7 years children concession - need more information

[hoby]

Hi everybody
I couldn't find more information abt this only 5/6 paragraph from Sectary of State in 1999 abt the children and parents, since then any changes , therefore any helps are most welcome or any family/ies that had apply using this rule.
We are overstayer since oct last year, this september will be 7 years in UK and 7 years of school too for them , my children are not born here.
They excel in studies and school. I have collected our testimonials from school, coaches, music teacher, community worker, parents and friends.
NHS cards, bank statements, anything else that i missed..
What form should i use, as one solicitor says there are no form to submit just a letter but dont you think the HO ppl will throw it in the bin! I beleive every application shold have a form, could it be ILR, i m not sure.
What are the chances? or is this the best avenue?
thank you, my family and i appreciate yours help and opinions.

[jei2]

If you have an outstanding application and the Home Office hasn't made a decision on it yet, then you do not need a form. Send a letter outlining the issues and using the documents you have collected to support them.

If you have never submitted an application or you have had one refused already, you will need to pass the Life in the UK test, complete a SET(O) form, and pay £750.00 for the Home Office fee.

Any children over 18 will also need to take the test and complete a separate form. You, your spouse/partner and all children under 18 can be included on the same form.

[chibage]

jei2, Hi, In my case im an overstaying spouse from zim and have an outstanding spousal application with HO at the moment and hoping the Chikwamba case will work to my benefit??? MY daughter qualifies for 7yrs concession in sep 08. So would you say that if i havent had a decision yet from them in sep, would i then have to forward further representations to show i qualify for the 7yr rule?? DO you think they would then issue a spousal visa, or will I get ILTR if successful??

[bahwe]

Hi
Just been on the phone with a lawyer, he said that if you have 2 kids born in the UK. The H.O only take in consideration the age of the youngest. My eldest is almost 7 and my youngest is almost 5, I thought I could apply for the eldest?
Plz can anyone confirm if this lawyer is right or wrong?

[jei2]

bahwe,

This lawyer is wrong.

The 7 year concession applies to a family where one child has spent 7 years in the UK and is under 18 at the time that they reach the 7 year deadline. It's irrelevant which child it is.

It's also a concession so is only relevant for applications outside the rules.

It's not automatically granted. The Home Office makes you fight for everything.

[bahwe]

thank u Jei2
.....and we but our lives into a lawyer hands!!!
My case is complicated and i need a good lawyer, this lawyer I talked to today has a good reputation and when he told me about the rule I asked him if he was sure and he said yes!
Does anyone know a good hardworking lawyer ?

[hoby]

Jie2, thank you.

so, it does n't matter if the child born in UK /not as long as have been in UK for 7 years, right.
should i engage an solicitor?

cheers jie2

[jei2]

bahwe,

I think you should ask your lawyer to quote his source of information. Or give him the facts about your case again and ask him to explain exactly what he means. Are you sure he knows the children's ages?

hoby,

Generally the child should have been born in the UK or have come here at an early age.

If there is a child in the family who has reached 18 and no application was ever pending they will have to make a case for leave to remain in their own right. However if they were under 18 at the time of the application and it is still outstanding all that should be required is a letter and the corresponding documentary evidence.

If your application is outside the rules - and given these volatile times, I would recommend engaging a solicitor.

[Thandia]

I'm not sure if I read this in this forum or another forum but some woman said her 7 year child concession application for 3 children was refused because the family hadn't had removal instructions issued to them ie. home office said policy only applies where removal instructions have been issued for a family. She said this was later granted on appeal. My question is, is this the way the concession was originally intended to be applied or are the home office just being difficult?

[jei2]

The Home Office have said that this only applies to illegal entrants or those who have been served with removal orders. However they've been overruled in at least one case where Temporary admission (t/a) was granted and still pending after 7 years.

Many sucessful families are granted it once a child of the family reaches the 7 year criteria mark without removal directions having been issued.

