to think we shouldn't be sending people back to Zimbabwe

[wonderstuff]

The Gamu thing was on the news - surely it isn't safe to send people to Zimbabwe while Mugabe is still there? Seems very unfair.

They said she arrived 8 years ago (Gamu) so she would have only been 10 at the time, I feel so sorry for her. Also seems that her mother found out her application to extend her visa was turned down via the media which seems harsh.

I know someone who had to offer and pay a HO employee a bribe.

The visa was first rejected. First thing my immigration solicitor friend asked - upon learning what country it was - was, 'Did they pay the right fee? Maybe they didn't pay the right fee?'

Sure enough, they happened to be £200 short.

But the list of public funds is on the UKBA website for all to see, as expat pointed out. That information had to exist somewhere prior to being put on the UKBA website.

And even with no up to date legal knowledge re immigration I would have thought any benefits available to a UK citizen were "public funds". If on a visa that stated "no recourse to public funds" that would lead me to assume I would not be able to claim any benefits that a UK citizen had the right to claim. After all, as a non imigrant visa holder I would not be viewed as a citizen of that country so why would I have any claims on the benefits of said country's citizens iyswim? I paid nearly $20k a year into Uncle Sam's coffers and got NOTHING in return. So even if Gamu's mother worked and payed taxes it doesn't mean she had the right to claim the tax credits as stated in the press. Even if she didn't know, she is still responsible.

Gamu's mother had a non immigrant visa. Thus no rights to any benefits a UK citizen could claim. And the UKBA has this info on their website and that makes it easy to see what is and isn't applicable.

'I paid nearly $20k a year into Uncle Sam's coffers and got NOTHING in return.'

I paid way more than that in the 16 years I worked there and, even as a citizen, got nothing in return because I didn't qualify for it.

It never crossed my mind to even think about benefits here when I was on FLR because, well, it said 'No recourse to public funds'.

That info's been online for ages it was on there years ago when DD1 was born in 2003, it's also on directgov's site and again, as a bullet-point list. I was on ILR soon after DD1 was born, but DH even looked it up to see if he could claim CB for DD1, who was of course, British from birth (yes, he could and did, as he was then a SAHD).

Yes wrinkly. And if we all went by 'what I would have thought', no doubt we'd all be breaking the rules.

The info on the UKBA website might be helpful - if you already understood what it meant. But as it stands, it's not.

For example: does 'no recourse to public funds mean'? Does it mean you can't claim back council tax if your partner's a student - or is this 'council tax benefit'? Can you call in the council to fix the party wall if the building is council owned, or would that be taking advantage of 'local authority housing'? Those are the ones we've grappled with particularly.

I expect what's happened with Gamu's mother is that she didn't understand she still had no recourse to public funds, or that she was taking advantage, but I do want to show that UKBA info is - like most of their site - only really useful if you already know the answer to your question.

I don't buy it, LRD, in her case. Just now googled, 'Is working tax credit a public fund', very basic question. First hit is a yes. It's not a complicated question as your situation might be.

And you have to complete an application for these funds, an application in which you declare your income.

An application in which, every year, you must state if you are subject to immigration control.

If she was mislead by a bureaucrat it is still no excuse because the answer to this question 'Are tax credits public funds' is such an easy to find one.

Yeah, you may well be right expat.

I guess I just want it to have been an honest mistake, you know? I don't watch X Factor and would have no idea even what her daughter looks like, but it's crap when something like this gets publicity because it confirms, for some people, that all immigrants are naturally cheating scroungers.

I used to hate filling out that form, and others, as I always had to go into detail about being on ILR and then invariably I'd need to go in person and have the visa copied blah blah blah.

Such a relief to naturalise and then not have to bother with it.

Getting my childrens' passports was a 'mare because when DD1 was born, her nationality came from her father as I did not have ILR when she was born. Even so, according to the law, she could have it through me after I had ILR. But no matter.

When DD2 was born, again, I had ILR so it could have come from either parent, but her app was also first rejected, as was DD1's.

Only DS's went through without a hitch as I checked British on everything.

And again, the staff I dealt with were pricks who treated us, DH, too, like criminals trying to get a passport our children weren't entitled to.

I even had to stop Dh once, on the phone to some git in Belfast when he yelled, 'Look, y ou git, I dunnae ken wot part o' Scottish you dunnae ken but mah bairn is Scottish, okay, pal?!' :o

'I even had to stop Dh once, on the phone to some git in Belfast when he yelled, 'Look, y ou git, I dunnae ken wot part o' Scottish you dunnae ken but mah bairn is Scottish, okay, pal?!'

Great line!

Actually by "what I would have thought" I would err on the side of cautiom and not assume entitlement to anything I was not expressly entitled to. Some others might say "well it doesn't say I can't do it so I will assume I can". Its all down to personal attitude and morals isn't it?

I can only speak from personal experience and give my own opinion (as we all can do here). Your experience with UK immigration sounds just as frustrating as mine was with US immigration. I'm sorry you've both had a hellish time. I really hope it all works out for you and your dh.

Actually by "what I would have thought" I would err on the side of cautiom and not assume entitlement to anything I was not expressly entitled to. Some others might say "well it doesn't say I can't do it so I will assume I can". Its all down to personal attitude and morals isn't it?

I can only speak from personal experience and give my own opinion (as we all can do here). Your experience with UK immigration sounds just as frustrating as mine was with US immigration. I'm sorry you've both had a hellish time. I really hope it all works out for you and your dh.

You should have heard the bloke on the line, too. He had a Norn Irish accent you could cut with a knife. I could hardly make him out but DH had no problem with him. He said, 'Okay, right, fine well, because you understand me without me having to repeat yourself like most people who ring here, I'll say I've spoken to you and you are really British, I mean, Scottish.'

:o

morals, huh?

Yeah, it's just our lack of morals that makes us want not to waste hundreds of pounds. Still, might as well no bother applying for any money back, just in case people like you think we're scroungers, eh? Ta for that.

expat - I love that! That is very characteristically Northern Irish though. Dad's family are from there and I swear it's like a secret handshake.

If she deliberately claimed something she was not entitled to then yes that reflects poor morals.

I don't think anyone is a scrounger who receives help they are both legally entitled to and in need of. Don't put words in my mouth. If you received benefits you're entitled to you're hardly a scrounger. If you needed help in understanding what you're entitled to you're not a scrounger. Someone who deliberately flouts the rules and claims something they are not entitled to IS a scrounger. And I don't think Gamu's mother is a scrounger as no one knows what her mindset was about the tax credits. If she felt or was advised she could claim then fair enough. But as it turns out the facts clearly state her particular visa did not give her entitlement to tax credits and that's the point.

If she deliberately claimed something she was not entitled to then yes that reflects poor morals.

I don't think anyone is a scrounger who receives help they are both legally entitled to and in need of. Don't put words in my mouth. If you received benefits you're entitled to you're hardly a scrounger. If you needed help in understanding what you're entitled to you're not a scrounger. Someone who deliberately flouts the rules and claims something they are not entitled to IS a scrounger. And I don't think Gamu's mother is a scrounger as no one knows what her mindset was about the tax credits. If she felt or was advised she could claim then fair enough. But as it turns out the facts clearly state her particular visa did not give her entitlement to tax credits and that's the point.

We do not currently return people to Zimbabwe

What? Really? Since when?
And what is this story all about then?

The Home Office announced earlier this year that they will start removing and deporting people to Zimbabwe. However I'm not yet aware of any cases where they have done so.