My experience with the UK immigration

[askmeplz82]

I am a family member of an EEA national. Separated from long time. Today I'm seriously thinking to get divorce. it's been 5 years 7 months marriage now.

I often travel outside the UK but yesterday i had worst experience coming back . UK immigration officers asked me so many questions

where is my wife, when we married, where we married, how we meet, what she does, do we have any children, where she work, her address and mobile number

I told her she is exercising treaty right as self sufficient EEA national ( we have health insurance ) and working, but she keep saying so you are well rehearsed. You know about the law.
I got stuck where she work because i do not know. So she told me to wait . but luckily my ex didn't pickup the phone so the officer came back and let me go. She remind me that i will be tough interview next time and even home visit. I am scared now

[Abi77]

You should have done it before now, not too late though.Good luck

[Obie]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

[chaoclive]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

[Obie]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

No one say a person should not be questioned, but sarcastic comments is deeply unprofessional and unacceptable.

A person is entitled to know their right. Saying a person has well rehearsed , indicates that they are suggesting that their action is artificial, or his knowledge of his rights is somehow designed for the interview.

Also the suggestion that he will be interviewed or receive a home visit, is in my view wholly inappropriate.

[gozo1]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

It is completely unacceptable for the immigration officer to state he/she is well rehearsed and he/she knows about the law, is it a problem for the OP to know about his or her right? And you question the unacceptability of that inappropriateness?

[chaoclive]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

It is completely unacceptable for the immigration officer to state he/she is well rehearsed and he/she knows about the law, is it a problem for the OP to know about his or her right? And you question the unacceptability of that inappropriateness?

It was a statement of fact. I don't see any issue whatsoever. They are allowed to ask questions, as are respondents allowed to rehearse, they are also allowed to state facts as they see fit. Get over it.

Please show me where in any legislation it states that this is a problem.

[gozo1]

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

It was a statement of fact. I don't see any issue whatsoever. They are allowed to ask questions, as are respondents allowed to rehearse, they are also allowed to state facts as they see fit. Get over it.

Please show me where in any legislation it states that this is a problem.

Of course you can say get over it now, couple of months ago when you were stuck at whatever place it was you were desperately trying to get out of with your other half, you understood what it meant for UKVI to apply the law correctly.

It was not a statement of fact, it was a patronising statement, i'm sure you were here months ago too when an applicant was refused in France for simply for understanding the regulations and applicable case law in O&B, that too is a statement of fact right?

[chaoclive]

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

It was a statement of fact. I don't see any issue whatsoever. They are allowed to ask questions, as are respondents allowed to rehearse, they are also allowed to state facts as they see fit. Get over it.

Please show me where in any legislation it states that this is a problem.

Of course you can say get over it now, couple of months ago when you were stuck at whatever place it was you were desperately trying to get out of with your other half, you understood what it meant for UKVI to apply the law correctly.

It was not a statement of fact, it was a patronising statement, i'm sure you were here months ago too when an applicant was refused in France for simply for understanding the regulations and applicable case law in O&B, that too is a statement of fact right?

I was asking you to get over it, not the OP. I was not stuck at all, nor was I ever in a desperate situation. I have never desperately tried to get out of anywhere. I had a great job in China and led a nice life. There was nothing wrong with being there if we had been unable to move, however, being a former dual citizen, we have always had options. The reason for moving was to get my civil partner citizenship before things changed. I also planned every step so that nothing could go wrong. I am very aware of the need to know the law. You may want to read through my previous posts to read about my story, rather than assuming.

The fact is that he probably was 'well-rehearsed' as he has done this before (i.e. traveling outside the UK) and he does know the law. I didn't say there was anything wrong with that. As noted above, I knew the law that applied to us too and don't mind to be told that by someone in immigration. After all, there was nothing they could fault us on. I absolutely do not agree at all with people being refused on this basis and would definitely be taking that refusal further if it was anything to do with me.

As far as I can gather, you were not there when the OP was talking to the immigration officer. Did you hear the tone with which these things were said?

I am always going to have run-ins with you, no matter what. Not very inspired by our 'chats' tbh.

[gozo1]

There are two sides to a coin, whilst I wasn't present when the interrogation took place, one could rightly possibly assume that he was patronising the OP by suggesting they may visit him or call him for interview, what's that about? I am not prepared to engage you further on this issue, I have my opinion on the matter, you have yours, It is nothing to do with gross misapplication of the rules, and therefore not constructive, so I quit.

