Home Office makes 800% profit on some visa applications

Something we all assumed but can now confirm: visas cost far less to process than they're charging.

The article below winds up being about a different issue with someone applying for a partner visa while in the UK on a tourist visa, but the first bit is the most painful for anyone paying for visas now.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/sep/01/home-office-makes-800-profit-on-some-visa-applications

Well, they're clearly not hiring enough staff, so where is all the money going?

I hate when they use a crap example like that one to drive a point home.  It is obvious if you're paying attention that you have to apply for an initial spouse visa from outside the UK.  It's not a technicality that they only enforced for them.  How many times do we see people rejected for not having the original marriage certificate or whatnot when others get the visa with photocopies?  Something like THAT is a technicality to get angry over.

I hate when they use a crap example like that one to drive a point home.  It is obvious if you're paying attention that you have to apply for an initial spouse visa from outside the UK.  It's not a technicality that they only enforced for them.  How many times do we see people rejected for not having the original marriage certificate or whatnot when others get the visa with photocopies?  Something like THAT is a technicality to get angry over.

Their example is somewhat poor, but also common due to the navigation of the site and lack of stops while going through the webapp. Just look at the number of questions we see regularly for people who have been given incorrect advice that they can change from a visitor visa within the country. 

The examples you give are cases where it's clear the ECO is more interested in profits for the country. I am genuinely curious what controls exist to audit these decisions and ensure that they are not denying people simply to gain $$.

I hate when they use a crap example like that one to drive a point home. 

Exactly, I read that part and didn't bother going any further. Not a technicality at all, they didn't follow the rules.

As far as I'm aware, the visas are the price they are to subsidize the EU applicants who have very little or nothing to pay, to process their applications for resident cards etc. so that the British taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill for them.

As far as I'm aware, the visas are the price they are to subsidize the EU applicants who have very little or nothing to pay, to process their applications for resident cards etc. so that the British taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill for them.

I guess it also helps to generate extra revenue for the government - like with the IHS surcharge.

As far as I'm aware, the visas are the price they are to subsidize the EU applicants who have very little or nothing to pay, to process their applications for resident cards etc. so that the British taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill for them.

e.g. £65 for those on EEA Regulations for a DCPR (for EEA citizens) and PRC (non-EEA citizens) that they need to apply for British citizenship. How much is it for the equivalent  ILR using UK immigration laws?

Yet often UKVI staff will have to spent more time on the DCPRs to check that they have been following all the various ways they can use the EEA regulations over those 5 years. Some even apply to try to see if they are given it, as it is only £65 to lose.

About it being a technicality, though...

It IS right that they shouldn't just take the money. If you've applied for the wrong visa, they shouldn't accept it in the first place. Maybe take an administration fee for having to look at the documents, but it's highway robbery to charge the full amount.

About it being a technicality, though...

It IS right that they shouldn't just take the money. If you've applied for the wrong visa, they shouldn't accept it in the first place. Maybe take an administration fee for having to look at the documents, but it's highway robbery to charge the full amount.

Agree so much. Their website and online application is difficult to navigate and leaves a lot of room for error.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As far as I'm aware, the visas are the price they are to subsidize the EU applicants who have very little or nothing to pay, to process their applications for resident cards etc. so that the British taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill for them.

Are funds raised through third country applications earmarked as subsidies for EU applicants?  I don't think they are.

Are funds raised through third country applications earmarked as subsidies for EU applicants?  I don't think they are.

I read that here and it makes sense to me that they would be. The money to pay to process the EU applications has to come from somewhere.

Why do you think they are not?

Why do you think they are not?

Well I believe funding raised from visa fees is spread across the entire department. So it would be equally valid to say that we are subsidizing the new carpet, or the heating. There is, to my knowledge, no direct link between third country fees and those of EU citizens.

It is important in that the needs/requirements of third country applicants and those of EU citizens are not in opposition.

Well I believe funding raised from visa fees is spread across the entire department. So it would be equally valid to say that we are subsidizing the new carpet, or the heating.

That amounts to the same thing!