Supreme court ruling....what might it mean for couples with kids?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/supreme-court-upholds-foreign-spouse-income-limit-for-immigration-a3473056.html

I'd imagine next to nothing....but curious.

It doesn't mean anything really.  The income requirement is appealed and upheld each year (so it seems anyway).

Currently when applying for your extension, if you don't meet the requirement but have kids, you ARE allowed to remain but put on the 10 year path to ILR.  Whereas if you don't have kids, you are not as lucky.  For entry clearance, you'd have to prove that you had no where else to live.

The UK is all about the money, money, money!

It doesn't mean anything really.  The income requirement is appealed and upheld each year (so it seems anyway).

Currently when applying for your extension, if you don't meet the requirement but have kids, you ARE allowed to remain but put on the 10 year path to ILR.  Whereas if you don't have kids, you are not as lucky.  For entry clearance, you'd have to prove that you had no where else to live.

The UK is all about the money, money, money!

Nowhere else to live? How would that happen? Like a refugee situation or the like?

I had no idea this was appealed every year. Interesting. I guess I just happened to notice this lol.

Yeah, refugees or someone who was stateless.  Even then the UK is not good at allowing refugees (as I'm sure you've seen on the news). 

You'll get here before long.  Just sit tight a bit longer.   

Yeah, refugees or someone who was stateless.  Even then the UK is not good at allowing refugees (as I'm sure you've seen on the news). 

You'll get here before long.  Just sit tight a bit longer.   

Haha thank you for your positivity KFdancer.

I just got off the phone with a rude recruiter who said that they could use my particular UK NATO Entry Clearance. They write the ads a certain way as if they could use it and then they get all bent out of shape when I even call and ask about it.

They were so rude that I had to hang up the phone. 

Sometimes I wonder if it is worth it all.

Haha thank you for your positivity KFdancer.

I just got off the phone with a rude recruiter who said that they could use my particular UK NATO Entry Clearance. They write the ads a certain way as if they could use it and then they get all bent out of shape when I even call and ask about it.

They were so rude that I had to hang up the phone. 

Sometimes I wonder if it is worth it all.

Eh, depends who you ask.  Those who live in the North and Scotland seem to really love the UK.  Unfortunately I live in the South and I don't think life is any better here than it would be in the US.  Don't get me wrong, I'm happy enough.  It's just not like this place poops unicorns and rainbows. 

I think it all depends on what your expectations are.  I think family is the best reason for anyone to move anywhere.  My reasons for wanting to return to the US are family (though my mother recently drove me crazy on a trip home, so that's eased off a bit), my kid's education (the UK system leaves a lot to be desired in my personal opinion), and wanting to have a work/life balance back.  But everyone's experience here is different.

Eh, depends who you ask.  Those who live in the North and Scotland seem to really love the UK.  Unfortunately I live in the South and I don't think life is any better here than it would be in the US.  Don't get me wrong, I'm happy enough.  It's just not like this place poops unicorns and rainbows. 

I think it all depends on what your expectations are.  I think family is the best reason for anyone to move anywhere.  My reasons for wanting to return to the US are family (though my mother recently drove me crazy on a trip home, so that's eased off a bit), my kid's education (the UK system leaves a lot to be desired in my personal opinion), and wanting to have a work/life balance back.  But everyone's experience here is different.

...but it doesn't poop rainbows? I guess that is Ireland. You have got it right, everyone has their own particular reasons for consideration of such a move.

Currently when applying for your extension, if you don't meet the requirement but have kids, you ARE allowed to remain but put on the 10 year path to ILR. 

That's not always a given. You have to show "insurmoutable obstacles" why you can't take your children and have your family life in your own country. If you only recently arrived with those children, it would be hard to show why they can't all return to the country of the other parent who had no right to be in the UK, especailly if those children were citizens of that country.

Even the 7 years with a child in the UK route, got closed down for many by changing the wording, as parents who couldn't get a visa tried to use that route with "anchor babies". That got changed to "best interest of the child" as in, it's in the best interest of the child to be with their deported parents.


It all seems to be swinging back now, to favour those who stick to the immigration rules/EU rules.

That's not always a given. You have to show "insurmoutable obstacles" why you can't take your children and have your family life in your own country. If you only recently arrived with those children, it would be hard to show why they can't all return to the country of the other parent who had no right to be in the UK, especailly if those children were citizens of that country.

Even the 7 years with a child in the UK route, got closed down for many by changing the wording, as parents who couldn't get a visa tried to use that route with "anchor babies". That got changed to "best interest of the child" as in, it's in the best interest of the child to be with their deported parents.


