Charged overseas student fees but hold a residence visa

[Dana]

Hi,

My wife was suppose to enroll to university today but was surprised when the university staff told her that she will be charged as an overseas student. My wife is now 21 years and was given the permanent residence visa at 2000 when she was 16, she did went to her home country for about 8 months or so
(but definitely less than a year) and return to the UK on november 2003. According to the university staff she was charged with an overseas student fees because of that period when she went to her home country, they said since she returned to the Uk on november 2003, she had been staying here for less than 3 years and she would be considered a home student if she enroll next year. Is there anyone that could give us an advice on how to solve this matter please.

Thank you very much,

ps: so sorry if this topic is not appropriate, don't know where else to seek advice

[Rogerio]

This is a difficult situation, as I guess most uni's ask for the student to have been present in the UK, as a permanent resident, over the last 3 years before allowing for home fees to be charged.

When does the course start? If she enrolled in Nov 2006 she will have been here 3 years and that would get round the 3 year residency requirement. Assuming the course will start in Oct or early Nov, would she be able to join it after it started?

OR would the uni not waive the strict 3 yr requirement based on the fact that 1) it's only one month for 3 years and 2) she has been a permanent resident for about 5 years?

Rogerio

[John]

Dana, I know it sounds tough but sorry, I think that is right. The regulations, quoted on many University websites, seem very clear.

Not saying that I agree with the regulations, so as they say, don't shoot the messenger.

[ppron747]

Sorry to demur, but I'm not sure that they are actually that clear...

Gloucester, for example, says:

A student has a relevant connection with the UK/EU if all of the following are met:

• He/she has been ordinarily resident in the UK/EU throughout the three year period before the start of his/her course, and
• The main purpose of your residence in the UK/EU must not have been to receive full-time education during any part of the three year period, and
• He/she has been given 'indefinite leave to remain'

It doesn't, however, explain what "ordinarily resident" means, exactly - or how long it takes to cease being ordinarily resident if you leave the country with the intention of coming back.

It seems to me to be at least arguable that "Mrs Dana" became ordinarily resident in 2000, and that her eight month absence from the country in the middle of that six year period was not sufficient to break her residence.

If the eight month absence was sufficient to break her period of being ordinarily resident, where does this leave the thousands of young people who take a gap year overseas before starting their university education? Shouldn't they be paying at overseas rates because they haven't been ordinarily resident "throughout the three year period before the start of his/her course"?

To me, eight months, as a proportion of six years, isn't very much - especially when you consider that a non-Brit applying for naturalisation can spend fifteen months of their five year residence period outside UK - and that that 15 months can be a single "chunk", provided that it isn't in the year leading up to the date of application...

I don't know whether what I'm saying holds water or not, and it is dozens of years since I was a student, but is not there some body that Mr and Mrs Dana can go to, so they they can at least be certain that the university is interpreting the rules correctly, and that there is no possibility of discretion being exercised if they are?

[John]

Dana, can you explain what your wife has been doing in the last three years? Studying? Or if not, what has she been doing?

And when did the two of you get married?

[nemo.]

"ordinarily resident" (OR) I presume relates to the tax definition. In this case after leaving the UK for 8 months (more than 6 months ago) within the last 3 years she would still count as OR. And is currently "resident" for tax purposes

There are three terms used for tax purposes

- domiciled
- ordinarily resident
- resident

These determine the taxes you pay - there are tests for these but clearly she passes the 3 year OR test. As she was "ordinarily resident" for 3 years for tax purposes maybe a letter from the tax authorities confirming this may help? (assuming she has tax records).

If the rules stated "resident" for the last 3 years then that would be different. You are not resident if away for more than 6 months basically. But clearly she is OR as the 8 months was "temporary" in nature, she intended and did return.

I think she should pay local rate!

Sorry to demur, but I'm not sure that they are actually that clear...

Gloucester, for example, says:

A student has a relevant connection with the UK/EU if all of the following are met:

• He/she has been ordinarily resident in the UK/EU throughout the three year period before the start of his/her course, and
• The main purpose of your residence in the UK/EU must not have been to receive full-time education during any part of the three year period, and
• He/she has been given 'indefinite leave to remain'

It doesn't, however, explain what "ordinarily resident" means, exactly - or how long it takes to cease being ordinarily resident if you leave the country with the intention of coming back.

It seems to me to be at least arguable that "Mrs Dana" became ordinarily resident in 2000, and that her eight month absence from the country in the middle of that six year period was not sufficient to break her residence.

If the eight month absence was sufficient to break her period of being ordinarily resident, where does this leave the thousands of young people who take a gap year overseas before starting their university education? Shouldn't they be paying at overseas rates because they haven't been ordinarily resident "throughout the three year period before the start of his/her course"?

To me, eight months, as a proportion of six years, isn't very much - especially when you consider that a non-Brit applying for naturalisation can spend fifteen months of their five year residence period outside UK - and that that 15 months can be a single "chunk", provided that it isn't in the year leading up to the date of application...

I don't know whether what I'm saying holds water or not, and it is dozens of years since I was a student, but is not there some body that Mr and Mrs Dana can go to, so they they can at least be certain that the university is interpreting the rules correctly, and that there is no possibility of discretion being exercised if they are?

[Dawie]

Alternatively you could vote with your feet and try to find another university that doesn't interpret the rules so strictly.

[JAJ]

Alternatively you could vote with your feet and try to find another university that doesn't interpret the rules so strictly.

Maybe easier said than done. Is there any appeals process against such ruling, or can the office of the Ombudsman get involved?

[Thandia]

I doubt she will be allowed to pay home fees, unless she has actually been in the country for the full three years preceding her course. Most universities will not budge on this rule. At the university I attended, this rule was not negotiable. U either paid the fees or waited for the following year. If she does start the course without waiting for her three years to be up, she will be charged the international rate for the duration of her course. Best bet is to defer for a year & then start as a home student.