Is it Really So Difficult and Time Consuming for the ECO to Get it Right?

[lastlid]

I recall that Joe indicated that approximately 25% of visa applications are double checked. And Terpe has made the point below.....

Just take an example of UKBA Visa's, should the ECO have every single visa appraisal completely checked by a checker? What about checking the checker and so on?
Where does the line get drawn between cost of process, cost of staff employment, time taken etc etc.
I feel sure questions would be raised about efficiencies and taxpayer money. Especially taking considering all life costs of public sector employees.

Upon review I would suggest that if 50% of the Spouse and Fiancee Visa application fees cover the costs of processing the application then there is more than enough money available to pay for a double check.

I would propose that given that 98% of Spouse and Fiancee visas are successful, then why not doublecheck all of the refusals. It would save so much hassle for all parties if they did. And wouldnt cost them a lot of time and money.

I have first hand experience of this sort of thing, but in another sphere and believe you me it doesn't take much more than 5 minutes to double check with a trained eye, with all the material in front of you. I don't think checking the checker would be necessary if both the original assessor and the checker were competent and Competent - (There is a difference between the two). A quick squint by the checker, in Marcos application case, should have set the alarm bells going and hopefully a re-appraisal of that refusal. It isn't necessary to double check absolutely every application. All the designated responsible person need do is say " before you send out a refusal, I want to see it first ". Simples.

And I don't subscribe to the idea at all that these guys are pouring over these applications for weeks at a time. For 800 quid they should get it right first time.

[lastlid]

I recall that Joe indicated that approximately 25% of visa applications are double checked. And Terpe has made the point below.....

Apologies there. Joe said that 25% of refusals are checked initially:

i think the EC manager has to check about 25% of refusals , but that means 75% are not checked until the appeal process starts

Still, not good enough under the circumstances.

[Terpe]

Interesting thread topic Lastlid.

Personally I would suggest that the 'statistics' are not accurate, but lets not turn this thread into a debate on the stats.

I wonder whether the following might help in understanding the basic process:-

Entry Clearance Basics (ECB) - Making a decision on an application


Some of the key wordings used include:-

"The burden of proof lies with the applicant.."

"The ECO / ECM has discretion to vary the documentation required to support an application."

"If the applicant does not meet the requirements of the Rules the applicant should be refused without interview"

"The ECO is encouraged to make quick, pragmatic decisions to resolve applications, on papers where appropriate, using Structured Decision Making, their expertise, local knowledge and focussed interviews. The ECO should not rely unnecessarily on documentary evidence."

Some of this stuff is quite worrying.

[lastlid]

The ECO should not rely unnecessarily on documentary evidence."

Some of this stuff is quite worrying.

I presume thats the bit that worries you the most?

Or do you think he / she follows up with phone calls also?

[andy222]

Things are so easy if your a european.

[lastlid]

"The ECO is encouraged to make quick, pragmatic decisions to resolve applications, .....

Some of this stuff is quite worrying.

This too?

[Terpe]

I presume thats the bit that worries you the most?

Or do you think he / she follows up with phone calls also?

The thing that concerns me the most, is that the 'paper process' is more akin to ticking the boxes against immigration rules. At the same time the ECO's are given considerable discretion and this may well lead them into value judgements (which should not be confused with discretion or risk assessment - imo)

[lastlid]

Things are so easy if your a european.

I am a european Andy....just jesting....

I guess you meant if the applicant is european?

[lastlid]

The thing that concerns me the most, is that the 'paper process' is more akin to ticking the boxes against immigration rules. At the same time the ECO's are given considerable discretion and this may well lead them into value judgements (which should not be confused with discretion or risk assessment - imo)

I agree, but take the Marco example....how did the box ticking fair there? The initial checker must have ticked the boxes despite the documentary evidence....or he gave it to a 5 year old to tick? Or did it blindfolded.

Any example where a difficult value judgement is made should be double checked. Though, did Marcos require a huge value judgement?

[lastlid]

Also it begs the question, what kind of persons do the UKBA hire? I used to think that Civil Servants were an elite bunch.....

[RickyR]

I've got several different opinions on the matter. I do agree that the British Embassy staff seem to have an air of superiority in some situations, and I've never been satisifed with the way the British Embassies operate. Around the world we have some of the largest and most fortified Embassies, with military grade armoured Range Rovers (200,000 pounds each for these special spec machines?). The Embassy does not provide passports anymore, they don't directly process the visas (they use VFS), they have very limited opening hours to process consular documents, they don't have a great deal of involvement with foreign trade (the British Councils etc seem to do that), and seem to have a real resentment to assisting and supporting British people overseas who have issues.
I've dealt with many other Embassies, including the US Embassy, who are often cheaper, much more helpful to their citizens, provide a better service and do almost everything in house.

When it comes down to refusals, I do often see mistakes on the part of the applicant. You see a lot of ranting, but it often appears that the applicant hasn't fully researched or taken advice on the procedures for applying, especially when there are complications involved.
The ECO bases their decisions on the 'evidence provided' applied to the 'rules and regulations' which are stated on the website. If you put together the correct evidence, lay it all out clearly, and then provide a very good supporting letter essentially spelling out your application and how it relates to the immigration law then it should be processed fairly swiftly.

Immigration in the UK is becoming a major issue, and there is a lot of pressure from both sides of the coin. It's very hard for them to make a proper decision if you send in a few scrabbled and jumbled pieces of paper and assume that they'll guess the rest.

