UK Entry Refusal

Hello

My girlfriend arrived at Manchester airport last Saturday for what would have been a five month stay.  She would have been living with me for the duration, had a return ticket booked for May, proof of funds, and absolutely no intention of working or overstaying.  I had waited for over an hour after her flight had landed, and was absolutely shellshocked to receive a call from Immigration officers to say that she was being detained for further questioning. They proceeded to ask very intrusive, personal questions. After about 4 hours had passed, I was then informed that she had been refused entry. It was a further 2 hours before my girlfriend was told, and was eventually given leave to stay until Monday morning.

The reasons given were that she tried to deceive officers about our relationship. Upon being asked about the purpose of her visit, she replied that she was visiting a friend - I gave the same reply when asked the same question over the phone. The officer then probed further, and asked if we were boyfriend/girlfriend - to which, we both replied that we were. To call this lies, or deception, seems very harsh. There was absolutely nothing to hide, and we had no intention of deceiving anyone.
After taking out every last item from each piece of luggage, they found her diary, which had four entries listed 'babysitting'. This was from last year when she was visiting, and involved watching a friend's little boy for a couple of hours whilst they were out. Immigration officers took this to mean that she undertook employment. Unfortunately, my girlfriend was completely honest, and told them that she did it as a favour, and was given £20 as a gift on ONE occasion - This sealed the deal, her passport was confiscated, and she was refused entry.

After pleading with the Chief Immigration Officer, she was allowed to stay until today (Friday), which I think is very generous after reading some of the frightening stories on here. I have just returned home from the airport after a tearful farewell, and am absolutely crushed. We had such nice plans for the forthcoming months. My girlfriend had booked flights and accommodation in Prague for my birthday in a couple of weeks. All this has now been lost, and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it.

Will this affect her chances of obtaining a Visitors Visa, and would it be advisable to apply for one immediately, and attempt a return to the UK within the next month or so?

Thanks.

J

:\\\'(

Yes, she will have significant difficulty returning to the UK as a visitor.  It is highly doubtful that the UK will consider her a visitor at this point, especially for a 5 month visit.  If she was visiting for 2 weeks, or maybe a month, they might consider her a visitor.  Any application she makes will be checked with what was stated during this refusal and be used to decide any future applications.

I am afraid that you have fallen into what is the most common scenario for refusal at borders by US single women.  The going through the diary and asking the very personal questions is quite "normal" for young single American women "visiting a friend".

The big question in their mind, which you should honestly answer yourselves, is how can someone be a "visitor" when they come into the country repetedly and spend 5 months at a time living with a "friend".  The UK wants you to either formalise your relationship (get married) or to not enter the UK.  By formalising your relationship it does afford a legal and controlled way to migrate to the UK.

If you were to move towards formalising your relationship, she would likely not have a problem getting a fiancée visa or a spousal visa (assuming both of you are >21 years of age).

Since she was detained, Garry would be very interested in her story as he is representing, on behalf of UK Yankee, women who have been detained.  I would suggest sending Garry a PM if you want to help ensure that single women crossing UK borders a treated in a fair and safe way.

Because a 'Visitor' visa allows a stay of up to 6 months, we naturally considered a 5 month stay for a non-visa national to be perfectly acceptable.

I find this very distressing, and to think that a refusal will affect any future travel plans is really heartbreaking. She was a genuine visitor with concrete plans to return, (job, family, university) and we thought the only consideration would be the 6 month limit. Surely, the reasons for refusal can't be considered again, can they?!

The treatment she received was quite alarming - her luggage completely emptied, and analyzed - She was then interrogated by one person (male), with no witnesses or recording. Nothing was written to give her the 'benefit of doubt'. It seems to be a completely one-sided decision-making process, with absolutely no second opinion or fairness involved.

