American Kicked Out

And as is usual in these cases, instead of returning to the home country and following the correct procedure, they are trying to fight the system.

£4000 for a judicial review? For a shady lawyer more like, it’s a shame no one is giving them good advice. 

It's not just the money they have to pay to their lawer; they get the Home Office legal fees bill too when they lose. One person just said his HO bill for losing his JR was 8k

So silly. He should have gone home and returned on the correct visa months ago. He would have been on his way to 5 years for ILR by now, have bill free use of the NHS instead of having to pay etc.

I think they had a baby though?  If I remember correctly.

But yeah, it seems as soon as the media gets involved, they are allowed to stay.

A British baby seems to be the only reason they might be put on the 10 year route, even an adult British children won't cut it.

Anyone remember that woman from Singapore who tried to stay after entering as a visitor, her ILR had lapsed years before and she had been married to a Brit for something like 30 years? She had British children and grandchildren in the UK, went to all the papers to try to force the UK to change the rules for her, but was shocked to find she was detained and then deported. While she was in a detention centre, her husband really ramped up the story in all the papers, but it didn't help.

Once deported, she then finally accepted that the rules would not be changed for her and she then applied for the correct visa and is now in the UK. But she has ruined her immigration history, gave themselves a lot of expense and stress and it will be at least 10 years before she is considered to be of "Good Character" for British citizenship.

It seems they're more concerned with going the appeal route than coming on here and discussing it. I, personally, would be straight on here immediately to find help.

Ah well. At least I tried.

It seems they're more concerned with going the appeal route than coming on here and discussing it. I, personally, would be straight on here immediately to find help.

Ah well. At least I tried.

Well, the thing is that they can't appeal... they have no right to appeal the decision - UKVI have got rid of the option to appeal for in-country applications. Their only option is a Judicial Review, which is not the same as an appeal.

An appeal is just a review of the case to determine whether or not a mistake was made in refusing the visa, and if this is found to be the case, the refusal decision may be reversed and the visa granted instead. As I understand it, a Judical Review is a court proceeding where a judge determines whether or not UKVI's decision to refuse the visa was lawful.

I've just found this comparison of the two on a visa blog (https://ukvisa.blog/2016/02/11/judicial-review-uk-immigration/):

The Judicial Review questions the “Correctness of the Procedure” that has been adopted to reach a “Decision”; whereas an APPEAL questions the “Rightfulness of a Decision” i.e. whether a decision was Right or Wrong.

The right of appeal against a UK Visa and Immigration Refusal is not ubiquitous i.e. an appeal can only be filed against an appealable refusal decision; whereas, Judicial Review can be filed against nearly all types of UK Visa and Immigration Decisions, provided that there are sufficient grounds to prove that correct procedure has not been adopted for reaching a refusal decision.

The problem that this couple will have is that the correct procedure WAS adopted: their visa was refused because they did not qualify to apply for it in the first place, and they are not eligible for the 10-year path under Article 8 because they do not have insurmountable obstacles to living abroad in another country, or a young UK citizen child whose life would be disrupted if they had to leave the UK.

It seems they're more concerned with going the appeal route than coming on here and discussing it. I, personally, would be straight on here immediately to find help.

Ah well. At least I tried.

Honestly, people only want to hear what they want to hear.  If a lawyer has told them they will be successful with a judicial review, then they think that's the answer.  It happens very frequently.

I know ksand, that's what's frustrating me. Almost the blind leading the blind.

Honestly, people only want to hear what they want to hear.  If a lawyer has told them they will be successful with a judicial review, then they think that's the answer.  It happens very frequently.

It's very frustrating!

It's very frustrating!

And really sad. I hope they change their minds and pop in here for a chat at least.

I'm dubious about the "I'm so upset I can't work anymore " bit.  Much like when I catch my daughter messing around instead of helping clear the dishes.  She immediately stops doing any work  because she's so incredulous that I could possibly accuse her of not working. 

In the article she says that her husband is a skilled worker and would not be a burden on the State. Does this mean he has been working illegally here, and what has he been doing for healthcare?

It’s hard to be sympathetic towards folks with their background of living in the USA and the UK. They have to know both countries have strict rules on immigration.

In the article she says that her husband is a skilled worker and would not be a burden on the State. Does this mean he has been working illegally here, and what has he been doing for healthcare?

It’s hard to be sympathetic towards folks with their background of living in the USA and the UK. They have to know both countries have strict rules on immigration.

They came in 2000 and left to go to America in 2003. It seems they recently came back

Well, the thing is that they can't appeal... they have no right to appeal the decision - UKVI have got rid of the option to appeal for in-country applications. Their only option is a Judicial Review, which is not the same as an appeal.

An appeal is just a review of the case to determine whether or not a mistake was made in refusing the visa, and if this is found to be the case, the refusal decision may be reversed and the visa granted instead. As I understand it, a Judical Review is a court proceeding where a judge determines whether or not UKVI's decision to refuse the visa was lawful.

I've just found this comparison of the two on a visa blog (https://ukvisa.blog/2016/02/11/judicial-review-uk-immigration/):

The problem that this couple will have is that the correct procedure WAS adopted: their visa was refused because they did not qualify to apply for it in the first place, and they are not eligible for the 10-year path under Article 8 because they do not have insurmountable obstacles to living abroad in another country, or a young UK citizen child whose life would be disrupted if they had to leave the UK.

What ksand said.

They look at any Human Rights claim when they refuse an application now, even if it wasn't asked for. They had a "family life" together in the US and Human Rights doesn't mean they get to chose the country they want to live in.


The Immigration Act 2016 ended the abuse on Human Rights appeals too, as well as all the other abuse of applications made in the UK that didn't meet the immigration rules, but done to try to extend their time in the UK for years.


