Changing name on passport before applying for leave to remain visa

Tell me when to freak out hahaha.

Keep checking back, I'll let you know.

Yeah I've been worried about that when i've read about it in the forums. I don't quite understand the changes.
My Fiancee one is going into the consulate at 9am today eeek!!! Then I plan to make an appointment for in person FLR(M) literally days after the wedding. Tell me when to freak out hahaha.

No need for you to worry it will be more of an impact to those close to their ILR apps...as for freaking out, much later...much, much later.

No need for you to worry it will be more of an impact to those close to their ILR apps...as for freaking out, much later...much, much later.

One freak out at a time yeah? lol 

Sorry to hijack back to topic, but:

The border patrol at the airport only told us that we would need to get a new visa to stay in the country which we already knew but they were very pleasant and didn't indicate we'd done anythin wrong or illegal.

The reason the IO mentioned you would need a new visa is that your current visa was only issued for 6 months...and reading your previous posts you're nearing the 6 month limit and would obviously need a new visa.

You haven't done anything illegal, it's just that you may run into trouble with your FLR(M) application.   

What you did is still considered an illegal entry:

I don't know of a bounce at an entry point.  But I have had a case where the person was refused an in-person FLR application at Lunar House on the grounds that in-person applications cannot be made by illegal entrants.

They honeymooned in Paris and she reentered on her fiance visa, and was thus an illegal entrant.

Unless the OP was stamped in as a visitor and thus not violating the fiancee visa. Then she would definately have to return to the US to get her spousal visa since you cannot switch to another visa from a visitor visa in country. Hmmm...It will be interesting to see how this one turns out.

What you did is still considered an illegal entry
Unless the OP was stamped in as a visitor and thus not violating the fiancee visa. Then she would definately have to return to the US to get her spousal visa since you cannot switch to another visa from a visitor visa in country. Hmmm...It will be interesting to see how this one turns out.

That's why I asked what kind of stamp they put in her passport.  If she was given a regular visa stamp, then she's a family visitor, and can stay for 6 months.  However, she couldn't then switch to FLR(M), she'd have to apply for a spousal visa from the US. 

I don't think she's an illegal entrant, she didn't do anything dishonest.  She just made a mistake, which the IO didn't call her on.  That's obviously just my opinion as a non-professional, though     

I'd guess that since the IO did mentioned the visa, he'd have been unlikely to stamp her in as a visitor. Unless she mentioned that she was married, the assumption on the IO's part would be that her fiancee visa was still valid.

Still, that does mean that there's an entry stamp in her passport that is after the date of her marriage certificate and that could cause complications. Therefore, I think historyenne and WebyJ are right, the in-person application for FLR(M) is probably out.

I'm not sure what the consequences of this are, but I think it actually would have been simpler all around if the IO HAD stamped her in as visitor, cause at least that way, the path is clear. Not hassle-free, but clear.

Mort,

I agree an in person application is out...I guess the sticking point that I have is that IMNPO (in my non professional opinion) the re entry was illegal per Garry's previous post...I guess that we'll just have to wait for the pro's to chime in to see what the verdict is. I agree with historyenne's statement that the OP probably didn't knowingly make illegal entry, but ignorance has never constituted a defense.

Mort,

I agree an in person application is out...I guess the sticking point that I have is that IMNPO (in my non professional opinion) the re entry was illegal per Garry's previous post...I guess that we'll just have to wait for the pro's to chime in to see what the verdict is. I agree with historyenne's statement that the OP probably didn't knowingly make illegal entry, but ignorance has never constituted a defense.

I agree with everything you said.

but ignorance has never constituted a defense.

I'd agree with this if she had been refused entry after her honeymoon.  Then the IO could have said, sorry, we're not responsible for you not knowing the rules.  However, since she was granted entry, I feel very strongly that some responsibility lies with the IO.  Even if the OP didn't know she was doing anything wrong, then the IO should have.  My impression from Garry's post is that the "illegal entrant" bit was not the normal state of play, but like you say, we'll have to wait for the professional opinions.  

The bottom line for the OP is that she can't do the FLR(M) in-country, she's got to leave the country and apply for a spousal visa.  Fortunately, she's got a trip planned anyway, so she should be able to get it taken care of.    

I'd agree with this if she had been refused entry after her honeymoon.  Then the IO could have said, sorry, we're not responsible for you not knowing the rules.  However, since she was granted entry, I feel very strongly that some responsibility lies with the IO.  Even if the OP didn't know she was doing anything wrong, then the IO should have.  My impression from Garry's post is that the "illegal entrant" bit was not the normal state of play, but like you say, we'll have to wait for the professional opinions.  

It is a technical breach.  If the IO asked if they were now married, and was acting to letter of the law, he could have bounced her.  But only total gits do this.  It is a minor, teeny, tiny breach, which is certainly not worth losing sleep over.

The bottom line for the OP is that she can't do the FLR(M) in-country, she's got to leave the country and apply for a spousal visa.  Fortunately, she's got a trip planned anyway, so she should be able to get it taken care of.    

I think that a postal application would be fine in-country, but as this is likely to take the full 14 weeks, I agree that applying at a consulate is a better idea. 


Vicky