Thanks

Kitsonk, would it make a difference that she didn't actually spend the intended 5 months in the UK, but was bounced before she had the chance?  It seems like she could still lay claim to being a visitor, since the OP stated that she only spent a week with him before she had to leave.

historyenne, the OP made it clear that his girlfriend had stayed with him for a duration prior as a visitor and during that period she "engaged in work" and was "paid".  While I personally agree, watching a kid for a little bit of time doesn't seem like work to me, that is obviously not how UKBA feels about the issue.  UKBA has clearly made up their mind she is not a visitor, so arguing she didn't get a chance to be a visitor is tilting against windmills.

jamcyrix, she can always apply for a visitor.  Trying to come in again as a visitor without prior entry clearance as a visitor will likely result in her getting bounced.  Personally, I would think that applying as a visitor though would likely be a waste of time and money, unless it was for a brief period of time.  Again, in the mind of an ECO, they are unlikely to consider her a visitor again.  The notes take at entry, in particular her accepting money for the babysitting will pretty much be the nail in the coffin on that.  Now if she wants to come to the UK to form a family, or has skills that are in demand in the UK, then she will find a totally different attitude and I highly doubt anything that has occured will negitively impact her chances for a family visa or some other non-visitor visa.

As far as being interviewed by a male, alone, that should be unacceptable, and Garry would be very interested in hearing that.  I am sure he will be along soon to put his two pence in.  As far as going through stuff and reading diaries, while it does feel like a personal invasion, I am afraid that is standard "risks" that occur when crossing a border.  I won't go into how my partner was treated twice while trying to enter the US let alone the couple times I as a US Citizen have been subject to a search by US Customs.  Needless to say, I am thankful that UKBA is a lot better.

The five months normally isn't an issue by itself, but combined with "deceit" regarding who she was visiting (most of here agree that saying "friend" instead of "boyfriend" isn't deceitful, but UKBA IOs feel totally differently about that one and we warn people to be honest with the IOs about the boyfriend/girlfriend thing, because she wasn't the first to get caught up in that) and then her "working" in the UK.  I don't know how long she had stayed before in the UK, but if that had been a significant amount in the past 12 months that would have influenced it as well, as most IOs consider any more then 6 months in a 12 month period as that person not being a visitor.

Visitors have nada when it comes to rights or appeals, outside of complaints about how they were treated.  Visting the UK is discetionairy and not a right.  I know it is a tough message and it may sound rather blunt coming, but I am afraid it is the reality.

Very well put, Kitsonk!  Like a 20 year pro if I do say so myself.  The only think I could possibly add is to try to get the OP's narrative about the detention facility etc etc.  If she were interviewed by a male who was without supervision or in unsupervised circumstances, that's stuff we need to document and take forward.

And I agree that if she violated the T's & C's of a previous stay, it's a big time hit for any non-settlement entry clearance.   You might add that she's screwed for settlement too under 320(11) if she tries the ROI route after a bounce.

Everything else you said was spot on the money. 

Quite impressed!   

Very well put, Kitsonk!  Like a 20 year pro if I do say so myself.  The only think I could possibly add is to try to get the OP's narrative about the detention facility etc etc.  If she were interviewed by a male who was without supervision or in unsupervised circumstances, that's stuff we need to document and take forward.

And I agree that if she violated the T's & C's of a previous stay, it's a big time hit for any non-settlement entry clearance.   You might add that she's screwed for settlement too under 320(11) if she tries the ROI route after a bounce.

Everything else you said was spot on the money. 

Quite impressed!   

Hi Garry

I'm completely new to all of this, so please could you expand on your meaning of "screwed for settlement too under 320(11) if she tries the ROI route after a bounce."

To say that she "previously contrived in a significant way to frustrate the intentions of these Rules.", as quoted under 320 would really be stretching things.

I still cannot believe what has happened, and find it really, really harsh that such insignificant reasoning could prevent my girlfriend from ever visiting or settling here.

Thanks

J

jancyrix - I'm very sorry this happened to your girlfriend.

Information about 320(11) can be found in this thread:
http://talk.uk-yankee.com/index.php?topic=48729.0

If you search the forums for 320(11) you'll find more, but that one's pretty recent.