[Imshzd]

This is a routine case,every day hundreds of non British or non EU passport holders face these problems at UK ports.
Animals are more respectful at UK airports then non british/non EU passport holders.
UK immigration officers can open thier mouth like a gun and can fire dozen non sense questions without any reason, specially female officers.
Immigrants are very soft targets in the UK now a days so what politicians or what immigration officers,every body can easily humilate them under the shed of newly introduced anti immigrantion laws.
I personally feel that UK border force don't trust on UK visa and immigration service,because every time when passenger presents thier visa at immigration desk,UK border force officer starts their investigations to passengers that how they get this visa or RC/PR.I think one department is doing wrong,may be the department who issue the visa or the department who investigate the visa at ports?
Countries like Canada,once the visa department issues a visa then no immigration officers are allowed to humilate the travellers except the security checks on passport,because IO trust thier visa issuing authorities.

[chaoclive]

There are two sides to a coin, whilst I wasn't present when the interrogation took place, one could rightly possibly assume that he was patronising the OP by suggesting they may visit him or call him for interview, what's that about? I am not prepared to engage you further on this issue, I have my opinion on the matter, you have yours, It is nothing to do with gross misapplication of the rules, and therefore not constructive, so I quit.

They indeed may interview or visit him if he were to apply for PR or another residence card.

Fact is: there was no misapplication of the rules.

Well avoided

[Obie]

They seem a bit ruthless these days, but there was no basis for the way they behaved to you.

It was wholly unacceptable.

What was unacceptable about it? They simply asked questions, which they are entitled to do.

It is completely unacceptable for the immigration officer to state he/she is well rehearsed and he/she knows about the law, is it a problem for the OP to know about his or her right? And you question the unacceptability of that inappropriateness?

It was a statement of fact. I don't see any issue whatsoever. They are allowed to ask questions, as are respondents allowed to rehearse, they are also allowed to state facts as they see fit. Get over it.

Please show me where in any legislation it states that this is a problem.[/quote]

Well if you don't think intimidating a customer by threatening them that they could get home visit, when EU law don't even required joint cohabitation is a good thing, and sarcastically telling a customer that they have well rehearsed is a deeply offensive remarks, then we are certainly not living in the same planet , and i need not take this debate any further than this.

I will simply be content to conclude that we are not on the same wavelength.

[chaoclive]

Well if you don't think intimidating a customer by threatening them that they could get home visit, when EU law don't even required joint cohabitation is a good thing, and sarcastically telling a customer that they have well rehearsed is a deeply offensive remarks, then we are certainly not living in the same planet , and i need not take this debate any further than this.

I will simply be content to conclude that we are not on the same wavelength.

As I said to Gozo: you were not there and do not know the tone with which any remarks were made. Don't forget that the Home Office may invite him to interview or arrange a home visit if he applies for another RC in the future, for example. This is not out of the question. I won't be 'deeply offended' to be told that I am well rehearsed; nor would my partner: I've just asked him. If I am in the right, there is nothing to be worried about.

I do not condone threatening or intimidation at all. I do, however, acknowledge that IOs are the guardians of the border and have rights to point out the things that they see fit.

I do not need to further debate this either. I am not inviting your comments or response. I am, however, stating that I don't think there are any issues here. IF there are issues, then the OP could make a complaint and request an investigation.

[Annebee]

Well if you don't think intimidating a customer by threatening them that they could get home visit, when EU law don't even required joint cohabitation is a good thing, and sarcastically telling a customer that they have well rehearsed is a deeply offensive remarks, then we are certainly not living in the same planet , and i need not take this debate any further than this.

I will simply be content to conclude that we are not on the same wavelength.

As I said to Gozo: you were not there and do not know the tone with which any remarks were made. Don't forget that the Home Office may invite him to interview or arrange a home visit if he applies for another RC in the future, for example. This is not out of the question. I won't be 'deeply offended' to be told that I am well rehearsed; nor would my partner: I've just asked him. If I am in the right, there is nothing to be worried about.

I do not condone threatening or intimidation at all. I do, however, acknowledge that IOs are the guardians of the border and have rights to point out the things that they see fit.

I do not need to further debate this either. I am not inviting your comments or response. I am, however, stating that I don't think there are any issues here. IF there are issues, then the OP could make a complaint and request an investigation.

You clearly live in Pluto.

[askmeplz82]

It was a lady officer , I travel often and often they just ask 3/4 questions for example: ( When we married, where we married, how we met and is my family member still in the UK ) but this time lady IO asked me so many question.

