- 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
samaygrg wrote:Hope positive, I think you have winning points.
Even though UKVI emailed me on 22nd Decemeber 2015 that they can not decide my case within 28 days which I did not reply them but later on on 31st December 2015, I have received the letter invalidating my second AR application. Letter was dated 24th December.helpingperson wrote:Please keep us updated with progress. Thank you.
diamond07 wrote:Even though UKVI emailed me on 22nd Decemeber 2015 that they can not decide my case within 28 days which I did not reply them but later on on 31st December 2015, I have received the letter invalidating my second AR application. Letter was dated 24th December.helpingperson wrote:Please keep us updated with progress. Thank you.
There was no convincing explanation on why they have not accepted my grounds which I wrote and showed them under para 34M to 34Y immigration rules how second AR was Valid. I specifically mentioned them in my case para 34N(2) applies.
But they have not given any reasonable explanation just simply said
under para 34 L to 34 Y, your application is invalid.
And simply said, we have previously reviewed the decision and found original decision was correct.
But my submission was that initial application was rejected for continuity and AR was rejected because of missing information in specified documents. Letter does not mention any thing about it.
Now, I am preparing for PAP and JR.
I think, with consultation with lawyer,
I am preparing following grounds:
1. Not giving second AR right by first admin reviewer was incorrect and unlawful. He technically avoided the fact that he is in fact putting different reasons and withdrawing previous reasons. But did not clearly mentioned it in the letter. Rather simply said he is maintaining the original decision.
2. Invalidating second AR was incorrect and unlawful.
3. Then case working erros.
4. Then will prove it light of reported judgement that judgement was unduly harsh and unfair on wednesbury unreasonable as SSHD did not follow procedural fairness.
I have been given removal direction. I have two children under four years old. But I did not applied for their visa. Only I applied for my first son in 2013 application which was refused. Home office knows I have children.
I am slightly worrying about detention and removal before launching JR.
diamond07 wrote:This is just for information to the relevant people and to seek input from the people who may have experienced the similar situation.
1. Applied 2nd time for tier-1 (50k) route 21st sept 2015
2. Refused 19th OCT 2015-
Reason: Your business activities are not continuous since before 11th july 2014 up to application time.
One of the documents was overlooked.
3. Admin review application 1st of Nov 2015.
Clarification given for considered documents and notified of overlooked document.
4. AR Refused 16th Nov 2015:
Considered overlooked document. And said, overlooked document is considered by reviewer but it does not have my name on it on my business advertisement. But did not say, this overlooked advertisement was continuous or not. Maintained the decision.
But no specific clarification was given for refusal. Whether it was rejected because advertisement was not continuous or whether it is because only my name was missing from business advertisement.
No further admin review right given.
5. It seems awkward to me. Because overlooked advertisement was clearly continuous. Reviewer very cleverly avoid the issue by not mentioning whether it was continuous or not.
6. I went through
A) immigration rules para 34M to 34 Y
B) Immigration rules Appendix AR
C) All the upper tribunal judgement on tier1 entrepreneurship visa, case of mandalina, case of Akhter and case of Shebl.
7. After this, It was clear to me that reviewer has done in fact a very big injustice by not giving me further AR RIGHT.
I applied for second time AR online and sent application by post with supporting confirmation documents.
I explained under which rules this second AR should not be invalidated. and then pointed out case working error in light of immigration rules and court judgement.
My arguments were,
a) There is not requirement to show director of business name in an business advertisement, as director's position can be verifiable from company filing history.
b) Under para 245AA, caseworker was obliged to ask for clarification from me about missing elements in specified doc.
8. Second AR made 1st of Dec 2015
Now waiting for result.
Many thanks, everyone above.alex87 wrote:Fantastic! Now you can run your business in peace.
Ameten wrote:Hello All, I got a letter from HO today refusing my tier 1 extension base on the "FPS I submitted not showing the names of my settled workers", meanwhile their names are clearly showing on P11 and P60 that I submitted along with the application. It aslo shows in accountant's letter of job created.
I have been given 14days for AR, my questions are as follows, as I dont have any idea of AR:
1. Can someone use a solicitor for AR even when the application was made myself?
2. Can I re-submit another FPS showing the employees name for the AR?
Thanks Kunle,kunleoyewo wrote:Hi Ameten,
Sorry to hear to about your rejection.
It's really strange that your FPS didn't show settled workers' (employees) names. Your accountant probably didn't do a decent job reporting monthly RTI-FPS to HMRC, I would've thought names and wages are very imperative on the reports.
1. Yes. You can use a solicitor for AR irrespective of how you applied initially.
2. If that's the only reason for rejection and you can get your accountant to regenerate RTI-FPS showing full names of employees, it might be better to reapply than waste time with AR. Far too many ARs have been rejected in recent times, so might be a futile effort really. The choice is yours though.
Good luck!
Kunle
My account did some file conversion during printing which obvisouly cut out some info and which I did not spot myself as I didnt have idea of what a complete FPS look like. Apart from the names all other info were there. As I earlier said P11, P60 and letter from accountatnt all show the nameswhiteroses wrote:what info was present in fps?
Very sorry to hear about this. Did you take over an existing business?Ameten wrote:Hello All, I got a letter from HO today refusing my tier 1 extension base on the "FPS I submitted not showing the names of my settled workers", meanwhile their names are clearly showing on P11 and P60 that I submitted along with the application. It aslo shows in accountant's letter of job created.
I have been given 14days for AR, my questions are as follows, as I dont have any idea of AR:
1. Can someone use a solicitor for AR even when the application was made myself?
2. Can I re-submit another FPS showing the employees name for the AR?
Application Submitted 0n 01/03/16kunleoyewo wrote:Do you mind sharing your timeline please?
No I didntdd156 wrote:Very sorry to hear about this. Did you take over an existing business?Ameten wrote:Hello All, I got a letter from HO today refusing my tier 1 extension base on the "FPS I submitted not showing the names of my settled workers", meanwhile their names are clearly showing on P11 and P60 that I submitted along with the application. It aslo shows in accountant's letter of job created.
I have been given 14days for AR, my questions are as follows, as I dont have any idea of AR:
1. Can someone use a solicitor for AR even when the application was made myself?
2. Can I re-submit another FPS showing the employees name for the AR?