The specific ROI reference means entering the UK through the Republic of Ireland.  If you fly from the ROI to the UK, you won't go through immigration when you arrive in the UK (though you would have dealt with Irish immigration on arrival in the ROI).  Some people feel this is a clever way to circumvent UK immigration policy, avoid difficult questions about previous refusals, etc., but they're putting themselves at risk.

I'm completely new to all of this, so please could you expand on your meaning of "screwed for settlement too under 320(11) if she tries the ROI route after a bounce."

320(11) refers to a bit of Immigration Code that basically states that if she attempts to "significantly frustrate" immigration rules that they could prevent her from coming in as a fiancée or spouse.  Again, we haven't seen this being applied to US Citizens, but there are some cases of similiar things happening to those from Africa and the Middle East.  Garry is basically saying if she tries to be "sneaky" that it could harm her long term chances.  He is specifically mentioning that UKBA considers those who arrive to the UK via a common travel area country (such as the Republic of Ireland) do this to purposefully evade UK immigration control.  We are working to address this, because most of the people hear who enter via the ROI (via Dublin) do so not to frustrate the rules, but because the flights from the States to the UK are cheaper via Dublin.

The specific ROI reference means entering the UK through the Republic of Ireland.  If you fly from the ROI to the UK, you won't go through immigration when you arrive in the UK (though you would have dealt with Irish immigration on arrival in the ROI).  Some people feel this is a sneaky way to circumvent UK immigration policy, avoid difficult questions about previous refusals, etc.

For sneaky read criminal. People who deserve to be removed. Not to be regarded as a "hint".

For the record, I edited my post because I wasn't sure 'sneaky' was the right word, which is why contrex is quoting a version that does say 'sneaky'.  But let's go with 'criminal'.

Short version: don't do it.

After taking out every last item from each piece of luggage, they found her diary, which had four entries listed 'babysitting'. This was from last year when she was visiting, and involved watching a friend's little boy for a couple of hours whilst they were out. Immigration officers took this to mean that she undertook employment. Unfortunately, my girlfriend was completely honest, and told them that she did it as a favour, and was given £20 as a gift on ONE occasion - This sealed the deal, her passport was confiscated, and she was refused entry.

When I entered the UK as a visitor in August 2007, I was STRONGLY advised not to do ANY TYPE OF WORK, PAID OR UNPAID NOR ANY VOLUNTEER WORK. As your GF violated her visa conditions by doing what she did, in my opinion she deserved to be refused entry.

Another issue might be the 6 months of previous 12 months as a visitor, since you stated that she had visited you previously and I assume she had no issues entering last time. I am also wondering if she had visited you any other times previously. They may have seen a pattern in her travels and determined that she does not meet the visitor criteria.

Can I just also add that the same advice is being given on another forum!

Basically, the refusal under 320 of a further VISIT visa would be to do with the previous breach of conditions, as Kitson has said and as I have said elsewhere.  She admitted to working illegally, so another visit visa is almost certainly going to be refused and subject to a ban.

If she applies for a settlement visa, it is 50/50 as to whether she is approved or not.  Depends on the mood of the IO.  But she may well win on appeal if she is.

Vicky

People can post in a zillion forums if they want; I don't think the quality on this one can be significantly improved upon, but it's up to the individual to filter whatever responses they get.

For example, nobody in either forum has suggested that the OP's gf lodge an SAR to find out what the IO was thinking.  For a mere 10 pounds, I think it's crazy not to.

People can post in a zillion forums if they want; I don't think the quality on this one can be significantly improved upon, but it's up to the individual to filter whatever responses they get.

For example, nobody in either forum has suggested that the OP's gf lodge an SAR to find out what the IO was thinking.  For a mere 10 pounds, I think it's crazy not to.

Garry, could you please explain what the SAR is/involves, and any potential advantages/disadvantages in doing this?

Thanks

J