IO : Is your wife working ?
Me: Yes she is exercising treaty right as self sufficient and working
IO: So you know what is exercising treaty right as self sufficient ?
Me: Yes we have comprehensive health insurance and sufficient funds from legal income
IO: So you are well rehearsed, you know about the law ? ( yes her tone was not normal , bit angrily )
Me: Yes i have to because i often travel with UK issued residence card outside the UK to other EU countries
IO: Tell me what she does at work and where she work ?
Me: She is a part time dental assistant but i can't remember the name where she work . Madam , an EU national can exercise treaty right as a student, working, self sufficient etc...
IO: I can tell you where my partner work , why can't you?
Me: Well i am separated and we do not live together but we are still legally married
IO: What do you do for living ?
Me: I have online Business and i also work for a company
IO: Tell me what you do at work
Me: i explained what i do at work
IO: So, you still can not remember your wife workplace name?
Me: I know the location but i can't remember the name now
IO: How long you living in the UK and when was the last time you been to your motherland?
me: I been living in the UK for nearly 11 years and i left my motherland when i was 6 years old. I grew up in middle east where my family still reside
IO: Write down your wife phone number and address
Me: looked at my phone to search her number
IO: So you can't even remember her phone number ?
Me: i wrote down the number and my address

Then she told me to wait , I waited 20/30 minutes

IO: Ok come back to the desk, Well i tried to call your wife but she is not picking up the phone
me: I don't know may be she is busy
OP: Ok you can go now but i will write a note in the system so you will have tough interview next time and we may even have home visit soon
me: No problem Madam, Thank you

In the whole interview i was not nervous at all, there was always a smile on my face. I know port don't have the right to cancel my residence as long i'm a family member. It's not the port job to decide whether my EEA family member is a qualified person , As long i'm a married the EEA national i've every right to enter the country

[Imshzd]

You dont have to worry about that trainee IO.
At immigration desk they only get limited information about the passengers,So what she asked,it was just a chat with you.
When she left you for 20/30 minutes,during that time she checked your record and I believe as you married over 5 years then you may automatically aquired PR being a family member of an EEA national.
What she said about the tough interview or home visit then why she returned your passport?If she doubts about you and why she let you go in?
I think nothing can happen in future as well.
Her remarks on your legal knowledge was,may be she was not expecting you as a well informed person.

[gozo1]

Outrageous! Goodness me, I would never be answering any of the irrelevant questions, about phone numbers and where I work, I simply would politely tell her to shut up if she doesn't know the next relevant questions to ask, pointless!

@ Imshzd You are making excuses for the intrusive questions of the IO or what exactly are you trying to say? As far as I am concerned, those intrusive questions contradict recital 5 of Council Directive and I will rightly point it to her.

[rosebead]

It's not the border officer's job to determine whether your wife is qualified. I've noticed that if they do any checks, it might just be to ring the EU sponsor to check that they are in the country and that the non-EU family member is in fact "joining" them. That should be the extent of the IO's job. Asking a lot of intrusive questions is rude and unnecessary, especially since she has no authority to refuse you entry anyway unless you're not in fact "joining" or there is a grave issue.

[londonman]

Which was the airport or port where you arrived to?

[askmeplz82]

Stansted Airport; exactly let me tell you i travel every month and never had issue even travelling with the UK issued residence card i can travel many EU countries alone ( just show marriage certificate and tell them you are joining ) and i am out in 4/5 minutes

Look like other EU countries IO respect UK residence card more then UK IO

[londonman]

Wow,
That's weird, I've been there many times as well and they have been nice to me. I thought Heathrow was the toughest port to arrive.

Did she write a note on the system in the end?

Thanks for sharing your experience!!

[askmeplz82]

Wow,
That's weird, I've been there many times as well and they have been nice to me. I thought Heathrow was the toughest port to arrive.

Did she write a note on the system in the end?

Thanks for sharing your experience!!

No idea, I can't tell i left her when she let me go with the passport

[Obie]

The rules on self sufficiency is constantly changing, and the subject of a pending CJEU case called Singh, in regards to whether an EU spouse can established self sufficiency on the basis of their Non-EU spouse's income , which was derived from the employment of the Non-EU spouse, which is derived as a result of his right as fame member.

You need to possibly seek legal advise on your position.

[askmeplz82]

The rules on self sufficiency is constantly changing, and the subject of a pending CJEU case called Singh, in regards to whether an EU spouse can established self sufficiency on the basis of their Non-EU spouse's income , which was derived from the employment of the Non-EU spouse, which is derived as a result of his right as fame member.

You need to possibly seek legal advise on your position.

how i will find more about this case called Singh ?