He can't apply from the UK as a visitor and he doesn't have a human rights claim. A JR is outside the immigration laws, so he doesn't get protection under 3c of the Immration Act 1971, (doesn't make his stay lawful in the UK, he can't work, he can't use the NHS bill free etc) and will cost them thousands.

I hope he isn't doing anything that might prevent him returning on a spouse visa? i.e. not going to report when told to; working; not paying his NHS bills etc
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/frustrating-the-intentions-of-the-immigration-rules-rfl07-paragraph-32011/frustrating-the-intentions-of-the-immigration-rules-rfl07-paragraph-32011

Don't forget too that the Immigration Act 2016 also made illegal working a criminal offence for the person working now too, with the proceeds of their crime being seized and up to 12 months in jail.

Anyone remember that woman from Singapore who tried to stay after entering as a visitor, her ILR had lapsed years before and she had been married to a Brit for something like 30 years? She had British children and grandchildren in the UK, went to all the papers to try to force the UK to change the rules for her, but was shocked to find she was detained and then deported. While she was in a detention centre, her husband really ramped up the story in all the papers, but it didn't help.

Once deported, she then finally accepted that the rules would not be changed for her and she then applied for the correct visa and is now in the UK. But she has ruined her immigration history, gave themselves a lot of expense and stress and it will be at least 10 years before she is considered to be of "Good Character" for British citizenship.

Here it is-

Her story of trying to remain in the UK after entering as a visitor, having lived in her own country for years. Had lived in the UK for 3 years, decades before, but had lost her ILR. Refused permission to remain  in the UK as she entered as a visitor and had to report: being taking to a detention centre while on one of her required reporting appointments.
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singaporean-fighting-deportation-from-britain



Her deportation from the UK.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-two-deported-singapore-for-9924816

He added: “We went up to see her on Friday at the detention centre and she was in good spirits.

“We have been fighting all along to get bail for her so that she could come home while it was sorted out.

“To us it seemed like red tape that just needed to be cut through, we thought she’d be coming home and so did Irene.

“The idea that they would actually go through with his and send her to Singapore just seemed so ridiculous that it couldn’t happen.


"A Home Office spokesman said: “All applications for leave to remain in the UK are considered on their individual merits and in line with the immigration rules.

“We expect those with no legal right to remain in the country to leave.”


More here about her being deported.
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/52-year-old-singaporean-deported-despite-decades-long-fight-to-stay-with-british-husband


Once deported, she applied for the correct visa from her own country and returned on a spouse visa.

Speaking after being deported, Mrs Clennell said: "It is a bloody disgrace, they treat me like a terrorist and anything else under the sun.

"They embarrass me in front of everybody, the only thing I did wrong was marry a British man and want to stay in the country with my kids and my husband."

In a statement, the Home Office statement said: "Mrs Clennell has been granted a visa as a spouse as her latest application meets the immigration rules to enter the UK.

"This does not negate the previous decision which was the result of Mrs Clennell having entered the UK as a visitor, overstaying her leave to remain and making several applications while in the UK which did not meet the immigration rules.


"During that time, it was open to her to leave the UK voluntarily at any time in order to reapply under the correct route as she has now done."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-41052984

I would like to think that they are reading the great information in this thread, even if they are not participating.

Ben, just curious, where did you see the son’s comment? I braved the comments at the bottom of the article and looked at the crowd funding page but didn’t see one from him.

There are losts of cases like this, where they enter as a visitor and have to return home to apply,

Here is another US citizen who has done that and tried to remain, but he started in 2015 before the Immigration Act 2016 came in to stop the abuse of try to extend their time in the UK: ended in country appeals.

"Dale McIntier, 62, came to the UK on a visitor’s visa with his wife Sandra in April 2015 in order for her to receive medical treatment, with a plan to stay for six months and then return to their home in Idaho".


//As his British wife lived in the US, she was not alllowed to use the NHS bill free for her cancer treatment unless she returned to reside in the UK. Her husband entered as a visitor.

"After mounting an appeal against the decision, the couple were told by a court in a first-tier tribunal that Mr McIntier must return to the US in order to reapply for a spousal visa – a move that would leave his wife without a carer and having to rely on state support."

"Speaking to The Independent, Mr McIntier said his wife’s complex conditions would require more state-funded care without him in the country."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/american-man-deportation-ordered-leave-uk-despite-disabled-wife-care-a7921766.html

//She won't get state funded care as she has a house in the US that she doesn't live in (too much capital in her assets to get state funded carers in the UK).


"Because of visa restrictions, Dale is unable to work in Scotland. But by renting out their home back in Idaho, the couple have a steady income which helps pay for their day-to-day lives in Largs. He spends most of his days helping his wife and volunteering in the community.

"Scotland feels like home to me", Mr McIntier added.

"I have more friends here, the short time that I've been here than I have all my life in southeast Idaho."[/b]
https://stv.tv/news/west-central/1398774-man-faces-deportation-despite-being-carer-for-wife/

I feel bad for the couple in the original post.  Immigration is getting more and more strict and I think it's easy for it change beneath your feet without noticing.  Rules are rules though, you want in, you must play by their game.  We all had to do it and whining that they are special doesn't exactly endear me to their situation.  It makes them seem entitled and demanding because they think the rules, which are pretty damn clear, don't apply to them.

I do feel for today's immigrants, really I do.  I did it back in 2006, citizenship in 2009 and I think the entire cost was around £3,500 for my 3 visas plus citizenship (I did 2 of the visas in person).  At the time I thought it was really difficult; by today's rules and regs it was a cake walk.  But the way to fight the system is by letters to MPs, not by claiming that you're a special case once you've broken all the rules of the country you're trying on live in!