AVOID

Steering the applicant to a particular answer.
Well well well, we have known in the past, and in Gina's own interview that the ECO did indeed try to steer her towards admitting that she wanted a foreign husband only.

Using hypothetical situations in questioning.
Again ECO guilty as charged, he did in fact use a hypothetical situation when he said "If I refuse this visa, what will you do kill yourself or something".
Again a clear violation of the guidelines issued to ECO in British Dimplomatic posts.

I note also the information regarding sponsors, in fact the British Embassy Manila has a policy of instructing the Filipino guards downstairs that Sponsors may not enter the embassy, however the rules clearly state,

A consistent approach is needed to ensure that all Posts offer the same advice to sponsors who ask to attend visa interviews. Current policy is that Posts have discretion on whether or not to admit sponsors to interviews. There is no blanket ban on sponsors attending. Equally they have no automatic right to attend. It is preferable to conduct the interview with the applicant alone, seeing the sponsor separately if necessary. ECOs should, therefore, draw on the following when sponsors make such requests:

If a sponsor wants to speak to an ECO it can help to do this seperately from the interview with the applicant. This jelps ECO's to verify that the information presented by both is consistent;
It would appear that whilst the sponsor should be acknowledged as being present and not left to hang around outside chatting to the Philippine Marines, clearly the sponsor has no right to attend, it is interesting that whether the sponsor verifies any information regarding accomodation or income, that is not the overwhelming reason to issue a visa, see what it says later>

Reaching the final decision
The burden of proof is on the applicant to satisfy the ECO that he or she meets the requirements of the Rules. In discharging that proof the applicant need only do so "on a balance of probabilities". You should weigh up the evidence before you as a whole, allowing for points both in favour of an applicant as well as any that may go against him. These applications have a right of appeal against the ECO’s decision and an explanatory statement will have to justify a decision to refuse.
Note the terminology, the applicant has to satisfy, the ECO that he or she meets the requirements, on the balance of probability, that is why the ECO must weight up the pluses and minus, as any refusal must have be backed up by a summary, which can then be challenged in a Home Office appeal at the Immigration Appellate authority, the ECO will then have to justify the decision to refuse.


The next bit makes me laugh, look at this....

Local visa information handouts should include the following advice:
Has anyone ever been given Visa Information handouts, there has never been any mention in the information given, about the rights of sponsors to attend interviews for entry clearance.


if they choose to accompany the applicant to the Visa Section, sponsors might not be interviewed unless the Visa Officer decides that certain points need clarification;
This is of course a complete joke, since in my case and many others the sponsor was not allowed to accompany the applicant to the Visa Section.

at the discretion of the ECO sponsors or representatives (e.g. solicitors) may be permitted to attend an interview with an applicant, but will be given observer status only.They may make notes but should not intervene.
Again this option is not available to the sponsor, who seems to be treated as a 2nd class citizen, it clearly says the sponsor may atend the interview if only in the capacity as an observer, they may take notes but should not intervene.

Summary of the Above Information




Naturally these guidelines are issued to the Diplomatic posts, as exactly that, guidelines, now there are lots of ways that guidelines can be interpreted, thats almos the same as saying the following

The guidelines leave many questions unanswered
Which ones are those you might ask ?

Actually they were the ones that wern't asked
I rest my case, the guidelines are often exactly that, just a general guide, the problem with all of this, which by thee way, I mini-hacked into tonight, show one thing, that they are in fact totally ambiguous, since they say one thing and then say but that may not be the case, in other words,

The sponsor can attend with the applicant to the visa section, however he may not at the discretion of the ECO be admitted into the interview at the discretion of the ECO,
sadly the ECO has the final word, in all cases, the British Embassy Manila has made the decision not to admit any British Nationals into the Visa Section.

And of course there is no re-dress or right to complain about these procedures, and the scope for Ambiivalence is simply not tolerated, complaints will not be entertained, its a take it or leave it situation.

Its good though to see exactly what the guidelines are, and how decisions should be made in principle, the good thing I note here, is that the ECO is expected to make a quick decision based on the information before them on the day of the interview, on the balance of probability of the Applicant living with the Sponsor in Marriage, but it still shows one thing, we must educate our prospective wives, fiancee's that it is their job and their job alone to satisfy the ECO of their sincerity, the Sponsor may only be interviewed as a last resort, and the burden of proof is on the Applicant, that is the overidding factor.

Hope you all enjoyed this.