
Please try to send the email ASAP.
And also the solicitor suggested if we can sign a petetion & submit to one MP from Labour party he may present it when the bill is passed in the parliament.
Also try to mention the Damain Green words in your email:
“The Government's previous decision to change the rules so that highly skilled migrants who are already here and who want to stay are now disqualified from doing so is both unfair and wrong-headed. It is unfair because those people have made a commitment to this country but are having that flung back in their faces, and it is wrong-headed because it sends a signal to highly skilled people around the world that Britain is an unreliable place.â€

[smaganti]

York,

i completely agree with your comments.iam going to contact my MP.from where do we need to sign the petition?

[abbi123]

i am interested to send an email to my mp also,
can some one send a draft email please so we all can send the same email to all our representative mp's......


Many Thanks

[Son_of_Soil]

Please provide a draft email , it will help a lot. i am in coventry but the link given above shows my MP in london somehere.

[York123]

I dont know how the petetion will be. I will ask the solicitor or someone who signed for petetion for ILR rules for HSMP earlier in 2009.
If anyone knows how to prepare the petetion please help.

@Son_of_Soil:
We will send petetion with signatures in common, but email you can send as you wish stating that it is very unfair to change the rules. You can copy paste the Damain Green speech in 2009( I have pasted that is my previous message) where he said it is unfair to change the rules for existing immigrants as they have commited to the country.
You can say he said that earlier but now he is doing all this without mercy & without giving any time for people who are eligible for ILR in near future to arrange for transition process or for getting new visa .

It is only in UK where we immigrants dont have unity & work for each other, if this would have happend in any other country like US they will do big scene & do rally's & go to any extent to stop these rules from being implemented.
One of my friend from US was shocked to know how the Govt is changing the rules at last minute.
We have to do something regarding this. Please ask your friends from different places to write to there local MP.

[dewales001]

[quote="York123"]Hi All,
It is very difficult to challenge this case if the rules are once implemented , we need to act immediately on this. I tried to contact the MP from my constituency , I managed to get personal appointment on 11th of March. But it is not sufficient if one person meets one MP . One can meet only MP from their constituency if you people try to reach your local MP before mid of March & explain that it is very unfair to change to rules all of a sudden & for people who are already in the country it will help a lot. Even I spoke to solicitor , he said it will be helpful if we can tell about it to Local MP’s.
If you people could not get the appointment to meet the MP atleast send an email to his id, they will atleast check it, if we can convience as many MP as possible then they may vote in favor to us & the bill may not be passed.
Please find out your local MP from your contituency from below link:
http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/
Please try to send the email ASAP.
And also the solicitor suggested if we can sign a petetion & submit to one MP from Labour party he may present it when the bill is passed in the parliament.
Also try to mention the Damain Green words in your email:
“The Government's previous decision to change the rules so that highly skilled migrants who are already here and who want to stay are now disqualified from doing so is both unfair and wrong-headed. It is unfair because those people have made a commitment to this country but are having that flung back in their faces, and it is wrong-headed because it sends a signal to highly skilled people around the world that Britain is an unreliable place.â€

[Son_of_Soil]

Hi
i am trying to arrange a meeting with my MP aswell. Can anyone tell what documents i need to take with me? i will take the new rules publised, aprat from that please tell me what else do i need to take.

Regards

[smaganti]

Dewales001,,

please post your comments in the forum after you meet MP so that we can be prepared before we go to meet our MP's as well..



[quote="dewales001"][quote="York123"]Hi All,
It is very difficult to challenge this case if the rules are once implemented , we need to act immediately on this. I tried to contact the MP from my constituency , I managed to get personal appointment on 11th of March. But it is not sufficient if one person meets one MP . One can meet only MP from their constituency if you people try to reach your local MP before mid of March & explain that it is very unfair to change to rules all of a sudden & for people who are already in the country it will help a lot. Even I spoke to solicitor , he said it will be helpful if we can tell about it to Local MP’s.
If you people could not get the appointment to meet the MP atleast send an email to his id, they will atleast check it, if we can convience as many MP as possible then they may vote in favor to us & the bill may not be passed.
Please find out your local MP from your contituency from below link:
http://findyourmp.parliament.uk/
Please try to send the email ASAP.
And also the solicitor suggested if we can sign a petetion & submit to one MP from Labour party he may present it when the bill is passed in the parliament.
Also try to mention the Damain Green words in your email:
“The Government's previous decision to change the rules so that highly skilled migrants who are already here and who want to stay are now disqualified from doing so is both unfair and wrong-headed. It is unfair because those people have made a commitment to this country but are having that flung back in their faces, and it is wrong-headed because it sends a signal to highly skilled people around the world that Britain is an unreliable place.â€

[rajivilr]

Hi Everyone,

I think we really need to tell them that changing laws for people who have already committed there future now is really not fair. When we applied laws were different and now all of a sudden it has changed, I have checked and I will also try to get the appointment to meet the MP else atleast send a mail to show our discontent. Please let me know what we should write and discuss with him, may be one thread only for that and we all get in touch with our respective MP's.

