Disgusted at how the UK government will charge EU nationals £65 and no iPhone app

[Rosepetalgeranium]

Even if someone has been here working hard and paying tax for decades they will have to pay £65 to stay and there's only an android app to apply not even an iPhone app!

Changing of rules is the issue

Rules are always being changed. Have been throughout history. Things don’t stay the same. What might have worked at an earlier date doesn’t work now.

Would those who don't think this is a problem be OK with, for example, elderly EU citizens who have lived in the UK with their British families for many years being asked to leave the country?

Because the people who are going to fall between the cracks are not young, relatively wealthy, digitally literate people, but older people who don't have phones (and who may not even know they need to apply), looked-after children, and other vulnerable people.

Would those who don't think this is a problem be OK with, for example, elderly EU citizens who have lived in the UK with their British families for many years being asked to leave the country?

You know that's a "yes". Pointless asking. The end justifies the means innit ?

Why stop with the living ? I noticed visiting DMs grave there's a host of clearly foreign bodies taking up valuable English burial space - already at a premium. Why should they get away with it ?

Laws change all the time.
I am from EU and I view settled status and £65 as the least of our problems. Bottom of the "that's bad" pile. Manly because it looks like it's actually much easier to get than previous RC and PR.

Mainly because it looks like it's actually much easier to get than previous RC and PR.

Looks can be deceptive. I'm always wary when people who haven't done anything - and have no intention of ever doing it - simper "Oh, that's easy". Saying so, don't make it so.

Why stop with the living ? I noticed visiting DMs grave there's a host of clearly foreign bodies taking up valuable English burial space

What nonsense is this?

You know that's a "yes". Pointless asking.

Actually I don't think this is correct. I think when people think about EU immigrants having to apply for a status that will prevent them being deported (or falling victim to the hostile environment) they think of the mainly young people who have arrived in the last decade, not about older people who may have been here raising families since before full FOM, or about children raised in the UK but who don't have UK nationality.

I think the Windrush scandal showed that people do feel concern for individuals who are deprived of their rights and wrongly left destitute or, worse, deported.

Some don't (and these threads do bring out the most fervent nativists) but the majority of British people don't think that is the right way to treat people.

What nonsense is this?

Hopefully ... reductio ad absurdum.

@DGRossetti I am going by reports from people who got SS now during trials. And by comparing actual evidence needed to what was needed for RCs and PRs before. We used to send a bloody package rather than envelop for RC.

Mainly because it looks like it's actually much easier to get than previous RC and PR.

We don't know this yet. In particular, we don't know what happened to the reported 20% of applications (mainly supposedly straightforward cases) which were not successfully processed during the second pilot phase.

20% of 3 million is 600,000 people (and one might expect the success rate of the scaled-up application process to be lower than that of the pilot, because it will include more people whose situation is not straightforward).

For example dropped CSI requirements makes massive difference to people with not really straight forward cases. That was the main problem, since barely anyone knew about it, myself included.
Have you seen the requirements now? It is easier. Not easy, but easier than before.

I think the Windrush scandal showed that people do feel concern for individuals who are deprived of their rights and wrongly left destitute or, worse, deported
Some don't (and these threads do bring out the most fervent nativists) but the majority of British people don't think that is the right way to treat people

Doubtful, i think most people don't give a shit or worse!

The Home Sec, no less, is keen to question the status of these refugees crossing the channel, he is reflecting public opinion.

The Home Sec, no less, is keen to question the status of these refugees crossing the channel, he is reflecting public opinion.

Actually I think his target audience is much smaller: the 100k or so mostly elderly tories, many of them a bit dim and very racist, who will have the right to vote in the forthcoming Tory leadership contest.

Hangry: easier in theory. In practice, we don't know. All processes of this type create winners and losers.

Again for Hangry: the obvious losers this time being those without access to an android phone, or who struggle to operate technology. So yes, easier for people who were affected by the ridiculous and probably illegal CSI requirement. But not necessarily any easier for elderly applicants or those with disabilities. And particularly unfair for, eg, elderly EU citizens who may already have PR and who have to reapply for a status they already having using technology they may not be comfortable with.

You can send it by post as well. Hopefully it won't be nearly 100 pages long form you must pick what applies to you from again.

