Is ILR compulsory pre-requisite for Naturalisation?

Hi Folks

I'm new here and desperate for some clear information, if possible . . .

I'm an ancient Brit, happily married to a US wife.
We married in UK, over three years ago now and had intended to stay here in UK for good.

My dear wife is on her second Biometric Residence Permit, which is valid until April 2014 and she passed her Life In The UK Test a couple of weeks ago (incredible achievement, because I don't know a single Brit, including myself, who could pass this stupid test without intensive study and some good luck too)

We thought we could now apply for Naturalisation and I've spent the entire day downloading forms and guidance notes from UKBA. Nowhere does it state that an ILR is a compulsory pre-requisite step to naturalisation yet the 'Form AN' application form demands to know the date that ILR was granted!

It looks very much as though an ILR actually IS a compulsory step despite NOT being listed as such.
Can anyone cast some light on this please?

The costs are getting really scary and we need to find the most economical way of achieving her security over here.

I do hope someone can help - thank you in advance  :-)

You must hold ILR before applying for citizenship.

Blimey - that was quick!
And I feel sure you are correct.
Just incredible that UKBA do not list this as a clear mandatory requirement on their web site - absolutely unbelievable remiss of them. Grounds for a formal complaint I think.

Thank you SO much for your clarification/confirmation of my fears.
We'd better start scraping up some sheckels . . .

It is listed, actually:

Immigration time restrictions

You must be free from immigration time restrictions on the day you make your application.

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/eligibility/naturalisation/spouseorcivilpartnerofcitizen/

You are only free from immigration time restrictions when you hold ILR.

What you say is undoubtedly correct, but WHAT a crummy way they choose to disguise it in gobbledegook! It's certainly far from clear. We both read that as referring to time out of the country.

How much simpler for them to have clearly stated that an ILR is a compulsory first step and listing it in the required documents list as exactly what it is - ILR!

Spouses of UK citizens tend to think of naturalisation as the final step of the immigration process, and it does have some benefits (voting, free movement in the EU), but don't forget that ILR is enough to allow your wife to remain permanently in the UK.  So if you feel that it's too much money all at once, you can put off naturalisation indefinitely.  As long as you're not planning to leave the UK for more than two years, there's not a huge practical difference between holding ILR and holding citizenship.

As far as your point about the information UKBA provides, it is fairly common knowledge that ILR is the next step after a spousal visa .  Plus, as you mention, form AN makes it clear that ILR is necessary.

What you say is undoubtedly correct, but WHAT a crummy way they choose to disguise it in gobbledegook! It's certainly far from clear. We both read that as referring to time out of the country.

'Immigration time restrictions' refers to the fact that most visas have time limitations on them (i.e., they expire at some point).  ILR does not as it is 'indefinite' leave to remain.

The reason the text refers to "free from immigration time restrictions" rather than ILR is because it needs to cover applicants who are EU citizens.   These people are free from immigration time restrictions but don't hold ILR (though technically I believe they qualify for it automatically after a certain time)

I'd just like to thank everyone for their knowledgeable and friendly input, which has clarified what seemed quite a nasty problem before I asked for help.

There is obviously a wealth of information and good will among the members here and my wife will be joining up in her own name on the strength of that.

In the meantime, we'll get stuck in to applying for ILR and only consider naturalisation after that. If we hit any snags with interpretation of wording etc, we'll certainly know where to come and ask - thank you all so much, again  

Just a quicky question re ILR

My US wife, because she had not taken her Life In The UK Test soon enough, is on her SECOND 2-year Biometric Residence Permit, which runs from April 2012 to April 2014.
She passed Life In The UK test a couple of weeks ago. (I'm truly impressed!)

As we married in UK and have been living together here for more than three years, would I be correct in thinking we can now apply for ILR, immediately, without any further waiting time? It seems we should be able to, but with the slightly complex wording of some rules, I thought it would be sensible to ask you very experienced people your opinions, please  :-)

Yes, as long as she has been on FLR(M) for at least 2 years AND has now passed the Life in the UK test, she can apply for ILR at any time between now and April 2014.

In terms of meeting the ILR requirements, the only reason she had to apply for another FLR(M) (I won't call it a Biometric Residence Permit because ILR is issued as a Biometrics Residence Permit as well) was because she hadn't passed the Life in the UK test... so as soon as she passed it, she became eligible for ILR.

Then, once she has received her ILR, she should be able to apply for citizenship immediately, as long as she meets all the other requirements as well.

You were asking if you needed ILR before you could get citizenship... well, now I can see why you were confused, because your wife has been here for 3 years on 2 FLR(M) visas, not the usual 2 years on FLR(M) and 1 year on ILR.

The FLR(M) visa is only valid for 2 years but you cannot qualify for citizenship until you have been in the UK for 3 years... so normally the only way you can legally stay in the UK for those 3 years to qualify for citizenship is to apply for ILR after 2 years, not another FLR(M) visa (the only reason your wife was allowed a second 2-year FLR(M) visa was because she did not qualify for ILR, otherwise she would have had no choice but to apply for ILR in 2012).

This next part doesn't affect your wife at all, but they changed the visa rules in July 2012 and now anyone who applied/applies for their first visa after 9th July 2012 has to spend 5 years on FLR(M) and also apply for ILR, before they can apply for citizenship... so even though citizenship only requires 3 years of residency, because you must hold ILR first, new visa holders now have to wait 5 years to be able to apply for citizenship (and apply for up to 4 visas beforehand - either a fiance visa, two 2-5-year FLR(M) visas and ILR, or a 2.5-year spousal visa, one 2.5-year FLR(M) and ILR)!

Thanks yet again for a great, clear, reassuring reply!
I can't tell you how much even a little reassurance, from people who clearly know their stuff, helps to lift one's spirits!

From reading around the forum, it's become obvious that I'm not alone in sometimes feeling completely overwhelmed and even defeated by the bureaucracy and the insecurity that it engenders in applicants.

Over the last four years, we've been through the initial fiancé visa, spouse visa, two FLRs and now ILR and, every single time, the stress has brought me close to a nervous breakdown. I just wish I had discovered this forum back then . . . I'm sure I would have coped much better.

Thank you all, once again - your input really does help   :-)

'Immigration time restrictions' refers to the fact that most visas have time limitations on them (i.e., they expire at some point).  ILR does not as it is 'indefinite' leave to remain.

Is this true? I applied for and received ILR in 2003, and the visa in my passport has an end date in 2013. I was under the impression that I would either need to pony up for another ILR via or go for citizenship.

No, there is no requirement to do anything further if you have ILR. Thus the name - 'indefinite'.

I wonder why there is an end date on the ILR visa in my passport then. It gives the impression that something must be renewed.