Immigration Rules
Portfolio of divided families of British citizens and
residents due to UKs family immigration rules.
July 2015
CONTENTS
BritCits .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
britcits speak out: .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Policy Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Useful links .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 252
Index .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 253
NON-EEA PARTNERS
Families with children
Aaron & Kano ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 56
Aisha & Abraham ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 57
Andy & MollyDylan & Devon ...................................................................................................................................................................... 58
Anne ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 60
Barry, Francisca& Millie ............................................................................................................................................................................. 61
Ben................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 62
Colin & XXX .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 63
Dell & Valery................................................................................................................................................................................................... 65
Douglas ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66
Emma, Driss& Aymane ................................................................................................................................................................................ 67
Eric & Halima ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 68
Fiona, Nate...& William................................................................................................................................................................................... 69
Hayley & Manuel............................................................................................................................................................................................. 70
Jade & Merouane ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 72
John, Hayley...& Ryan ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 74
Juliet ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 75
Kate, Fune...& Reggie ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 77
Kelly ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 78
Kevin................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 79
Leighsa & Scott ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 80
Liz & Abdullah................................................................................................................................................................................................. 81
Lizzie & Alexander .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 82
Lorraine ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 84
Neil & Emily .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 85
Nick, Courtney...& Elliott ................................................................................................................................................................................ 87
Nikki, Juan& Jayden .................................................................................................................................................................................... 91
Page | 2
ADR
v24.07
Sarah ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 92
Sarah (Malaysia) ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 93
Sarah (Thailand).............................................................................................................................................................................................. 94
Sarah & Joe ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 95
Sean & Sherry Ann .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 98
Stella & Ankush ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 99
Stephen & Yilei .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 100
Wayne & Meliana .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 101
William & Noriko .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 102
Xocoa & Vishal .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 103
Financial requirements
Aimie & David ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 156
Alexis & Miad ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 157
Amanda & Imed ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 160
Amanda & Tony ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 161
Amy & Sean ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 163
Aneela ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 164
Angela............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 165
Anne ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 166
Ashleigh & Orisvel ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 168
Asif & Hafsa .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 169
Bethan & Winston .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 170
Brian .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 171
Chrissie & Supon ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 172
Claire ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 173
Clint ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 174
Craig & Toni ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 175
Damar............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 176
David & Dee .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 177
David & Emelie ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 179
Dee & Ozan ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 180
Ed & Anya ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 182
Emma & Haytham ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 185
Emma ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 186
Page | 3
ADR
v24.07
Gillian............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 188
Jack & Shah ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 190
Jade & Luis.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 191
Jas.................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 192
Jay & Alberto................................................................................................................................................................................................. 193
Jenny.............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 194
Jessica & Warren .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 195
Joel ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 196
Josh & Edward .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 197
Kathryn & Colin ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 199
Katie & Cliff .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 200
Kev & Barbara .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 201
Kirsty & Karim .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 202
Larissa & Nicolas .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 203
Laura & Mohamed ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 204
Les & Becky ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 206
Lisa ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 208
Louise ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 209
Loz & Josh ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 210
Lucinda & Karim ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 211
Lyndsey & Paul ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 213
Maliha & Bilal ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 214
Mark & Mercy ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 215
Megan & Max ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 216
Mel & Mahmoud ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 217
Michael (Malaysia) ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 218
Michael (Singapore) ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 219
Muhammad .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 220
Naila .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 221
Nick................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 222
Paul ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 223
Paul &Connie ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 224
Phil & Amanda .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 226
Rachel & Ahmed ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 227
Ravi................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 229
Rhys &Natacha .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 230
Richard & Kate .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 231
Rob (Indonesia) ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 232
Rob (USA)...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 233
Rudi ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 234
Ruth ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 235
Sandra & Aftab .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 236
Sandra & Monaam ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 237
Sarah & Angelina .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 238
Sharon & Wade ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 240
Sierra ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 241
Stacey & Yoshi ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 242
Steven............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 243
Suzanne .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 244
Tracey & Gary .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 245
Wayne & Daisy .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 247
Wes & Erica................................................................................................................................................................................................... 249
Wes & Rebecca .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 251
Page | 4
ADR
v24.07
BritCits
Immigration rules in the UK in force from 9th July 2012 are believed to be undermining family values
and violating the sanctity of marriage in causing the separation of families, keeping our citizens in exile
and forcing British children unnecessarily into a single-parent upbringing.