[lastlid]

Interesting slant Ricky. I still get the feeling that mistakes are being made and bad ones at that. But to ramp up the paranoia, I used an approved Immigration Advisor for my wife's application and to this day I dont actually know exactly what was submitted. I know what I sent to the Advisor but thats it. From then on in I have no idea. I know what should have gone in. I can see how sometimes a sponsor might feel that the materials are all there with the ECO but maybe they arent. But surely that would happen rarely. Food for thought though.....

At the time of posting all of the materials off (the Advisor did that) to my wife it did cross my mind that I had no idea what the Advisor had actually posted and concluded it was a potential drawback of using an Advisor.

On the positive side, but in keeping with the main gist, my Advisor asked me to send them a good quality scan of my wife's visa just to check it as they pointed out that it wasn't exactly uncommon for the UKBA to get the visa stamp / detail wrong and didn't want my wife to find out the hard way.

[lastlid]

It's very hard for them to make a proper decision if you send in a few scrabbled and jumbled pieces of paper and assume that they'll guess the rest.

Or on the back of a fag packet.....

[Terpe]

Lastlid, I think you'd find that an immigration advisor will present the application pretty much as Ricky has intimated.
Everything referenced to the relevant immigration rules, and cross referenced to each other.
The sort of thing that can be covered in a good sponsor letter.
Makes it very difficult for the ECO to find a reason to refuse.

The ECO's have reference documents that contain 'standard' wordings for different refusal scenarios.
Bit like standard letters in a way.

[lastlid]

Lastlid, I think you'd find that an immigration advisor will present the application pretty much as Ricky has intimated.
Everything referenced to the relevant immigration rules, and cross referenced to each other.
The sort of thing that can be covered in a good sponsor letter.
Makes it very difficult for the ECO to find a reason to refuse.

Well yes. I would be inclined to agree with you except there was the odd up on the part of the Immigration Advisor along the route - human error, which I did see, before the documents were sent by me to the Advisor.....for example I was sent a draught copy of the application form for checking and it had the wrong birthdate on it for my wife. Of course this was picked up by me but.....
Fortunately in the end what you said there is true in our case. As we got the visa. I think there are both advantages and disadvantges to using an Advisor.

But it isnt finished once it leaves the Advisor. Ones other half has to do the rest.....me and Mrs Lastlid had a bit of a carry on with my Bank Statements....the problem was that I had sent a mix of uncertified originals and certified (stamped and signed) copies. All perfectly okay. But it led to some confusion, not helped by language differences, between me and mrs lastlid and so she had to hold them up in front of the cam so that I could verify that what I thought had been sent, had actually been sent. Again at that point I thought, I wish I had sent the package off to the Philippines myself.

[RickyR]

One point about immigration advisors, is that to be a UK immigration advisor there are no real regulations. To be an Official Immigration Advisor for Australian Visa applications you have to be legally registered with certain requirements. Seems a lot more sensible to me that people who are advising should have been tested to know the law inside out.

As for mistakes, the first visa my step daughter received from the British Embassy several years back had the date of birth wrong, so they cancelled it without prejudice and applied another visa foil with the correct data. I've also processed a US Visa for a crewmember where they issued the wrong type of visa, so mistakes do happen at any embassy and its well worth checking.

[lastlid]

One point about immigration advisors....

I see, interesting. I noted your step daughters visa error....

Upon reflection I never once felt that the Advisor lacked required knowledge or lacked access to a bredth of Immigration knowledge base. And the Advisor was OISC approved.......if that is entirely significant or not I dont know.....

[Arthur Little]

Things are so easy if your a european.

... that's long been MY BIG gripe too, Andy ... by some curious quirk in the "System" as it stands, nationals of all EEA Member States - with the exception of - can bring a non-European partner to the UK free of charge! Moreover, it would seem ... without restriction! Why?

[tanga]

I've got several different opinions on the matter. I do agree that the British Embassy staff seem to have an air of superiority in some situations, and I've never been satisifed with the way the British Embassies operate. Around the world we have some of the largest and most fortified Embassies, with military grade armoured Range Rovers (200,000 pounds each for these special spec machines?). The Embassy does not provide passports anymore, they don't directly process the visas (they use VFS), they have very limited opening hours to process consular documents, they don't have a great deal of involvement with foreign trade (the British Councils etc seem to do that), and seem to have a real resentment to assisting and supporting British people overseas who have issues.
I've dealt with many other Embassies, including the US Embassy, who are often cheaper, much more helpful to their citizens, provide a better service and do almost everything in house.

When it comes down to refusals, I do often see mistakes on the part of the applicant. You see a lot of ranting, but it often appears that the applicant hasn't fully researched or taken advice on the procedures for applying, especially when there are complications involved.
The ECO bases their decisions on the 'evidence provided' applied to the 'rules and regulations' which are stated on the website. If you put together the correct evidence, lay it all out clearly, and then provide a very good supporting letter essentially spelling out your application and how it relates to the immigration law then it should be processed fairly swiftly.

Immigration in the UK is becoming a major issue, and there is a lot of pressure from both sides of the coin. It's very hard for them to make a proper decision if you send in a few scrabbled and jumbled pieces of paper and assume that they'll guess the rest.

Ricky,
I have to agree 100% on every word you have written. You are absolutely correct