It all seems to be swinging back now, to favour those who stick to the immigration rules/EU rules.

True, I only "know" the ones we've had on this board.  And Lord knows, I can see them refusing people with kids the 10 year path...   

While we're talking about legal challenges, does anybody know if the issue of regional income disparity has been raised in the courts?  An income of £18,600 is easy to accomplish in London and other urban areas in Southern England (but difficult to live on!).  Meanwhile, it's really hard to come by, even for graduates, in other parts of the UK.

My husband and I were able to buy a house in Wales, but his job won't move with us.  So he is now commuting 150 miles each week and living near his old job Monday through Friday.  The extra costs are about £700 a month.  If he took a salary of £500/pm less than he makes now, we'd be money ahead, less stressed, and we would have more time and money to devote to making the home improvements we need to do...  but we'd be below the income threshold.  It doesn't even make sense!

While we're talking about legal challenges, does anybody know if the issue of regional income disparity has been raised in the courts?  An income of £18,600 is easy to accomplish in London and other urban areas in Southern England (but difficult to live on!).

The hourly national minimum wage is the same for all the country, rising again in April as it has done at least once a year since the 18,600 was brought in. Many in London and the SE only get that NMW too. People are allowed to do more than one job to sponsor.

My husband and I were able to buy a house in Wales, but his job won't move with us.  So he is now commuting 150 miles each week and living near his old job Monday through Friday.  The extra costs are about £700 a month. 

Lots do this to have a better property in a cheaper part of the UK and rent a room from someone for those four nights. A friend of mine lets one of his spare bedrooms. 

If he took a salary of £500/pm less than he makes now, we'd be money ahead, less stressed, and we would have more time and money to devote to making the home improvements we need to do...  but we'd be below the income threshold.  It doesn't even make sense!

Can you find a job to make up that loss? Your salary can be used too to meet the requirements.

The hourly national minimum wage is the same for all the country, rising again in April as it has done at least once a year since the 18,600 was brought in. Many in London and the SE only get that NMW too. People are allowed to do more than one job to sponsor.

Lots do this to have a better property in a cheaper part of the UK and rent a room from someone for those four nights. A friend of mine lets one of his spare bedrooms. 

Can you find a job to make up that loss? Your salary can be used too to meet the requirements.

Thanks for your reply.  We are making it work for us until after my IRL application (June 2018).  I was just wondering if the issue had been raised in the courts.

After all, the government has acknowledged cost of living (and wage) disparity in other aspects of its operations, as evidenced by "London weighting" for civil service job salaries.  I wondered if anyone had asked the courts to determine whether they should make the same consideration in determining the minimum income threshold, either by holding those areas to a proportionally higher threshold, or reducing it for lower cost of living regions.

Again, and to be clear, I'm only asking if the issue has already been raised in the courts.

I think this is the original report from the Migrant Advisory Committee.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-income-for-family-migration-route

The mooted question is addressed towards then end with this Pontius Pilate-esque tidbit offering a good summary:

"We were not commissioned to
consider whether the
maintenance threshold should
vary across the UK, and we
have not analysed the matter
in depth. Nevertheless, on the
basis of the above we do not
see a clear case for
differentiation of the
maintenance threshold
between UK countries and
regions. We proceed under
the assumption that the
income threshold will be set
nationally."

The bit I bolded is almost amusing...."We don't know anything about that, but will make recommendations anyhow."

I think this is the original report from the Migrant Advisory Committee.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/migration-advisory-committee-income-for-family-migration-route

The mooted question is addressed towards then end with this Pontius Pilate-esque tidbit offering a good summary:

"We were not commissioned to
consider whether the
maintenance threshold should
vary across the UK, and we
have not analysed the matter
in depth. Nevertheless, on the
basis of the above we do not
see a clear case for
differentiation of the
maintenance threshold
between UK countries and
regions. We proceed under
the assumption that the
income threshold will be set
nationally."

The bit I bolded is almost amusing...."We don't know anything about that, but will make recommendations anyhow."

Thanks for that!  Do you recall what section/page that was on?  I'm scanning the file now.  But the issue hasn't been raised in the courts to your knowledge?  It's irrelevant for me because I'll have got past my IRL application by the time any decision was handed down, but I am so tempted to pursue this question.  I like rules and laws, but I expect them to be fair and rational.  And it seems there is a bit of a disconnect between the rationale behind this particular rule and its effect.  I feel like this needs to be fixed.

Edit: Nevermind, I found the section you cited.  Thanks, again!  This is an interesting read.

I hope the home office take into account the supreme courts comments regarding consideration for third party sources of funding, this would be huge if a family member or friend could help to meet the required MIR amount.