Well they are wrong. It isn't public purse. It is a credit against tax paid.Originally Posted by gWaPito
And as ive already said at least 5 times until im now blue in the facethat the powers that be deem child tax credits (not to be confused with tax relief) as public purse.
This is an important point. You've got the government talking about regional pay because of the disparities across the country, yet it appears this income threshold will be uniform. To show how absurd this is: consider london weighting. It brings my income up to circa 25k a year. Yet someone doing the same job up north somewhere gets around 18k. Now, with income from other areas (including overtime, if that will be considered) I might squeeze over a possible 25,700 threshold but the person earning 18k will be denied. And here is the rub: it isn't that good a wage in London! Mainly because of housing and transport costs. You'd probably be better off on the 18k up north. In the short term at least.
And yes, London is increasingly like a city state. We even have our own executive and mayor. But then, generally, England is very much Balkanised now with major disparities between the different regions.
I quite agree and have made this point strongly before. Ideally, regional variances in pay and costs of living ought to be taken into account. Realistically though, will it happen? And how might it be done in a fair way?
interesting blog here ..
http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2012/06/families_only_f
Again why it should come down to DISPOSABLE income.
After I split with the ex I was netting over a £1,000 a week, with my outgoings about £100 a week all-in.
Wish I could say the same now.
in away that how it is now, some tribunals judges used the weekly figure of what a married couple would get if they were on JSA. as the gov stated that was the minimum figure a couple could live on. so some judges used that figure.what was wrong with doing it that way?Again why it should come down to DISPOSABLE income.
After I split with the ex I was netting over a £1,000 a week, with my outgoings about £100 a week all-in.
Wish I could say the same now.
Honestly Joe You are confusing the issues here...whether we like it or not, the new europeans are now ours brothers and sisters.this is more like what the headline should be,
New immigration clampdown demands £20,000 salary for Brits to marry a foreigner
British citizens who Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee marry foreigners will have to earn at least £20,000 a year if they want to set up their family home in the UK under a new immigration clampdown.
The planned changes mean lower-paid Britons would be forced to emigrate if they wanted to live with a loved one from overseas.
And if the foreign-born spouse had children, their British partner would have to earn £30,000 or more, depending on how many children they had.
They will also have to pass a strict new 'combined attachment test' to prove they share a genuine loyalty to Britain, not another country, and they will remain on probation for five years instead of the current two.
The proposals, to be announced by Home Secretary Theresa May, are expected to cut immigration, currently standing at 250,000 a year, by 25,000.
They are designed primarily to combat claims that some foreigners are marrying Britons to take advantage of the UK's generous welfare system.
The new clampdown will not apply to partners from within the European Union, as they will continue to have the right to settle here.
"There is little we can do to stop them claiming benefits but we can implement better controls on people who come here to marry in the first place."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1xMjd4L7S
as a British citizen you dont have the same rights as Europeans living in your country, they can still bring their wife and kids here without a problem
little you can do to stop them claiming benefits ?what planet is this gov spokesman on ? if they are not allowed to claim the benefits prosecute them, if they are allowed to claim the benefit then they have a legal right to, so what are they talking about
Really, you should stop beating yourself up thinking about it....
As for the 20k base stated by the mail...thats not unreasonable....example Imagine, like most of us sending monies back home....a regular amount...then they ask for a little bit more, reason given to you is the one of the out of work brother's has got a girlfriend with kids.
I guess you'd feel pretty miffed to say the least.
Do you think they could make a transitional arrangement for this though? Ie you meet the requirements when applying for the Fiance Visa - new rules come in - you apply for FLR - you are still bound by the rules that were in place when you first applied for the FIance Visa?
Wouldn't know Yellowcloud, but really, being logical and sensible, can you really REALLY see them deporting your wife? Whose now lived her a couple of years, maybe has British children and is very likely working?
I am no expert, but I just can't imagine them doing it. Besides, this government is so out in 3 years time
A survey of 531 is hardly a representive view of 50000 applicants....find a survey of at least that later figure then, we'll start seeing a truer picture.
Iani, thanks for that. Yes but my Fiance would have only been here a couple of months on the Fiance Visa and then we marry here, then apply for the FLR right after we marry, so in total she would have only been here for a couple of months. Would be a lovely Wedding gift by the UKBA, right after we get married and apply for FLR they then deport her :(
Yellowcloud, I would imagine it will be like when life in the uk test was introduced...ie..will only effect totally new applicants....those already with spouse, flr I cant see for one moment being affected. You got your now wife under the rules they set...when you apply flr you are just providing proof that you are upholding there rules.
Easy for me to say but, going by the last changes in requirements and how it was handled ie for new applicants on a certain date, you dont have nothing to worry about
Oh sorry, that's me not reading it properly - FLR not ILR. My mind really isn't there at the moment (long story, you can possibly guess part of it).
Well, this isn't much use I'm guessing, but one thing unanswered is just when these will come in. Theres no reason they wouldn't implement them in a months time as some rule changes are, or they might schedule them all for in the new year, if more planning is needed, or if they think it would be prudent to put out to the mps and wait for legal advice.
If I was the government, the latter is exactly what I'd do, as I would look a complete plank if my wonderful new plans got torn to bits by the legal people - and let's face it. Ms May is on already thin ice with her career, you'd think she would handle this one cautiously.
However, since when did governments behave logically. If we made the same mistakes they can we'd be fired and most likely in the dock for gross misconduct - and this goes for all governments, Black Wednesday, Gordon's famous let's sell the gold and invest in Euros fiasco etc.
Wish I could put your mind at rest, but
I agree, gWaPito.