[Thandia]

The Home Office have said that this only applies to illegal entrants or those who have been served with removal orders. However they've been overruled in at least one case where Temporary admission (t/a) was granted and still pending after 7 years.

Many sucessful families are granted it once a child of the family reaches the 7 year criteria mark without removal directions having been issued.

Thank you jei, much appreciated. I work with overstayers & asylum seekers with families & I'm sure this info will come in handy for those overstayers whose children have been here for seven years. Is there a fee to pay for this seeing as there is no official form to fill in?

[bahwe]

Jei2
He asked me about the age of my kids, I said the eldest is almost 7 the youngest is 5, than he said I have to wait for 2 more years until the youngest is 7. He said that the youngest is the one to benefit from the concession.
I thought this rule was for every child who has been in the UK for 7 years continuously!

[bahwe]

so if the parents are illegal entrants and they are failed asylum seekers does their 7 years old child benefit from this concession?
The H.O look at the parents immigration history: Isn't being illegal entrant or being refused as asylum or being issued with a removal order a poor immigration history?

[Frontier Mole]

Let me add my sixpence worth just to mix it up!

In the good old bad old days of the 1970's / 80's it was rare for children to have their own passports. They were mostly added onto their parent’s passports. Therefore - serve an IS151A/B on the parent and the child becomes an illegal at the same time. No problem there.

Time moves on, EC takes more power from UK plc, terrorism becomes more global and more to the point countries move away from inclusion of children in with parent’s passport. In the middle of all this UK Immigration Service being about as fast to react as a sloth on valium does not come up to speed with the changes. Children have their own passports BUT UKIS is still only serving IS151A/B on the adults. The rest of the family were effectively ignored. Hence we have a situation where technically mum & dad are served and are considered illegal but kids are not. Any immigration clock that was ticking is stopped for the adults but was still ticking for the kids. Bit of a mess then!

Asylum claims were the same as above. In the late 90's and early 2000's claims were taking several years to complete. So we have the 7 year concession to protect the rights of children who have spent their formative years in the UK.

You have guessed it - "formative years" is the killer phrase. Not just any old 7 years, they have to be "formative". Years three to ten were considered the years that counted the most. Anything older say five to twelve, six to thirteen, they were in the zone. Once the kid was eight or nine on their UK arrival then things kind of swung the other way. Their formative years were spent out of the country!

So being born in the UK and getting to the great age of seven is not going to get you past the finish line as a rule. Being three when you arrived and getting to ten is a better bet.

The biggest point to remember - it is a concession, outside of the rules and has no form of appeal in its own right. I see very few cases with the child concession coming into play now, while in the early 2000's it was very common.

[PaperPusher]

Frontier Mole

UKIS is dead and buried. It is all UKBA now, no IS or MM.

[tasha75]

Jei2
He said that the youngest is the one to benefit from the concession.
I thought this rule was for every child who has been in the UK for 7 years continuously!

Has your eldest child been here for 7 years? if so, then your lawyer is wrong. When I applied my kids were 7 and 1 and HO accepted that we qualify under this concession. Mind you, they refused it anyway.

[Frontier Mole]

The ghost of UKIS past still lives on. An IO is still an IO and any pretence that things have changed or improved will have the UKBA thought police at your door before you know it.

Ref UKIS - when they ran the IS151 show before E&R or E&C now as, they could not see the barn door never mind hit it with a banjo. Things changed, the world changed, one thing that time stood still for was UKIS. Where else would they think it was acceptable not to update their policy to reflect the change in world passport protocols.

Joke - UKIS Change Management - that was when you put pound coins in one pocket and the rest of your coins in the other......

[tasha75]

The H.O look at the parents immigration history: Isn't being illegal entrant or being refused as asylum or being issued with a removal order a poor immigration history?

