Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Deported grandmother : what is the government trying to prove

363 replies

alwaysprepare · 27/02/2017 11:31

There is a story of a woman originally from Singapore who lives here and has been married to a Brit for 27 years, they have 2 kids and a grandchild.
Her parents had been ill and she has spent the last few years going home to take care of them. They have now passed away. She had indefinite leave to remain which has been revoked and was apparently taken on a Sunday by authorities and sent to a detention centre before being put on a flight with £12 and the clothes on her back. Her husband is poorly after a heart bypass, I think it was.

You are not allowed to leave the country for a certain amount of time on the visa she has, but she probably needed to take care of ailing parents. Also Singapore does not Allow dual citizenship which maybe why she did not apply for UK passport as that probably would have been tricky for her parent emergencies etc.

We are no better than Trump.

Sorry cannot paste it right now, but it's on Google.

OP posts:
YERerseISootTHEwindy · 28/02/2017 15:14

Well, it is a decision for you and your mum so that is up to you Flowers

hamble123 · 28/02/2017 15:31

I've lived in Singapore on two occasions for a total of 8 years.....loved it there but the rules and regulations are very strict indeed. When the landing cards are issued to anyone arriving in Singapore it is clearly marked in big red letters "Death to Drug Traffickers', they mean it.

If you want to become a Singapore citizen you need to prove that you have given up your other citizenship ie. For Brits you would need to formally renounce British citizenship in front of a British Consular official (there isn't an Embassy as Singapore is a Commonwealth country, so there is the British High Commission building in Tanglin Road). I presume at this point they retain your British passport and hand you a letter or certificate of some kind proving this.

Btw, Singapore is quite choosy on whom they will allow to become a Singaporean. There are about 215,000 maids in Singapore from places like the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Indonesia etc. They could be working in Singapore for many years but are not allowed to apply. The country is tiny (the size of the Isle of Wight) with 4 million people living on it and no resources.....they only want people who can contribute by paying a lot into the tax system. There is no social security provision in Singapore, families are expected to pitch in if someone is unable to work, so low earners are not enouraged to stay indefinitely. Maids aren't even allowed to marry Singaporeans or have babies in Singapore....(the locals seem to frown on they kinfolk marrying maids, but I did know one maid who went home to Manila to marry a Singaporean guy and they had to jump through some hoops to move back to Singapore).

I too think this lady may have wanted to 'have her cake and eat it'. I know a few Singaporeans who went to the US and Canada for university and stayed on to work and eventually get married after their studies. One has a US passport, the other a Canadian passport (she married a German guy in Canada and they currently live in Switzerland). They have both retained their Singapore passports - but just keep it quiet to the authorities there.

This lady as far as I can tell wanted to keep ownership of property in Singapore (for example only locals can buy land or freehold landed property and this is why she wanted to retain residency for so long in Singapore. HDB flats - Housing Development Board - are only for citizens and permanent residents as they are subsidized by the government. Foreigners have restrictions on what they are allowed to buy and have to buy at full market rates).

I also suspect that her husband returned to live in England with their sons because sons of Singapore citizens and sons of permanent residents must register for National Service and conscription is mandatory from the age of 16.5 (can be deferred if still at school or college) for 2 years of full time NS. They still have to be available up to the age of 40 (my dentist had to delay my treatment as he had to go off and do a fortnight of NS and he was in his late 30s!). There are huge fines (and possibly imprisonment) if NS is not completed. The only way to get out of it if you don't want to pay a huge bond - which is forfeited if the son doesn't return to do his NS - is to leave Singapore. I am pretty sure that the spouse chose not to go for Permanent Residency because of this and perhaps if his work contract ended - along with his employment pass - instead of looking for another job in Singapore, the couple decided to move the boys to England whilst she stayed on in Singapore to keep the property there (property is generally more expensive than London prices, even for a tiny flat).

CosyNook · 28/02/2017 15:32

If you go to another country you do have a responsibility to check your status and eligibility to be there.

Unfortunately it's not straight forward and is highly inconvenient but one can't complain if faced with deportation when you haven't followed procedure.

GraceGrape · 28/02/2017 15:56

hamble Your description of Singapore sounds like exactly the kind of place Rees-Moggy and his ilk would like to recreate here. Except for the national service - although I wouldn't rule anything out!

TheElementsSong · 28/02/2017 16:23

hamble Very good point about National Service, I can't believe I forgot about that! Yes, it would be a very good explanation as to why the husband and sons decided to move back to the UK instead of taking up PR there.

DickToPhone · 28/02/2017 16:37

"I also suspect that her husband returned to live in England with their sons because sons of Singapore citizens and sons of permanent residents must register for National Service"

The kids would have been about 5 or 6 when they left though?

YERerseISootTHEwindy · 28/02/2017 16:45

I agree Hamble. Looks like they thought they could have the best of both worlds.

We are very lucky we do not have forced national service like this at the moment. It is actually common all around the world, I think it is the same in Israel for example. Funny really that people here moan about the occasional jury service Hmm

YERerseISootTHEwindy · 28/02/2017 17:01

I have looked it up. They would not want to be there when sons turned 13 because of this

" WHEN HE IS 13 YEARS OLD
According to Mindef website iPrepNS, your son will need to apply for an exit permit if he is travelling or remaining outside Singapore for three months or longer.

If he plans to travel or remaining outside Singapore for more than two years, his parents or guardians will be bonded at $75,000 or half of their combined annual income, whichever is higher. He can apply for an exit permit at the NS portal."

The rules for conscription look very very strict. I don't know what the rules for applying for uk citizenship for kids are, but perhaps they wanted to give themselves enough time to get it sorted so this didn't happen?
You can't blame them for trying, but the hanging on to the state sponsored flat was a bit Hmm

TheElementsSong · 28/02/2017 17:11

but perhaps they wanted to give themselves enough time to get it sorted so this didn't happen?

Hey, perhaps we could re-frame this as "English husband doesn't want to fully commit himself and his children to Roolz in Forrin place, moves back to UK and leaves wife behind to join later."

YERerseISootTHEwindy · 28/02/2017 17:18

Yep they should have picked a place, not tried to select the bits of each country they wanted.

YERerseISootTHEwindy · 28/02/2017 17:19

I would have tried the uk first

hefzi · 28/02/2017 20:29

Saudade I don't blame your husband at all! I used to live somewhere with complicated immigration laws (amongst other things) - I still have fond memories of my mother bursting through a barrier at Heathrow to take issues with the officials of that country who were questioning me Grin You have to laugh, otherwise you'd cry Confused

thetoothfairywhoforgot · 28/02/2017 20:54

Saudade - sorry you have had such a shit time. Yours is a perfect example of what many are going through. The reality is that many, many highly skilled and paid people/families are being refused the option of living in the UK. These are people who make a huge contribution - in tax and other ways.

I live in NZ and many of my pals would like to return to the UK but are unable because they are married to kiwis. They are women who have taken time out to look after their families so can't immediately get a well paying job. Or who don't want to split their families while they go through the application process when it is so long, difficult and expensive.

This isn't about what is good for the UK or it's citizens. It's about reducing the headline rate of immigration.

I'm an immigrant. I won't be bringing my family back. Luckily I have siblings who can care for my aging parents.

EnormousTiger · 28/02/2017 21:41

325,000 net migration to the UK (250,000 from the EU) I think in the last figures so a good few people are moving here, many many more than are leaving.

It does sound like the Singaporean lady is not the best example of the press to use as she was trying to have her cake and eat it and breaking the rules.

scottishdiem · 28/02/2017 22:05

"I think that various situations have led to a tough stance on immigration, which a lot of people support"

Daily Mail readers asserting their nativism and xenophobia?

Demographics all point to the need for immigrants. Its going to get messy.

Leo5301 · 28/02/2017 22:17

Being interviewed by Strait times in Singapore

With 10 year ban (from deportation), will take care to ECHR.

www.straitstimes.com/singapore/deported-singaporean-woman-vows-to-fight-on-in-bid-to-return-to-britain-will-take-case-to

The article said: "Two of her three sisters, Lily and Juspin Anthony, met her at the arrival gate."

BBC now updated the news with video interview in Singapore
www.bbc.com/news/uk-39099574

--
Update statement by her sister in law, Angela:

Just as we have told every journalist and everyone who's asked us, Irene came here 30 years ago and married my brother in 1990 They moved back to Singapore in 1992 with their 2 sons and then returned to the UK John in 1998 and Irene 1999 when her mother passed away

Just as we have told every journalist and everyone who's asked us,
In 2001 Irene went back to Singapore as there were issues in Singapore that needed to be addresssed and she returned to the Uk in 2003
Irene made 4 applications between 2003/2004 which were all rejected and in 2005 she had to return to Singapore as she had no right of appeal

Irene attempted to return in 2007 but was detained and returned on the next flight back to Singapore
Irene's father passed away 2008 and again she made an application and again it was rejected
Irene eventually was allowed into the UK in 2013 and all applications have been rejected since

We have been really clear about this with everyone we've spoken to.
----------

I am incline to agree with some poster above that there may be some sort of break in the relationship during that period but on balance, the Home office appeared to have acted incorrectly.

SaudadeObama · 01/03/2017 08:44

This isn't about what is good for the UK or it's citizens. It's about reducing the headline rate of immigration

Exactly, I thought that when we were going through this. Families like our's are easy targets that on paper make the statistics look good.

