- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2
Obie wrote:You should not have sent a review but rather a pre action protocol.
An unappealled decision stands unless new evidence comes up.
Obie wrote:Possibly. If they say it is their policy, then that policy is not in accordance with the law, as seeking a review may not change much.
Siraj ud-Daulah wrote:Hi smacky,
I think Obie meant the policy that Home Office followed to reject the application for naturalisation is not valid, which is :
"reopen applications where the application has been refused on character grounds due to a criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal."
And this policy of "criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal " isn't valid because :
"An unappealled decision stands unless new evidence comes up."
So, because Home Office did not appeal further with new evidence means they cannot rejected your application and hence did not follow protocol.
I think that's why Obie mentioned "pre action protocol" to challenge the decision. Only Obie can clarify completely, sorry.
I'm almost on the same boat, went to a college which was banned after I left but Home Office never alleged. Now, they're taking over a year to decide and most likely to allege now and ban from now to 10 years going forward. So I've to be prepared for this pre action protocol as well as challenging their decision. Please keep us posted, thanks.
foufou wrote:tomorrow will be 3 months since I sent my application 4 reconsideration , no news yet , just the money debited after 10 days from sending my application , I used a legal advice . be prepare mr smacky , good luck to every one
well I been told is no point to go for judicial review as it cost big money and because a citizenship is a privilege is not a right , the only thing is i'm waiting for them decision about my reconsideration , the last time I read in this timeline was a member received his decision after 4 months and 10 days since he send his reconcideration form , so I'm trying to for get about , is really stressful time , I been waiting 9 months now from day I sent my applicationsmacky wrote:Hi foufou,
Thank for the update. Could you please share what legal advice you've been given - in a generic way of course. Are you going for a judicial review? If so, is this after 90 days have passed since your decision? Just interested in knowing how it works.
Regards
foufou wrote:tomorrow will be 3 months since I sent my application 4 reconsideration , no news yet , just the money debited after 10 days from sending my application , I used a legal advice . be prepare mr smacky , good luck to every one
foufou wrote:well I been told is no point to go for judicial review as it cost big money and because a citizenship is a privilege is not a right , the only thing is i'm waiting for them decision about my reconsideration , the last time I read in this timeline was a member received his decision after 4 months and 10 days since he send his reconcideration form , so I'm trying to for get about , is really stressful time , I been waiting 9 months now from day I sent my applicationsmacky wrote:Hi foufou,
Thank for the update. Could you please share what legal advice you've been given - in a generic way of course. Are you going for a judicial review? If so, is this after 90 days have passed since your decision? Just interested in knowing how it works.
Regards
foufou wrote:tomorrow will be 3 months since I sent my application 4 reconsideration , no news yet , just the money debited after 10 days from sending my application , I used a legal advice . be prepare mr smacky , good luck to every one
That was nicely summarised.Siraj ud-Daulah wrote:Hi smacky,
I think Obie meant the policy that Home Office followed to reject the application for naturalisation is not valid, which is :
"reopen applications where the application has been refused on character grounds due to a criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal."
And this policy of "criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal " isn't valid because :
"An unappealled decision stands unless new evidence comes up."
So, because Home Office did not appeal further with new evidence means they cannot rejected your application and hence did not follow protocol.
I think that's why Obie mentioned "pre action protocol" to challenge the decision. Only Obie can clarify completely, sorry.
I'm almost on the same boat, went to a college which was banned after I left but Home Office never alleged. Now, they're taking over a year to decide and most likely to allege now and ban from now to 10 years going forward. So I've to be prepared for this pre action protocol as well as challenging their decision. Please keep us posted, thanks.
I'm flattered Obie, thanks.Obie wrote:That was nicely summarised.Siraj ud-Daulah wrote:Hi smacky,
I think Obie meant the policy that Home Office followed to reject the application for naturalisation is not valid, which is :
"reopen applications where the application has been refused on character grounds due to a criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal."
And this policy of "criminal conviction which was later quashed on appeal " isn't valid because :
"An unappealled decision stands unless new evidence comes up."
So, because Home Office did not appeal further with new evidence means they cannot rejected your application and hence did not follow protocol.
I think that's why Obie mentioned "pre action protocol" to challenge the decision. Only Obie can clarify completely, sorry.
I'm almost on the same boat, went to a college which was banned after I left but Home Office never alleged. Now, they're taking over a year to decide and most likely to allege now and ban from now to 10 years going forward. So I've to be prepared for this pre action protocol as well as challenging their decision. Please keep us posted, thanks.