Garry - would it not be worth their while applying for ILR after 2 years on the spousal visa anyway? Regardless of what Ms Hughes has said, I am not sure that this can be refused, as the caseworker would have to look at the current rules, surely?
Victoria
Victoria: I agree that it's viable strategy with little to lose except the £365 it takes to apply. Yes, she comes under current rules if she has a spousal FLR. ~BUT~ we would need to find out what the FLR she has actually is. What kind of FLR is it? That's what the caseworker is going to ask. They mentioned that it's a 3 year FLR piggy-backed to another 3 year FLR - and that's not sounding very spousal - that sounds more like an exceptional, or worse, that they booked it as Article 8. She said it expired in 9/2006, another 10 months.
At the baseline, 40&feelit has 4 distinct options, but only 1 is really workable, which is to go forward with a SET(M). At the point of debate are two questions: [1] when and [2] what strategy.
The Ombudsman and the JR approaches are not really workable ideas. We already have starred tribunal decisions where they ruled adversely against couples in similar straits, and at least one such decision handed down was classed as "reportable", so there's no silver bullet in that direction. And even if an advisor were foolish enough to put forward a JR, there would be public advocates like me howling with outrage and making trenchant accusations of queue jumping. And those accusations would stick. And I would NOT be the only one either.
So 40&feelit, your next port of call is a formal consultation with someone on the advocacy side. You'll need to get in touch with Victoria or me vis-a-vis the entire case history - hope that you save copies of all your stuff. From there, you can hammer out the two big questions: when; and what strategy.