No way will they make any of the rules retrospective. Now that WOULD be asking for trouble.
When you say retrospective, do you mean by that someone who applies for say a fiance visa under old rules would have to meet the new rules when applying for an FLR?
Yes
It's pointless to try and second-guess how changes will be implemented.
Historically immigration rules don't get made retrospectively.
Means if you applied for a fiance(e) visa prior to the rule change it will not impact the conditions of your fiance(e) visa.
If there are changes made that affect the application and conditions of FLR, ILR or Naturalisation and those changes are effective before you make an application then they will impact you.
At this time there has been no indications if the conditions of existing FLR/ILR visa holders will be changed. We can only look into the MAC report to imagine what the government may have in mind.
why am i confusing issuesit does not effect Europeans living in the UK, yet it effects British citizens, might be fair to you, that isn't to me
why doesn't it effect Europeans, because the gov can't restrict them, yet they can do this to citizens of this great country . not very fair is it
Stop winding us up gWaPito.
Since UKBA lost the HSMP JRs in 2008 & 2009, they have not made any retrospective changes to immigration rules. I think they will continue the practice for the fear of new JRs and the prospect to losing them on similar grounds.
Yes but what I mean is that so long as the rule changes are not made retrospectively then in my situation I wont be effected, and my situation is that my FIance Applied for a Fiance Visa a few days ago, UNDER the OLD RULES, so once we are married and apply for the FLR we will still be under the old rules, so long as the rule changes are not made retrospectively correct?If there are changes made that affect the application and conditions of FLR, ILR or Naturalisation and those changes are effective before you make an application then they will impact you.
government figures and data gWapitomany people earn the minimum wage and i think those figures are after tax ! not b4.
difficult one, would only be guessing, when the new rule is enforced
at a guess, those that are already on a fiancee visa i would have thought they would be given 2yrs not 5yrs FLR
but those that have not yet been granted their fiancee visa, when they come to apply for FLR will be given 5yrs.
Maybe so but, 531 is hardly representive of 250000 people who apply annually...yes, many do earn minimum wages and I put it to you, many dont.government figures and data gWapito
Try and find us a better survey Joe. You know it makes sense
Joe The Great British citizens aren't being affected by these immigration laws as is our European brother and sisters. We all one now Joe, I dont like it either...I know my uncles and granddads will be turning in there graves seeing how my granddads fought in the great war and uncles in the 2nd....we are only being affected when we want to bring someone in from outside the EU and that's if you fall below the minimum limit which, few will.
The woman with twins will be leaving on her free will to be with her non euro husband due to the fact she dont earn enough to bring in her husband. She and her babies are not being kicked out as you are implying.
Btw Im corresponding on the hoof so, please excuse some errors
the gov better fly him here by first class. you know it makes financial sense
Does TM have to have approval from MPs to approve the new maintenance requirement?
Does TM have to have approval from MPs to approve approve a Commons motion advising the judges that the right to family life is not absolute and should be overridden if doing so is in the national interest.
What happens if MPs do not approve a Commons motion advising the judges that the right to family life is not absolute and should be overridden if doing so is in the national interest?
Well Yellowcloud, as I've been told, mps dont have to be consulted over immigration visa matters.
So if this is the case, the income levels can just be made a dictat and just go ahead.
Now whether or not this is so potentially wide ranging that it would have to be consulted is another matter.
For example, the proposals to remove the right of appeal for family visit. They are going to just implement it for distant family members, but for closer ones, this has had to be tacked on to an existing bill, and will not come into law until next year - due to parliamentary time.
If ALL visa decisions don't have to go via mps, then they would have just removed the right of appeal with little notice, instead of having to tack it onto a bill.
Really no idea if income levels would be the same. If they are, then it would be next year before it could happen. If not, then - well, anytime from next month, depending on if they decide to seek more feedback.
Second point - yes she has to seek approval from mps - but I only know this because she said it herself this morning.
If the mps chucked it out (not unlikely, even tories will know this might go against laws they simply don't have the right to challenge), then it will fail.
She or someone else will have to try it a different way.
All just my analysis, I could be wrong of course.
http://www.freemovement.org.uk/2011/...rmits-and-ilr/
interesting part is do to with fairness. you know what i think about that and the europeans
Fairness has been gaining momentum in immigration decisions, and seems to be the intellectual child of the european idea of proportionality. As Sedley LJ commented, policy (by definition) ought to be applied less rigidly than rules. Not doing so could lead to ECHR claims; but it might be possible, on the basis of the accumulation of dicta in recent cases, to make an alternative argument stating that rigid application of policy is now out of step with the more general “fairness” requirement.
There is dicta from Lord Rodgers in Wilson to the effect that new laws will always affect people’s rights, this is not retroactive, but that sudden changes may well be unfair. Taken with the principle in Pankina and the suggestion in Ahmed that it would have applied under different circumstances, it is arguable that this is becoming something the courts are more willing to consider in a wider set of circumstances than before.
Indeed, the recent case from the Upper Tribunal of Alam showed a real willingness to apply this doctrine of fairness. Although the principle of fairness is not a means by which the courts can examine or avoid the merits of legislation, an order made under Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 was subject to this assessment.
now are these changes fair ? specially if you have kids and also more strict test for spouses ?
Im sorry to inform you Joe....the mother with twins on 31k wont be claiming tax credits with, I might add, the child care element.
the gov better fly him here by first class. you know it makes financial sense
Reason being, from this April 2012 no one can claim tax credits who's annual wedge is 25k and above.
There are currently 60 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 60 guests)
Posting Permissions
