Living 'illegally'? in the UK

I don't know if this worked for you because you'd lived together outside the UK for so long, because Garry and Victoria have both said repeatedly that time spent living here on a tourist visa or visa waiver does not qualify.  Or maybe that was a while ago, and things have changed?

I would like to know if this is correct or if the consulate do take this into consideration as Chris has been here for nearly 6 months now and on the application form I would have put this down as yes even though it is a visitor on a waiver visa that he came in on.

So if anyone knows for sure Garry and Victoria, or anyone who has been in the same situaton been together under the same roof and put down they have lived together how they got on would you let us know thank you

For the advisers on the board, however, I wonder, in the future, if the Unmarried Partners Visa won't be more heavily scrutinised, especially now as couples can opt for the new partnership ceremony.

Not so much scrutinized, but I expect a levelling down.  I couldn't tell how at the moment, but it could be along the lines of a longer residency before ILR or something like that.  That's all just guessing based on my own view and a discussion with some other advisors at the conference last November.  Since same-sex civil partners do not *have* to be homosexual, the IND will have to do something to curb the abuse that's going to happen.

Civil partnerships should reduce the number of UP applicants, but not completely eliminate them because we would still have people who cannot get married and cannot get CP's.

So if anyone knows for sure Garry and Victoria, or anyone who has been in the same situaton been together under the same roof and put down they have lived together how they got on would you let us know thank you

UP's accrue their time any which way they can on any type of visa that they can. 

The most common tactic is to hop over to the continent and re-enter and get another 6 months.  The successful ones will tell the IO something like, "I am fulfilling the cohabitation requirement to qualify as an unmarried partner" and that's that.  At least that's what I always tell them to say.

I had a couple last autumn UK/Argentine who had been doing that for almost 4 years and when she came in the last time at Stansted Airport, the IO decided that they should either apply or not, so he curtailed her to 1 month to submit her application.  It was all very hurry-up, but in the end it worked out fine.

lorriek, I think you should go hire an Immigration lawyer who might be able to work something out for you. 

I have *definitely* never said that time spent on a visit visa won't qualify for a UP, as I know darn well that it will!

It is often difficult to prove cohabitation though, and switches can be tricky as the IO can argue that the applicant told porkies on entry when they claimed to be a visitor and actually intended to settle.

I actually have one of these on my desk right now, so I hope to God I'm right!

 

Victoria

I actually have one of these on my desk right now, so I hope to God I'm right!

Me too. 

But more seriously, what are your expectations, if any, of the leveling down?  Or is it just pessimism on my part?

No, I agree. But I'm a pessimist too!

The UP visa was only introduced to allow for same-sex relationships, after the govt was told they were breaching Human Rights and basic equal ops.  Now that the Civil Partnerships are in, they can do away with UP's, though I suspect will keep them purely for the very few people who cannot legally get married or enter into a UP (which will probably be only those who were married in a country where divorce is prohibited).

Victoria

UP's accrue their time any which way they can on any type of visa that they can. 

The most common tactic is to hop over to the continent and re-enter and get another 6 months.  The successful ones will tell the IO something like, "I am fulfilling the cohabitation requirement to qualify as an unmarried partner" and that's that.  At least that's what I always tell them to say.

I had a couple last autumn UK/Argentine who had been doing that for almost 4 years and when she came in the last time at Stansted Airport, the IO decided that they should either apply or not, so he curtailed her to 1 month to submit her application.  It was all very hurry-up, but in the end it worked out fine.

Garry,

This seems to be at odds with other advice on this board.  If when you enter as a tourist you tell the IO your reason for visiting is to fulfill the cohabitation requirement  aren't you really saying it's ultimately your aim to reside in the UK? 

I'm about to come over for 4 1/2 months and thought it best not to even mention cohabitation...

confused (again).

Nancy

This seems to be at odds with other advice on this board.  If when you enter as a tourist you tell the IO your reason for visiting is to fulfill the cohabitation requirement  aren't you really saying it's ultimately your aim to reside in the UK? 

I would massively agree that the system exhibits both paradox and contradiction.  But there's a difference between knowing a rule and attempting to fulfil it, and trying to hand the IO a line. 

I haven't put through a UP since the commencement of civil partners, however, so perhaps how to handle the IO is different now.

I would massively agree that the system exhibits both paradox and contradiction.  But there's a difference between knowing a rule and attempting to fulfil it, and trying to hand the IO a line. 

I haven't put through a UP since the commencement of civil partners, however, so perhaps how to handle the IO is different now.

My plan was simply to tell the IO I was on a long holiday as I will have just retired and am planning on travelling to the Continent and in the UK, visiting friends and going to football matches (all true as far as it goes).  So...not telling the 'whole' truth but not telling a lie either.  My entire stay will be 4 + months and is my second visit in 2006. I stayed a little over a month the first time but they did not exit stamp my passport.

My bf and I are planning on visiting the US for 3 weeks at the end of Nov-Dec, then returning to the UK before Christmas.  At that point I might tell the IO I'm visiting to fulfill the cohabitation requirement.  However we would still need a year and 2 months more to meet the two year requirement.   It is my understanding that there can be separations totalling no more than 180 days during the two year period (is this correct?)

On the other hand, if I do not mention the bf connection and just try to return before Christmas will it raise lots of official eyebrows?  Because I will be retired I have no job to return to and it explains why I have more time to travel.  I can show that I have enough money to support myself and health insurance.  My gut feeling is to fly under the radar for as long as I can.

Nancy

I think I disagree with Garry on this one.

I wouldn't volunteer that information at all.  You are on a long holiday, you will be going to football matches (including Barnet I hope!) and you will be visiting your boyfriend but you do not intend to settle.  You know that if you want to settle in the UK you would have to make a different visa application and that must be done from outside fo the UK. 

This is true and I don't see that there would be a massive problem.

Vicky

If I didn't mention visiting bf at all, just visiting 'friends' would it make a huge difference?  I'd rather not alert them to having this sort of tie unless necessary.  I think the crunch will come in December when I want to return so soon.  They may not think it's OK to come back for months more footie so soon!  :-)

I don't know if it really makes a difference, but when I was still living in the US and came to visit the BF, I would just say "visiting friends".  However, one time the officer pushed further and asked what kind of friends, where did they live, how did I know them etc.  I got a little flustered, but they let me in because I had a return ticket I showed them.  That was one time out of a few.

Karin, I think you have identified the problem.  If you just say 'friends' and they push you, and you then admit 'boyfriend', that is when they will get suspicious. I always think it is best to be upfront.

Nancy - The crunch will be in December, but if they have any sense they will realise that Boxing Day matches are something special, and that is obviously why you will be coming back!  And if you can show them your match tickets, all the better.

Look, I am on a mission to get you in, don't worry so much!  I will e-mail you the fixture list as soon as it is out and you will have plenty of evidence that you are here for the footy (I know the boyfriend is incidental!).

Vicky

If I didn't mention visiting bf at all, just visiting 'friends' would it make a huge difference?  I'd rather not alert them to having this sort of tie unless necessary.  I think the crunch will come in December when I want to return so soon.  They may not think it's OK to come back for months more footie so soon!  :-)

I didn't know you were near retirement age.  That throws the whole thing into a different set of assumptions.  Yes, forget what I said.  It was geared to a different age group.