reintroduction of interviews for spouse visa's?

[joebloggs]

sounds like it from this ..

New immigration plan is welcomed by MP

The new measures include extending the use of interviews in the visa application process.

Starting with the highest-risk countries and focusing on the route to Britain that is widely abused, student visas, the number of interviews will be increased considerably to more than 100,000, starting next financial year.

“From there the interviewing programme will be extended across all routes to Britain.”

http://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/local/new-immigration-plan-is-welcomed-by-mp-1-4613673

[Terpe]

My wife had an interview back in 2002.
No problems.
Genuine couples should not have any concerns, it may actually be beneficial by filling a few gaps in the application that often leads to needless refusals.

Just may take.

[joebloggs]

my wife back in 2004 had an interview, so did my stepson a year later, sure it can fill in gaps but also open gaps, i think more so for the fiancee visa, search and you should find some questions in previous posts, what will the case worker do if you don't get most right, and if you don't and nothing happens whats the point of the interview :Erm:

time will tell :Erm:

[Terpe]

I know where you're coming from joe and I can't suggest any sensible idea on that. It's an impossible task developing a 100% quality programme for both applicant and UKBA

The 'public' announcements have said that the interviews will be targeted on high-risk areas and high-risk applications.

When my wife had her interview they really quizzed on issues related to her knowledge about me and my family and her reasons to go to UK.
I can imagine it would follow a similar path.

[joebloggs]

with the government determined to cut immigration figures, you must wonder if the purpose of the interview is for the case worker to discover if there are any concerns or is the onus of proof on you to prove your relationship is genuine :cwm24:

i think i remember someone on here was refused a visa and one of the reasons given was for not knowing or getting wrong the town her fiancee was born and where he lived :doh

[stevewool]

so if they go for this surely its going to take longer to interview each person and what cost will that be, plus whos going to interview with all the cut backs we all are having to make, or is this another way to get more money

[Iani]

Edit - that's going to take the thread off track, sorry

[Iani]

Thinking, and what exactly are the "correct" sort of answers in such an interview? As Terpe said, questions about the real reason to come to the UK, there's the obvious and in nearly all "genuine" spousal visa applications the truthful one, or.............well.

[joebloggs]

Thinking, and what exactly are the "correct" sort of answers in such an interview? As Terpe said, questions about the real reason to come to the UK, there's the obvious and in nearly all "genuine" spousal visa applications the truthful one, or.............well.

backdoor 'Primary Purpose rule' ???
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/politics97/news/06/0605/straw.shtml

remember re-introducing the interview is only being done to cut immigration figures, if it was to weed out cases which were not genuine, why scrap the interview process in the first place (to save money) ???

and steve your right, who's going to pay for this interview , the applicant of course, so visa fees will increase, and yes it can only delay the visa process :doh

[Trefor]

Interviewing is going to take a huge amount of resources. It would be great to think they will hire more people and everyone will get a face-to-face instead of the current postal black hole. However the sceptic in me predicts the delays/time to process will increase. I guess they will be targeting India and Pakistan at first as they are probably the highest 'risk' countries.

[stevewool]

anyone has any ideas what is the percentage of these immigrants who want to come into this country, is it that high where we will help reduce thousands of tax payers money paying for these people, plus are they saying all this to keep joe public happy that the goverment it seems is doing something about mass immigration:NoNo:

[Arthur Little]

My wife had an interview back in 2002.

Yes ... I believe it used to be standard practice for ALL applicants. Certainly, Myrna never underwent an interview,:NoNo: so I wonder when the former procedure actually ceased. :icon_rolleyes:


No problems.
Genuine couples should not have any concerns, it may actually be beneficial
by filling a few gaps in the application that often leads to needless refusals.

:iagree:, genuine couples SHOULD have no real reason(s) to fear its reinstatement ... especially if Embassy staff are properly trained in how to conduct interviews with an appropriate degree of sensitivity - to take account of obvious cultural variations, in particular - while managing (to the best of their abilities) to "separate the wheat from the chaff". Personally, I've long preferred the notion of a one-to-one approach for dealing with important life-changing moves ... after all, it affords both parties the opportunity to clear-up any misunderstandings on either side - something that isn't always so straightforward on paper for some people.


Just may take.

Hmm ... worth a try, anyway. And ... :anerikke: ... who knows ... it might even speed-up the process.

How?

OK. Applicant presents for interview. Interviewer then goes through the applicant's personal details step by step ... drawing upon his/her skills to determine the application in front of him/her is substantive, by clarifying any issues that aren't always too clear on the form at first glance. Once he/she is satisfied that the application has been made for all the right reasons, the visa can, at that stage, be approved - without involving further frustratingly stressful and unnecessary delays.:xxgrinning--00xx3:

[Terpe]

That's how I see it too Arthur :xxgrinning--00xx3:
Being limited to the questions on a form is often not sufficient to provide the genuine circumstances, as has been seen by a number of refusals.
It's so easy to miss out a small piece of information that the caseworker or ECO can build into a major reason for refusal.

[joebloggs]

OK. Applicant presents for interview. Interviewer then goes through the applicant's personal details step by step ... using his/her skills to determine the application in front of him/her is genuine ... clarifying any issues that aren't clear at first glance. Once satisfied that the application has been made for all the right reasons, the visa can be approved without further unnecessary delay.:xxgrinning--00xx3:

why would you need to have an interview with someone when they should have supplied you with all the information requested in the visa application ?, if they haven't supplied you with all the information, whats the point of asking someone to attend an interview? unless you ask them to bring the info, but will they have time to check that info at the interview..

if you don't supply the information requested they could either ask you to supply it or in some cases refuse the application, but since Decembers changes the case workers have a bit more discretion,

look at the questions that were asked at previous interviews, that's what they will be asking again, its all to see if your relationship is genuine and some innocent people could be refused.

[Terpe]

Just my personal opinion...
I feel that interviews are less costly, less resource intensive and quicker.
I also feel that face to face provides the interviewer with better security of confidence in the couples genuineness.

Did you ever hear of a job application that didn't involve an interview?
It's very easy to write something on paper. May not be true at all.

That's my feeling anyway.

[joebloggs]

its me being cynical :biggrin:
after May stating she will cut immigration it cant be a good thing :NoNo:

[Terpe]

I think we're all cynical about Mrs May.
But here we're only focussed on Filipina-UK relationships.
There are hundreds of thousands of other relationships. Many of these are the ones being targeted.

[raynaputi]

Just my personal opinion...
I feel that interviews are less costly, less resource intensive and quicker.
I also feel that face to face provides the interviewer with better security of confidence in the couples genuineness.

Did you ever hear of a job application that didn't involve an interview?
It's very easy to write something on paper. May not be true at all.

That's my feeling anyway.

I actually would prefer being interviewed rather than the current system. Less hassle for me in my opinion. It makes them see who the genuine couples or applicants are. Plus, they can easily identify who can speak English and who cannot. I would have wanted the way US Embassy does in the Philippines, interviewing everyone, whether it's for visit visa, working visa, fiance(e) or spouse visa (and even the sponsor can come to the interview with the partner). Result can be given right away. I remember when I was interviewed for a working visa, sponsored by my previous company, the American consul was talking to me in Tagalog! :omg: But I was talking to him in English. :xxgrinning--00xx3: