Deported grandmother : what is the government trying to prove

[alwaysprepare]

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 She had indefinite leave to remain which has been revoked and was apparently taken on a Sunday by authorities and sent to a detention centre before being put on a flight with £12 and the clothes on her back.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.

As a couple, they have spent many years living and working outside of the UK. Now that the husband is sick, it suits them to remain in the UK to utilise free healthcare.

A friend has a Singaporean mother and British father. Her mother gave up her Singaporean passport in favour of a British one as she felt keeping her family together was more important than holding a passport of the country of her birth.

DP is foreign and we are currently attempting to navigate the rules allowing him to come in. I, along with many, many British-born citizens, am being punished for falling in love.

However, rightly or wrongly, the rules are in place and if we want to make our lives in this country, we have to follow them.

Only people stupid enough not to read the conditions of their residency or visa, or arrogant enough to think the rules don't apply to them.

But you're ignoring the fact that the Home Office's OWN RULES say that she was allowed to stay outside the country for longer than two years if she was caring for relatives.

She hasn't broken the rules of her visa. The Home Office has.

Do the people who bang on about rules actually know anything about immigration rules. If you have been following them, been affected or know someone who has , you will know they change all the time and what was a rule in the 70s may be back after lots of changes in between. If this woman made her application almost 30 years ago, she would have known the rules back then, and put them at the back of her mind. Not too long ago ILTR was considered the same as having a passport, without loosing your citizenship - see my other post.

As for those who say she stayed away too long, was she supposed to say FU parents you been sick too long, die already, the British need me to go back? My friend had her mum sick in France for 5 years and mostly her family had to go visit them, if she needed a visa she would have been deported when she came back after her (mum)death.

Another woman was married to anEU working in the UK and told me she was not aware that she was supposed to keep all documents she had ever had in the UK for the 5 years she stayed here when she applied for ILTR . She had worked here and they had kids. The Immigration website never tells you what you need, nor do they say when you call. She was initially told to go home, but eventually a lawyer told her what to do.

While I understand interrogation on marriage of convenience , but 27 years and kids and grandkids , surely surpasses that. And I find it intrusive that after 20 years she should be asked about the state of her marriage (it seems some ppl penalise her for not living / sleeping with her husband, even though it has not been stablished that he was visiting her or not in that time)

She had 27 years to do it,now she'd probably only get holiday visas etc

Why do people blame the government because of someone's lack of using common sense and following the rules when you get a visa it's in black and white to read .

It's got nothing to do with bloody Theresa May! We had to deal with these rules 15 years ago, and they've been in place since 1971.

The rules regarding minimum income that must be earned by the UK spouse have not been in place since 1971.

They were brought in July 2012.

Why do people blame the government because of someone's lack of using common sense and following the rules when you get a visa it's in black and white to read.

Because the rules of the visa are that you CAN leave the country to look after relatives.

And it's the government that isn't following them.

Not on that kind of visa you can't fit that length if time

Australia

www.border.gov.au/Trav/Visa-1/801-

Partner visa (subclasses 820 and 801)

Features

This visa allows the spouse or de facto partner of an Australian citizen, permanent resident or eligible New Zealand citizen to live in Australia.

Who could get this visa

You must be married or in a de facto relationship with:

an Australian citizen
an Australian permanent resident
an eligible New Zealand citizen.

You must be in a genuine and ongoing relationship. You must live with your partner or, if you do not, any separation must be only temporary.
Both parties must freely consent to the relationship.

Just checking - do people here actually think that British people who earn less than 18k/pa (for any reason, including being the SAHP or being disabled or retired), don't deserve to live with their spouse if that spouse has the wrong passport?

Or do you think that the government should protect your right to a family life with the person you love regardless or whether you are rich or poor?

"Looks like she was in Singapore from Jan 2005 to 2013

That's more than a quick trip home - it's EIGHT YEARS!!"

Er, not quite, in fact for visa purposes she has only 'lived' in the UK from 1988 till 1992. The family then moved to Singapore, and in 1998, her husband and children returned to the UK.

So she has, from what I can see, been resident in Singapore since 1992. 25 years.

There was a 2 year 'visit' in 2003, and then currently she has been here for 2013, presumably also on a visit visa, which she has illegally overstayed, hence the deportation.

The point is she broke the terms of her visa. And if you do that then expect to be deported. That was my point. Each country will have its own rules which should be adhered to. Except in the UK of course where all the weeping wailing and gnashing of teeth starts.

Vivene. Well said

I mean, why not take this further? Why don't we make earning £18k a condition for receiving a marriage licence?

You must have an additional ±£3k for every dependent child. Let's snatch the children of everyone who doesn't earn that before having another.

Why are the family lives of British people married to fellow Brits worthy of protection, but those married to someone else are not?

Gosh yes, questioning rules and bureaucracy, God forbid we'd engage in such anti-British behaviour.

Wait...

It's a figure that's listed because the country as a whole dosent need more people on benefits. So a reasonable figure is common sense

"The rules regarding minimum income that must be earned by the UK spouse have not been in place since 1971.

They were brought in July 2012."

Absolutely false. There was ALWAYS a requirement to prove you had 'adequate' income so as not to have 'recourse to public funds' - a friend of ours was declined a visa around about 2003 for this reason, and our family was temporarily separated in 2002 for the same reason (had to find a job BEFORE applying for a visa).

The 2012 rules merely set out in black & white precisely what these numbers were - it is much fairer to have a set of specific rules that say 'you must earn £18,345.56 or more', than to have people NOT KNOWING, whether they earned enough.

Not on that kind of visa you can't fit that length if time

Yes you can Carollocking - there are situations where you can exceed the two year rule. It comes under Paragraph 19 of the Immigration Rules.

I know this because my husband lived outside the UK for six years while on an ILTR, so we researched it very thoroughly.

"Why are the family lives of British people married to fellow Brits worthy of protection, but those married to someone else are not?"

Because as a starting principle, all British people (population seventy million) are entitled to public funds (amount: limited), whereas the rest of the world (population seven billion) is not.

there are situations where you can exceed the two year rule. It comes under Paragraph 19 of the Immigration Rules.

Yes BeAlert and I provided a link upthread.

So he was away 8 years Also and it was ok?

^It's got nothing to do with bloody Theresa May! We had to deal with these rules 15 years ago, and they've been in place since 1971.

The rules regarding minimum income that must be earned by the UK spouse have not been in place since 1971.^

I can confirm that it's not in place in 2004. I came in with my British husband and we both were just finishing our degrees in NZ. I can easily apply for a permit as a spouse to come here. As long as we show our relationship is genuine. (Which they didn't check anything but I'm guessing because I'm from NZ).

So he was away 8 years Also and it was ok?

Six years, as I already said. Then he moved back to the UK.

I have not read the whole thread, sorry. YANBU, this is heartless, a shame. People talk so easily about the Law and applying for citizenship, but frankly, most people have no idea how difficult it can be to have close family in different countries with complicated and often incompatible legislation, costly procedures, long waiting times, lots of people get caught in this just for the horrible crime of having fallen in love with a foreigner, we should be ashamed!

Wow I'm surprised at that

Absolutely false. There was ALWAYS a requirement to prove you had 'adequate' income so as not to have 'recourse to public funds' - a friend of ours was declined a visa around about 2003 for this reason, and our family was temporarily separated in 2002 for the same reason (had to find a job BEFORE applying for a visa).

But that wasn't £18k british income a year. We arrived with a few thousand pounds in a UK bank account we opened back in NZ. We don't even need a return ticket for me as the bank statements show I have enough to purchase a return. We were confident we can find jobs here and if we don't, we'll just go to Australia.