I totally get why the guy didn't provide proof - he was told he didn't need to as the system would "speak" to HMRC.
The UK said there would be a 10- year ban for those who use deception on their application. If UKVI filled in their application and looked for all their proof, then why would they state there would be a 10 year ban? As under UK laws, the applicant completes the application honestly and provides the proof and then as UKVI always do, they check to see if that information is correct.
EU law has always required that they provide proof. Proof for their EU FP, proof for their EU RC, and then proof for the PR. Then proof for British citizenship. Millions of people have managed this OK. Unlike UK immigration rules, the EU regs are very easy to understand.
For those of you who have been here for decades, or even "just" 5 years like Bertine - you guys never could have anticipated Brexit
EU law was never was a case of just going to live in another country and I have no idea why some of those using the EU routes ever thought that as they had strict rules to follow. its not just living in another EEA country. The reason many have been unable to get PR in the UK is because they were not continuously lawful in the UK during their 5 years and they have reset their 5 years of PR clock to zero.
It's why some are asking if this settlement offer will end if the UK stays in the EU, because they would not get settlement if they tried under EU rules. From what I can remember of what Bertine has said before, she will gain from this arrangement as her EEA sponsor was not an EU qualified person continuously for 5 years and would have ended his (and hers) PR clock, and then set it to zero again when he resumed being an EEA qualified person.
It genuinely isn't his fault - at least not as far as the article reads (and we know these aren't always right). T
It's entirely his fault and worryingly for somebody who has been using EU rules to be in another EEA country, he doesn't seem to understand why!