I guess we're lucky we come from a country that people want to live in, rather than one where people want to leave. We're also lucky that our partners are from countries that welcome us as immigrants and where we can live a safe and comfortable life. Many British people are married to people from countries that are war torn or where their partner or children would not be as safe. I feel for those people. What happens then? Are they allowed to seek asylum or are they still being made to dance to the beat of find a job, pay a fortune and wait a year to see if you're permitted to be a family?

thetoothfairywhoforgot · 01/03/2017 09:45

I agree Saudade. I feel so lucky that I have two great countries to choose from.

I live in NZ now which has double the immigration rate per capita of the UK but has a very different attitude. Scratch a kiwi and you'll find a migrant (unless they are Maori!). We are expected to have an affiliation to our country of origin and this is celebrated.

This case in the Guardian is another which seems unfair: www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/scottish-woman-and-french-husband-quit-uk-over-brexit?CMP=fb_gu

TheElementsSong · 01/03/2017 09:51

Thanks for the updates Leo

I rather suspected that the reasons for her absences were because she had to keep reapplying to enter the UK, and was constantly being knocked back. Frankly if there were lapses in the relationship during all that crap, it would hardly be surprising - conversely I imagine they're in fact more committed to each other than most couples, to have stuck together throughout.

But still, I'm sure all those posters who were absolutely adamant that it was a fake marriage of convenience, that she had her children for convenience, that she doesn't love her family, that the entire case was fraudulent - I'm sure they've all put their money where their mouth is and contacted the authorities with their rock-solid evidence Hmm.

Leo5301 · 01/03/2017 10:15

TheElementSong

I have made successful ILR appeal for a friend and sometimes, just because the claimant does not know how to present the evidence in a way that is consistent with the rules would result in refusal. The immigration process is not one which is inquisitive which ensures a fair outcome, but rather one that is ticked box based.

Having said that, I have searched the Immigration appeal case log and could not locate her case. It would seem very strange that the case is not taken to the upper tribunal as she claimed all appeals process had been exhausted. But then I have met incredibly disorganise people who hope problems will just go away.

There are definitely more to this story. Unfortunately, our government agencies (not just HO) have not acted consistently to high standards with have strong reputations to the extend that we can trust that they have acted fairly and correctly in many cases when only limited facts are revealed.

EnormousTiger · 01/03/2017 10:15

NZ though at one stage had more sheep than people. IT is not as croweded as the UK which is part of our problem, certainly in cities and most immigrants don't want to move to rual Cumbria or Scottish highlands.

Leo5301 · 01/03/2017 10:40

The other strange thing is that she appeared to have been in detention before 3/2/17 (the gofundme page is dated Feb 3) and was deported on 27/2.

Legal manoeuvres could have been made in the 3 weeks time and the family should have an immigration solicitor who they could get hold of 24x7 just in case emergency injunctions had to be applied for.

It is puzzling.

SaudadeObama · 01/03/2017 11:10

Yes, I think space is a big factor.

I often find with HO that things are worded in a such a way that even they get confused about what things actually mean.

Leave to remain for example Confused really?!. Also the 90 day and 28 day rule for applying for permenant residency. That is clear as mud and a lot of HO employees themselves don't really know what is correct. In some places it says you can apply within the 28 days before the visa expires, others it is before the date of entry, others say not more than 28 days before the old visa expires and then others say up to 28 days before the old visa expires Confused, I have been told contradictory information from two different HO employees. They do not make the process easy. If their own employees can't figure out the jargon and they contradict themselves imagine how hard it is for people with English as a second language!

Andylion · 01/03/2017 16:22

*Update statement by her sister in law, Angela:

Just as we have told every journalist and everyone who's asked us, Irene came here 30 years ago and married my brother in 1990 They moved back to Singapore in 1992 with their 2 sons and then returned to the UK John in 1998 and Irene 1999 when her mother passed away

Just as we have told every journalist and everyone who's asked us,
In 2001 Irene went back to Singapore as there were issues in Singapore that needed to be addresssed and she returned to the Uk in 2003
Irene made 4 applications between 2003/2004 which were all rejected and in 2005 she had to return to Singapore as she had no right of appeal

Irene attempted to return in 2007 but was detained and returned on the next flight back to Singapore
Irene's father passed away 2008 and again she made an application and again it was rejected
Irene eventually was allowed into the UK in 2013 and all applications have been rejected since*

So, when was she granted IRL? In 1990? If so, then she left for more than tow years, 1992-99.
I realize I quoted what her sister said, not an MN poster who might not know any more about this than I do.

OhtoblazeswithElvira · 01/03/2017 16:33

This isn't about what is good for the UK or it's citizens. It's about reducing the headline rate of immigration.

This. It seems that Rupert Murdoch still calls the shots in British politics.