Raj

[geriatrix]

i will take the new rules publised

I hope that people understand the difference between "statement of intent" and "rules published"!



regards

[Son_of_Soil]

Hello Sushdmehta

i just got mised up between the two, I know there are no set rules published yet and its just a perposal.i meant to say i will take copy of thisperposed rules to the MP.

i will take the new rules publised

I hope that people understand the difference between "statement of intent" and "rules published"!



regards

[York123]

I just want you people to know about my case:
I was on Work Permit Visa from past 5 years working for the same employer. I was due for ILR on 13th of May & my Work Permit Visa expires on 1st of June.
I was shocked when I have seen the new rules which are going to be implemented from April 6th 2011 because I have unspent driving conviction where my international driving licence got expired (which I was not aware) & also I have provisional licence at that time but they said the insurance which I was paying on international licence was invalid as my international licence got expired.
Now my conviction will be spent in April 2013 but I have only Visa till June 1st 2011. My employer cannot do Tier-2 for me & also I don’t meet criteria for Tier-1. Now I don’t even have time to find a job where the employer sponsors me Tier-2. If I don’t get ILR in May 2011, I will be left with only one option that is going back to India. I came here as a student in 2002. I was in this country legally & paying all the taxes & at the end this Govt is changing the rules all of sudden.
There are many similar cases like me who are still not aware that the rules are changing. There are many cases where people on HSMP & Tier-1 visa who are working for less salaries than what they showed during extension due to this recession.
But the most effected will be always people like me who are in the border line who don’t have enough time to plan for other alternatives for applying other visa’s or for transitions.
There is one more case among my friends who is due for ILR in April end, his current visa also expires in May. He even cant extend his visa if he don’t get ILR because for Tier-1 or Tier-2 we need to show funds for 3 months in our bank account but it is not required for ILR so he didn’t maintain the funds & now he is not eligible for ILR according to new rules & he even can’t extent his visa because of lack of funds.
Hope these cases will help you to understand how people will be affected & you can speak accordingly to your MP.
Please don’t think I'm doing all this because I’m going to lose my eligibility for ILR by these new rules, even if they implement the rules & if I leave this country my life will not end there. I always have my home country but I just want this Government to know that there will be many immigrants who have to leave this country if the implement those rules.
Even if one MP speak in favour to immigrants when they pass the bill in Parliament in mid of March I will be very happy.
There are many people who will be affected by these upcoming rules. Let us work together & stop these rules from being implemented.
So let’s try our best.

@dewales001
Thanks for reacting very quickly. Please post your experience after meeting the MP

[jinkazama_11]

I think it will be difficult for the govt to change the rules for old HSMP visa holders because of high court judgement.

I am not sure about new Tier 1 and Tier 2 visa holders. Tier 1 Applicants have to sign the declaration on page 64 of Tier 1 application form which states following "I am aware that the rules and regulations governing points based system applications may change in the future and do not assume that the requirements covering any future applications will be the same.". This means that you have agreed that in future new rules can change.

Tier 2 applicants also have to sign the deceleration in new Tier 2 Form page 47 which states "I am aware that the rules and regulations governing points based system applications may change in the future and do not assume that the requirements covering any future applications will be the
same".

I agree with everyone that new rules should not apply to existing migrants but wining a court case in this situation seems a bit difficult.

[rajivilr]

Hi York,

I think I am the unluckiest here then coz i can actually apply on 8th of April and falling short by just 2 days and i am ready to support you as well, we should atleast keep our views in front of ministers. The laws should come in effect from that particular day and effect people applying under new rules. People who are already under the old rules should be left as when the wprk permit or HSMP was granted the rules at that time were different.

I am ready to speak to my MP or atleast mail him and we should try that as many people as possible who are here to get in touch with these people.

Raj

[xyz123]

I where my international driving licence got expired (which I was not aware)

How is that possible? It is YOUR licence.

anyway good luck with your application.