Applied for paper hearing but been listed for oral hearing

[lily2013]

I just received a letter from the tribunal notifying me of a hearing on the 16th Dec 2013. This is after I had recieved two letters from them- One in August advising that its a paper hearing and the second asking me to send additional evidence before Sept 3rd ( which I did). Its so confusing and even more frustarting now.

I called them thinking that it was an error but they said judge has listed it for oral hearing and I should write to them if I'm not able to attend.

Refusal reasons were no CAR included ( but I did include this report) and Contract did not explain services provided to clients - 'vague' according to caseworker.

I have been asked to send a bundle to HO and HO will send me theirs. My solicitor is not in a hurry to send the bundle but I dont want to leave it to the last minute.

ur thoughts please?

[top]

Dear Sir,

the objection relates to CAR not provided when you said you did, you might have sent a copy available online rather requested one for a fee received in post is not something that everyone understands or try to understand at the time application most of applicants rush as we know.
in such a situation as this the thing that tells Border agency if provided document is the one for a fee or printed off available on line is the top page where it tails the order details, removing that page saves you from this embarrassment or follow as they say provide the paid one,however there is not even a minor difference in them both.

services to have not been detailed in detail on the contract is something that you know, but one thing I know for a fact this objection stays valid before the provision of services but when a service has been provided whether it was mentioned in detail or not it can not be a valid objection because the objection on service which has been provided is how judges look at the case, staying active in provision of service besides arguments mentioned contents on a contract were sufficient it is easy achievable.

a judge can choose to ask further questions when analyse a case and is possible when you are there is what judge would have thought more questions as to why respondent says a thing to have not been provided while applicant says he did, I'll call it an opportunity to explain yourself a lot better than what could have been decided behind the wall in your absence.
thanks

[lily2013]

Thanks Top for your reply. I am a ma'am by the way

I did pay (i think )£1 for the CAR and it was emailed to me, I opted for this because first it was cheaper and faster than the postal option and second because the advisor said it was the same document whether emailed or posted. So why the caseworker said it wasn't included is still a mystery. I am sure it would have made more sense if the refusal reason was that the CAR provided was not in the right format rather than saying 'not provided'.

As for your second point, sorry not so sure what conclusion you have drawn from the rejection reason. The caseworker concluded by saying they the contract is vague and did not think the business is active.

[top]

Dear ma'am (sorry but I do not know what it is)
am I right to say your reading ability is not at competent level which could not understand the simplest way of explaining.

consider me a case worker who says looking at the contract and contents on it you are not active in business looks like acceptable when you had not provided services at the time of application, you were active in provision of services and you had provided services before you were served with a refusal notice is not acceptable excuse from Border agency to court that this applicant is not active when services has already been provided at that time missing contents services not mentioned in detail etc. are secondary reasons for a judge to uphold the decision, judges always over turn the decision in that situation because you would have logically met the rules on a contract requirement where provision of service is completed you claimed through the contract. as it would have clearly shown you as a genuine entrepreneur.

thanks..

[zohanx747]

A judge can choose to ask further questions when analyse a case and is possible when you are there is what judge would have thought more questions as to why respondent says a thing to have not been provided while applicant says he did, I'll call it an opportunity to explain yourself a lot better than what could have been decided behind the wall in your absence.
thanks

[babylondoner]

Dear ma'am (sorry but I do not know what it is)
am I right to say your reading ability is not at competent level which could not understand the simplest way of explaining.


thanks..

are you for real

why insult the poster?

so you know MR TOP.... most of your so called analysis are RUBBISH and they make little or no sense. same with your English sentences. you use the wrong tenses and make so much grammatical errors. Its a miracle how anyone understand most of the BS you blab about.

[Amber]

top please remember to treat members with respect.

[top]

my sincere sorry to everyone my comments caused the heart break.
considering the objections how I am thought I decided to stay no more on this forum.

hope you guys keep it up your ways,

Kind Regards,
Top.

[Amber]

You just need to remember that saying people are simple or incompetent is not very respectful. However, if you're using a translator then perhaps try using a better one.

[Olasunkanmi]

Dear ma'am (sorry but I do not know what it is)
am I right to say your reading ability is not at competent level which could not understand the simplest way of explaining.


thanks..

are you for real

why insult the poster?

so you know MR TOP.... most of your so called analysis are RUBBISH and they make little or no sense. same with your English sentences. you use the wrong tenses and make so much grammatical errors. Its a miracle how anyone understand most of the BS you blab about.

I always thought as much for TOP as he seem to always attack members that post questions for simple answers.

I hope he learn how to address members with respect.

[Olasunkanmi]

@ lily2013, you might have choosen to have a paper hearing rather than an oral hearing, but don't forget that there is an entrepreneurial test for applicants and judge requesting you to attend oral hearing might be a way of asking you direct questions to see if you are a genuine entrepreneur. Take the request as an interview request by Home Office.

Meanwhile, your refusal reasons are very easy to defeat on the basis that your business is trading.

The first point will be trash out by judge if you were registered as director with company house as at the time of your application. The CAR copy can either be printed copy or one ordered with payment, caseworkers are just being silly sometimes and in your own case, they simply said you didn't submit one so get the copy you submit with your application and take with you to the hearing. You might also get a recent copy.

The second point can only be defended if you are actually trading, so take along with you to the hearing all the evidence of your business and trading activities.

[lily2013]

Thanks D4109125, babylondoner, Olasunkanmi, for sticking up for me. When I saw top's insulting comments I wanted to react but I just held back because my time is better spent on more worthwhile issues.

[lily2013]

@ lily2013, you might have choosen to have a paper hearing rather than an oral hearing, but don't forget that there is an entrepreneurial test for applicants and judge requesting you to attend oral hearing might be a way of asking you direct questions to see if you are a genuine entrepreneur. Take the request as an interview request by Home Office.

Meanwhile, your refusal reasons are very easy to defeat on the basis that your business is trading.

The first point will be trash out by judge if you were registered as director with company house as at the time of your application. The CAR copy can either be printed copy or one ordered with payment, caseworkers are just being silly sometimes and in your own case, they simply said you didn't submit one so get the copy you submit with your application and take with you to the hearing. You might also get a recent copy.

The second point can only be defended if you are actually trading, so take along with you to the hearing all the evidence of your business and trading activities.

Thanks for your comments, I'll get a new CAR ready for the hearing. My business is still active and I have just signed another contract. I have also been able to open a bank account successfully too ( it was difficult because dont have passport ). I just hope no more surprises and hoping for the best.

[vinny]

If you have been listed for an oral hearing, then it may be a good thing.

The prospects of a successful appeal increase where there is an oral hearing. It helps the tribunal to assess the evidence by hearing witnesses give evidence. This is a factor legal representatives should take into account when advising clients about whether or not to have an oral hearing.

See also Representing yourself in Court > Guide.

[lily2013]

If you have been listed for an oral hearing, then it may be a good thing.

The prospects of a successful appeal increase where there is an oral hearing. It helps the tribunal to assess the evidence by hearing witnesses give evidence. This is a factor legal representatives should take into account when advising clients about whether or not to have an oral hearing.

See also Representing yourself in Court > Guide.

Thanks. the link was useful.