Plus there will be on phone support and apparently even in person, but I doubt it will be available everywhere, that needs doing properly so people who can't travel don't have to.

There could be more than 3 million applicants and you can more or less guarantee that the people making the decisions will be underfunded and undertrained.

Forgive me if I am sceptical about how simple the process is going to be, especially when the evidence is that the process may have solved some issues but created new ones.

Once we have some data from the second pilot we might have more of an idea, but we still won't know how well this will scale up.

Again. I am not saying it looks simple. Just simpler.

But you are right that we will see from the data. So far lots of people were happy with the speed of decision so that's hopefully a good sign!

Mistigri
We don't know this yet. In particular, we don't know what happened to the reported 20% of applications (mainly supposedly straightforward cases) which were not successfully processed during the second pilot phase

The Home Office issued its news statement based on data up to the 13th December - but the closing date for applications was the 21st December - so they hadn't yet processed all the applications?

www.gov.uk/government/news/eu-settlement-scheme-rolled-out-to-public-test-phase

Feedback during that phase, which ends on 21 December 2018, has so far been positive

By 13 December 2018, more than 15,500 applications had been made and more than 12,400 of these had been concluded. 71% of the concluded applications were granted settled status and the rest were granted pre-settled status. Many of the applicants received their decision within 24 hours. We will publish a full report in January 2019

But the point is that if they could only process and grant 80% of 15,500 applications in 7 weeks, what hope do they have of processing 3 million applications

It's a pilot scheme and they are testing the system/staff are training?

For comparison - the Passport Office issues more than 6 million passports each year. Almost 1.4 million people have applied for the 'fast track' 1 day service in the last 5 years and 1.8 million for the 1 week service.

There could be more than 3 million applicants and you can more or less guarantee that the people making the decisions will be underfunded and undertrained.

It's funny that people coming to the UK from other countries are compelled to learn about procedures and rights far more than people born here who seem to be conditioned to defer to "what the person said" ....

One of my DFs employees had to explain to a desk sergeant what the procedure was for completing a valid "producer" once.

The Home Office issued its news statement based on data up to the 13th December - but the closing date for applications was the 21st December

So there could have been more applications and it's possible that more than 20% weren't processed rapidly.

We don't know yet, but what we do know is that the operation will need to be massively scaled up (about 20 times, in terms of applicants/ day) in order to process all potential applications in the time available. If 20% of applications can't be processed rapidly for some reason, resources are going to get clogged up very quickly and big backlogs will build.

Let's hope that when/if the HO eventually release some data it's reassuring. But you'll have to excuse my scepticism.

So far lots of people were happy with the speed of decision so that's hopefully a good sign!

I don't think you can draw any conclusions from that tbh.

Of course it's a good thing that some people are getting settled status quickly, but the test is not what happens to people whose applications are straightforward, but what happens with more difficult applications, or even "straightforward" cases where for some reason the HO can't match the applicant with existing digital records (for eg due to spelling differences like ö/oe, or married name conventions that don't match UK conventions).

Even if "only" 5% of applicants experience problems, that's an awful lot of people facing potential destitution or deportation.

I think it's inappropriate to claim that the process is simple or straightforward until we know how it handles these cases and what percentage of applicants experience difficulty.

After successful private pilots of the system, the next testing phase of the EU Settlement Scheme is now opening more widely

If the system wasn't working well in the pilots, then the Home Office wouldn't be rolling it out more widely.

If the system wasn't working well in the pilots, then the Home Office wouldn't be rolling it out more widely.

I think some of use have worked in software too long ....

If the system wasn't working well in the pilots, then the Home Office wouldn't be rolling it out more widely.

This is a very curious statement.

Who defines "working well" and what makes you think that they don't have a deadline to work to? They'd be rolling it out even if it was crap (see: universal credit).

But as I said below, it's quite possible that it will work well for a large subset of applicants. However, the yardstick by which history/ the electorate/ the EU will judge whether it "worked well" won't be how many people were processed successfully, but how many weren't. 20% would be a disaster, but even 5% would be a disastrously large number (and tbh with the HO's record a 5% fuck up rate would be a highly optimistic assumption).