Anyone sponsoring their spouse visa as a carer?

[Danra]

Home office sent me refusal on my spouse visa. Refusal was based on financial reasons and third party sponsor. Refusal letter calculated all the income and put down the whole calculation rounding it up to finial figure that we needed to show.
And also some of the documents we did not provide them they listed in the letter. So my lawyer prepared all the documents and fixed our finance and wrote a PAP letter to home office and replied to all objections home office made.
Normally home office has to reply PAP letter in two week but they didn't bother to reply. Lawyer chased them but they did not respond at ALL.
Then comes the appeal date,
On day of tribunal home office lawyer said the original calculation that refusal was based upon was calculated wrongly.
Bring a different matter and told court we actually need more money than they originally stated in refusal. So neither us or our lawyer aware of this law because home office mentioned it neither they stated this in their refusal letter.
So basically home office withheld this information from us and the court before appeal hearing and only mentioned in hearing. Are they allowed to do this?
Beside that, home office lawyer presented hearsay evidence by criticising incompetent choice of my spouse and said my spouse has inflected this pain on herself by marrying someone who was not British, and also suggested that our 14months old son don't have to see me, since from his bird his dad wasn't in the country so if child never saw his dad ever again it would not effect him in any way.

1)So basically home office failed to mention this on refusal letter.
2) Failed to reply PAP letter ( probably because they were trying to conceal an evidence from applicant)
3) Insulted our choice of our relationship. (Since in UK no one asks home office before falling in love)
4) Financially, disregarded a child's right and showed how malicious and morally vile their lawyer is.
At the end yesterday, tribunal refused my appeal and favour home office.
My question is how is all this legal and can I point this out and challenge the decision of court.

[Danra]

Anyone sponsoring their spouse visa as a carer their visa was refused or granted. Can an additional information on finance or third party support?


thanks in advance

[Londoner007]

You cannot reply on third party support anymore. The only exception is if a child is involved and they feel there is a violation of ECHR and they specifically give you that option. i.e. at a tribunal judgment.

What makes you think that you have not met or have met the financial requirements?

[Danra]

Because my visa is refused on third party support. Home office said third party support is not enough. My spouse can not work because of receiving carer allowance. So there's no other way to earn extra money. If we do, we will get off carer allowance and will have to to show 18600. So our only option is to rely on third party. We have a child too but home office did not consider that either.
My apology for late reply.

[vinny]

Other sources of income, financial support or funds in exceptional circumstances

21A

(1). Where paragraph GEN.3.1.(1) of Appendix FM applies, the decision-maker is required to take into account the sources of income, financial support or funds specified in sub-paragraph (2).

(2) Subject to sub-paragraphs (3) to (8), the following sources of income, financial support or funds will be taken into account (in addition to those set out in, as appropriate, paragraph E-ECP.3.2., E-LTRP.3.2., E-ECC.2.2. or E-LTRC.2.2. of Appendix FM):

(a) a credible guarantee of sustainable financial support to the applicant or their partner from a third party;
(b) credible prospective earnings from the sustainable employment or self-employment of the applicant or their partner; or
(c) any other credible and reliable source of income or funds for the applicant or their partner, which is available to them at the date of application or which will become available to them during the period of limited leave applied for.
...
(8) In determining the genuineness, credibility and reliability of the source of income, financial support or funds relied upon under sub-paragraph (2), the decision-maker will take into account all the information and evidence provided, and will consider (in particular):

(a) in respect of a guarantee of sustainable financial support from a third party:
(i) whether the applicant has provided verifiable documentary evidence from the third party in question of their guarantee of financial support;
(ii) whether that evidence is signed, dated and witnessed or otherwise independently verified;
(iii) whether the third party has provided sufficient evidence of their general financial situation to enable the decision-maker to assess the likelihood of the guaranteed financial support continuing for the period of limited leave applied for;
(iv) whether the third party has provided verifiable documentary evidence of the nature, extent and duration of any current or previous financial support which they have provided to the applicant or their partner;
(v) the extent to which this source of financial support is relied upon by the applicant to meet the financial requirement in paragraph E-ECP.3.1., E-LTRP.3.1., E-ECC.2.1. or E-LTRC.2.1. of Appendix FM (as applicable); and
(vi) the likelihood of a change in the third party’s financial situation or in their relationship with the applicant or the applicant’s partner during the period of limited leave applied for.

If sponsor receives carers allowance, then adequate maintenance is sufficient to meet the financial requirements.

[Danra]

Thank you for your time and response. Home office refused because we failed to provide an affidavit on third party support.

What we did - We sent home office new documents including affidavit and all other document to prove that the support we are getting in credible. But we received no answer from home office.


What we did next- We appealed the decision but till the court date home office failed to respond to us or court.

What home office did- At the court date. Home office did not bring up the objections they made in initial refusal. But they had a new set of objection which was not discussed on refusal letter. So basically they withheld information from us. In relation to third party. HO said even if we had provided all the evidence still ( £550 a month third party support) plus carer allowances are not enough. HO lawyer said in the court we have to apply for universal credit along with carer allowances + third party support, to meet the requirement. But little the lawyer knew, one can't apply universal credit if they are already on carer allowances.

What court did- Instead of picking on HO. court asked us if we want to adjourn this hearing and come back with new evidence. But we thought we can still argue on Human rights and win this. So Instead of judge asking home office why they withheld the evidence infect judge took HO office side. Home office said we should not have married if we knew we were both not British. It's not HO fault if we are suffering along with our child.

What we did- We increased our third party support. Provided new documents and now that amount was £650 a month plus carer allowance. Told UP that HO is not even aware of universal credit rules. We prepared and lodged a detailed application for Leave (permission) to Appeal to the Upper Tribunal. But today they came back saying this.

• 1- There were no compelling circumstances to justify a grant under Article 8 outside the Immigration Rules, having regard to the 'couple's young child and the sponsor's health issues'. "Family life could be enjoyed in sponsor's spouse country.
  
  2- The sponsor's income was insufficient by itself and therefore relied on a 'regular income' of a monthly payment from her mother - this was not argued before the Judge and no application was made to adjourn before the Judge which could have been done if thought necessary;
  
  3- As the issues regarding income were not argued before the IJ, this cannot be said to be an error. "Having a child in the UK in a situation created by the Appellant and Sponsor in circumstances where there was no guarantee that the Appellant would be admitted the Judge was entitled to dismiss the appeal".

Our concern,

For the 1st point, the Sponsor is not only a carer in UK and can't move the country but Sponsor is also on constant medical treatment and takes antidepressants.

2nd- Sponsor's income was sufficient until HO brought a new trick in which they withheld from us.

3rd As for the third point. I can't even began to imagine that judge of a civilised so called 1st world country could say this about a child who is British. It just tells how much they value a human life.

[Londoner007]

It seems you got grilled for marrying a spouse who had no immigration status in the UK.

That amount you mentioned should have been enough to meet the requirement, unless you have had alot of expenditures.

Before you make your next steps, consult with a professional legal advisor.

[Danra]

The amount of £550 was enough when we applied earlier. At the time home office's objection was
'' We did not provide affidavit''
By the the time our appeal got to court it turned out this £550 was no enough either and home office had to come up with new excuse which they never bother to mention in refusal letter and amazingly court did not take notice of that and kept supporting home office. ( Which clearly tells whether its HM tribunal or Home office they both work for the same body)

Amount was increased to £650 + carer allowances £260 + Carer's Allowance Supplement £221 (Every 6 months)
But still none of this was considered by the court. They kept asking us to apply again with fresh application. Which also shows how they charge extortion money of people when this can be sorted without making a fresh application.
We had spoken to legal advisor but there's nothing they can do over the attitude of Tribunal and the home office. We can take it further but its gonna cost us a fortune and to starve our children which home office wants. We are already surviving on bread crumbs, So it looks bleak.

[Danra]

It seems you got grilled for marrying a spouse who had no immigration status in the UK.

What do you mean I got grilled? We are married because we love each other. Is that not enough? Thank you for your judgment if you misunderstood the situation, my spouse is a British citizen so is our child. And I had a well managed legal immigration history in the UK.

[Londoner007]

That was the judgement of the court not me

"Home office said we should not have married if we knew we were both not British. It's not HO fault if we are suffering along with our child."

[Danra]

It was probably typo there. My spouse and child are British born. Home office actually was saying my spouse knew Im not British so we inflected this pain upon ourself and then had a child too, that's the exact word lawyer said in the court and judge just sat there listening.

[Londoner007]

Yes - emphasis was put on why you got married knowing very well your legal status in UK was regularised beforehand.