Poll: Effect of the new immigration rules on UK-Y

I thought it would be good to get a snapshot of the effect on UK-Y these new rules would have had, had they been in place for the last few years.   Let's assume the income threshold for last year would have been £17,500 (downscaling £18600 by inflation)

EDIT:  And working back (using RPI):

April 2011:  17,500
April 2010:  16,700
April 2009:  16,300
April 2008:  16,150
April 2007:  15,400

I voted no, but I think we may have recieved the cash from his parents to sit in our account - but it wouldn't have been ideal, and I still think we would have moved to the US to avoid the stress of wondering when we would finally be able to give the money back.

Definitely not. My husband was a student at the time but I think the fact that we had over £5000 in savings at the time got us the visa. That wouldn't be enough with these changes. We would qualify now that my husband's done with uni but there is no way we would've in 2009 under these new rules.

I'm a probable No.  When we applied for Leisa's fiance visa in Feb '09 I was making over the threshold, but I'd only been employed for one month.   So I wouldn't have met the 6-month rule, unless they would have taken into account my PhD stipend before that, which was £14k but tax free.   If they didn't accept that, we'd have had to delay our wedding or live apart until I hit the 6 months.

I put yes, though it's more nuanced than that.  When I applied in December 2008, DH was making above the threshold, but hadn't been at his job for six months.  However, we would just have waited another three months and applied then, so I'd still be here in more or less the same situation as I am now. 

I'm a yes, but only because I switched in-country. We relied completely on my income since my husband has been a student or un/under-employed for much of the time. If we'd had to apply from out of country it would have been unlikely.

I wouldn't have qualified, as DH makes less than the £18,600 per year. When I applied under the "old" rules in 2010, all we needed was the extra £106 per week after rent and council tax, and that we had, so no problem. I think it's horribly unfair to deny others in our situation, who may not make a lot, but still have enough to put a roof over their heads and survive without benefits, as we have.

Think I was earning pretty much exactly 18,600 at the time, though for a period last year I was earning less (the perils of working in the public sector in Cameron's Britain). But since it seems they're accepting the applicant's savings as well as the sponsor's, we could have made up that deficit through my wife's savings.

Definately not, neither of us were working when we applied for the spouse visa in 2010 as we had been traveling for the 6 months prior to the application.  We had roughly £3000 in savings.

Yes. Although the boy originally came over on a Student visa, I'd been graduated about 9 months and was earning above £18K. 6 years later I've been consistently employed above that threshold (although things can change, I could get in a terrible accident tomorrow - let's hope not!)

Yes. However, we are older and DH is well established in his career.  We both also have savings, although they took a substantial hit due to visa, moving and wedding costs.

Think I was earning pretty much exactly 18,600 at the time, though for a period last year I was earning less (the perils of working in the public sector in Cameron's Britain). But since it seems they're accepting the applicant's savings as well as the sponsor's, we could have made up that deficit through my wife's savings.

This is the part of the rules that I don't get at all.  A person must have well in excess of 16K in savings to overcome an income shortfall.  Is this fair?

Absolute no. Both my husband and I were coming from the states after graduating, neither of us had jobs, only a very tiny amount of savings. We lived with his parents for 4 months after arriving.

I was in-country so I probably would have been ok. However, I put "no" because if I were applying from out of country per these new rules, we most certainly would not have qualified. My ex was making just under £18k (before he lost his job in October).

Tricky as DH was in a job for 2 years at above the threshold- then left for 3 months in the US when we got married and applied for the visa. Though he resumed work when he got back to the UK- I am not sure if they would have accepted this as he was technically not working when we applied.

So I put 'No' as I am sure that is what Theresa May would prefer