Woman allowed to live in UK with internet partner she never spoke to

[Dedworth]

A woman was allowed into the UK to live with a partner she claimed she had met on the internet despite being unable to prove she had ever spoken with them, a new report into UK border control has revealed.

The woman's case is one of a number of examples in a report published today into the UK Border Agency.

The report specifies the case of the woman as an example of the regularity with which decisions are overturned without going to an appeal.

The report says the woman's application to settle in the UK with her partner was initially refused when she was unable to show any contact or communication between the pair.

She was allowed to settle in the UK despite inspectors saying similar applications had been refused and describing the case's credibility as "very weak".

The report also criticised the level of checks performed on UK-based sponsors.

It cited the case of a man who, having overstayed already on one student visa, made a second application to join his spouse in the UK.

In his application he included a character reference from a police officer purporting to be a “detective constable inspector”.

The man was granted permission to settle in the UK by UKBA staff apparently unaware that the rank of the ‘police officer’ cited in his reference does not exist.

Overall the report found that more than three in five decisions to refuse family visas to those wanting to come to the UK from New York were overturned by managers before going to appeal.

John Vine, the chief inspector of the UK Border Agency, said he had "concerns about the lack of transparency in the Agency's inconsistent approach to evidential requirements".

"It is imperative that the agency ensures its staff adopts a 'right first time' approach and makes correct and robust decisions" he said.

"I found a high percentage of cases where the original decisions were overturned before cases were allowed to proceed to appeal.

"This concerned me, as the agency had not conducted any analysis to establish whether or not the original decision had been correctly made".

[joebloggs]

[Terpe]

These stories tend to wind people up.

The UKBA make judgement errors, as many members here know.

This case is really about judgement errors and give some insight into how UKBA staff view evidence positively and negatively upon appeal.

Here is the case study:-

The applicant:
• applied for entry clearance on 29 October 2010 in order to join her partner with a view to
marriage and settlement in the UK;
• met her sponsor on the Internet in April 2009 and travelled to the UK in January 2010;
• undertook an Islamic marriage ceremony in the UK in February 2010;
• was refused entry clearance correctly on 18 November 2010 because i) no evidence had been
submitted of contact or communication; ii) there was no evidence of any plans to legalise the
marriage under UK law; iii) the sponsor was unemployed and the couple intended to rely on
support from the customer’s mother in Mexico; iv) there was no evidence of the mother’s ability
to support the couple except an attestation by her to that effect;
• submitted an appeal on 7 December 2010 with the following evidence: i) the sponsor had
since obtained a job and submitted one payslip; and ii) the customer submitted evidence of her
personal funds;
• was issued entry clearance on 5 January 2011 after an Entry Clearance Manager overturned the
original refusal decision.
Chief Inspector’s comments:
• The Chief Inspector found that there was insufficient evidence for the Entry Clearance Manager
to justify overturning the original refusal.
• The sponsor was in receipt of housing benefits and had only just obtained a job in a restaurant.
• No checks were undertaken by the UK Border Agency into the sponsor’s new employment.
• The credibility of this Settlement application was very weak.
The UK Border Agency:
• chose not to address the Chief Inspector’s specific concerns, but stated that the Entry Clearance
Manager was satisfied that the customer had addressed the reasons for refusal with her appeal.
• repeated that it does not always need to see all the documentation detailed in the guidance if it
is satisfied that the requirements of the Immigration Rules have been met.
• chose not to take any action in this case.
Chief Inspector’s further comments:
• The Chief Inspector has concerns about the lack of transparency in the UK Border Agency’s
inconsistent approach to evidential requirements, as we have encountered other cases where
applicants have submitted similar evidence but their applications have been refused.

Sourced from An inspection of the UK Border Agency Visa Section in New York

[joebloggs]

it makes you wonder how many refusals were over turned that shouldn't have been

[grahamw48]

Then again, it could give some of us hope.

Just make sure you appeal a refusal.

[Dedworth]

No doubt the inept "Entry Clearance Manager" is still in his job - probably a mate of the Brodie Clark character

[Arthur Little]

The report also criticised the level of checks performed on UK-based sponsors.

It cited the case of a man who, having overstayed already on one student visa, made a second application to join his spouse in the UK.

In his application he included a character reference from a police officer purporting to be a “detective constable inspector”.

... AWAY ! You'd scarcely need "detective" insight to "draw" out a con~"artist" like this one

The man was granted permission to settle in the UK by UKBA staff apparently unaware that the rank of the 'police officer' cited in his reference does not exist.

... UNbelievable !

Overall the report found that more than three in five decisions to refuse family visas to those wanting to come to the UK from New York were overturned by managers before going to appeal.

Yet ... it's not difficult to imagine what would've happened HAD "the boot been on the other foot" in the case of a Brit wishing to settle in the US !

[tone]

Its simply laughable! Absolutely silly..

[Arthur Little]

John Vine, the chief inspector of the UK Border Agency said he had "concerns about the lack of transparency in the Agency's inconsistent approach to evidential requirements".

"It is imperative that the agency ensures its staff adopts a 'right first time' approach and makes correct and robust decisions" he said.

"I found a high percentage of cases where the original decisions were overturned before cases were allowed to proceed to appeal.

"This concerned me, as the agency had not conducted any analysis to establish whether or not the original decision had been correctly made".

... hurrah ! for John Vine ... formerly Chief Constable of *Tayside Police ... of which the one-time 'Perth & Kinross Constabulary' - NOW comprising the Force's Western Division - ranks [geographically] as *its largest constituent part.