It is, and this is the reason we got refused. Here's the xtract from my refusal letter:
.Although we accept that your child has spent a continuous period of 7 years or more in the UK and that you reside together with your children as a single family unit, we are not prepared to regularise you and your family's stays under the provision of the concession in view of your abusive history, which is considered to outweigh factors of your child's length of residence here.......
Whilst it is acknowledged that you may have established a family life in the UK with your children, it is not considered that your removal from the UK will amount to a breach of Article 8 since there is no insurmountable obstacles to your children accompanying you to your country should this be their wish. Your children are free to accompany you abroad (but they were still served with IS151A)....However, even if your children are unable or unwilling to accompany you, it is not considrede that your removal will amount to an unlawful interference with your family life in the UK....
...your rights to private life have also been considered. whilst it may be accepted that during your time in the UK you may have established a private life, it is believed that any interference can be justified. Your private life has been established partly whilst you have been in this country unlawfully, in the knowledge that you have no right to be here and may be removed at any time........
In view of the above we do not accept that the existence of your family or private life in the UK is a sufficiently compelling reason ....

Having spent most of your life abroad there is no reason to suppose you could not re-adapt to life in XXX (came here 10 years ago, aged 21, so most of my adult life has been spent in the UK, plus children don't speak my home language).


And here's the official view:

Whilst it is important that each individual case must be considered on its merits, there are specific factors which are likely to be of particular relevance when considering whether enforcement action should proceed or be initiated against parents who have children who have lengthy residence in the United Kingdom. For the purpose of proceeding with enforcement action in a case involving a child, the general presumption is that we would not usually proceed with enforcement action in cases where a child was born here and has lived here continuously to the age of [seven] or over, or where, having come to the United Kingdom at an early age, they have accumulated [seven] years or more continuous residence. However, there may be circumstances in which it is considered that enforcement action is still appropriate despite the lengthy residence of the child, for example in cases where the parents have a particularly poor immigration history and have deliberately seriously delayed consideration of their case.

So, someone who's been quiet for 7 years and then resurfaces to take advantage of this concession is very different to someone who has been granted temporary admission and it was still pending after 7 years.

[tasha75]

Children have their own passports BUT UKIS is still only serving IS151A/B on the adults. The rest of the family were effectively ignored.

My children were also served with IS151 but at the same time the refusal letter stated that they are free to stay or go with me. Go figure it out.

[Frontier Mole]

The policy finally caught up with the real world about 2 years ago. From that point on all the family members were served with IS151. That is one reason why there are less and less 7 year concession claims. The door is effectively closed once an IS151 is served on the child.

My original post covered the way it was in the dim and distant past where claims took many years to progress.

[jei2]

Joke - UKIS Change Management - that was when you put pound coins in one pocket and the rest of your coins in the other......

Frontier Mole,

You are sooo horrible..!

Jei2
He asked me about the age of my kids, I said the eldest is almost 7 the youngest is 5, than he said I have to wait for 2 more years until the youngest is 7. He said that the youngest is the one to benefit from the concession.

I thought this rule was for every child who has been in the UK for 7 years continuously!

bahwe,

If your lawyer is so sure of his facts, ask him to provide you a copy of the policy where it says that only the youngest child of the family will benefit under the 7 year concession.

The mind boggles...

[bahwe]

Tasha what was your poor immigration history?
what if the parents has an asylum case that is still being treated as legacy case?
Can you tell me if they can benefit from the 7 years rule if:
Their kid becomes 7 and no final decision has been reached about their asylum case.
Their kids has become 7 and they have received a refusal and a deportation order.
If the parents have a poor immigration history but they can rely on art 8 because they have humanitarian reasons that go against their deportation?

[bahwe]

Jei2
This man is not my lawyer, I have spoken with him on the phone for 5 minutes, I didn't get the chance to ask him for his source all I asked was if he was sure and he said yes.

[jei2]

Jei2
This man is not my lawyer, I have spoken with him on the phone for 5 minutes, I didn't get the chance to ask him for his source all I asked was if he was sure and he said yes.

Aahh....

[bahwe]

Jei2
what do you mean by ahh...
I was told that he is a good lawyer and that he gives free legal advise.
Anyway I am not going to call him again.

Does anyone have answers for my previous questions.
I thank you all for the informations you are providing.