British citizens from across the spectrum have become victims of their own countrys immigration rules:
A British man earning over 100,000 is prevented from looking after his elderly parents because
they are Ukrainian.
The parent of two British kids is refused a visa, with Home Office stating At two and three years
old, its considered x and y are of an age where they would be able to readjust to life without you.
A young British mum with a Prohibited Steps Order in place preventing her children leaving the UK
is refused a spouse visa for her Moroccan husband to join her in the UK.
A British man is unable to return home to look after his elderly British parents, both diagnosed with
cancer, because his wife is from South East Asia.
The Syrian husband of a British woman meeting both financial and language requirements is
refused a visa for not submitting a statement of entry for the language exam, despite showing the
certificate of passing the exam
A British pensioner with his mortgage paid off and no debt is forced to sell his home because his
partner is American. The financial requirements not only make no allowance for zero
accommodation costs, but they also require selling off property to show cash proceeds.
For Brits with a foreign spouse, the government has placed a price tag on love, of 62,500 cash or a
salary of over 18,600 p.a. if they want to live in the UK a financial threshold so high that 47% of
British citizens in employment will not meet it.1 The onus is on the British citizen to meet the financial
requirements any income earned by the foreign spouse not in the UK is ignored, regardless of their
income or earning potential.
The added hurdle of the English language requirement before entering the UK represents a departure
from earlier policies which required spouses to learn English while they were in the UK. This has led
to some with spouses in remote parts of the world giving up hope of ever returning home because of a
lack of available English classes and centres approved by the Home Office in their region.
If you have an adult dependant from another country, usually elderly parents, the rules are even more
drastic. In parliamentary debate Sarah Teather MP called the new requirements a ban masquerading
as a rule2 and Chris Bryant MP said to all intents and purposes the adult dependent relative route has
been closed: people have to be able to prove in this country that they have so much money, they can
care for those dependants; in which case, people should care for them in the country in which the
dependants live, unless they are so ill that they cannot stay there, in which case they probably could not
travel anyway.. The criteria are so contradictory and operate just to exclude people.3
Our government does not care if the sponsor or applicant is a nurse, teacher or engineer with skill sets
our country is crying out for. It doesnt care if these rules mean we lose British NHS-trained doctors to
1
Page | 5
ADR
v24.07
countries with family-friendly immigration rules allowing parents to join their adult children. It doesnt
even care if there are British babies involved.
In making misleading statements of migrants being welcome here as long as they are not a burden on
taxpayers, the government does not refer to the fact that migrants have no recourse to public funds.
Indeed, family members being allowed to join their British family is actually beneficial to the UK
taxpayer as most benefits are contingent on the household income, which with another income earning
member of the family, is likely to disqualify the British citizen from benefits as well.
Faced with my own family life being threatened, noting a lack of public awareness, and the resounding
silence of the media, on the impact of these rules, I founded BritCits in 2012. Steven Green has been
my BritCits partner and priceless in his contribution to the organisation since day one, using his IT skills
to create and manage our website www.britcits.com.
BritCits is not advocating an open-door policy on immigration. However we think its imperative that
immigration rules are fair and clear, in both their intent and application; rules must be such where the
interest of a child prevails whatever the parents financial situation.
Ridiculous reasons for refusal such as denying a British citizen is actually British, or that a couple
married for over 12 years with three children does not in itself prove the existence of a genuine
relationship are unacceptable. When the only recourse to an error made by the Home Office is the
applicant taking the appeal to court, the path to family reunification often proves to be prohibitive in
terms of time and money. We are also concerned with changes made by the Immigration Act 2014,
which takes away the ability to appeal against Home Office decisions on the basis that the immigration
rules have been wrongly applied.
We demand better from the government of a developed nation, one which has been a pioneer on the UN
convention rights of the child, has benefited from the contribution of migrants to our society and indeed,
a nation which historically and even today, is known for its own people venturing into other countries
around the world, to live, work and reunite with family.
Sonel Mehta
Trustee
Page | 6
ADR
v24.07
defended British lives & way of life and now kept apart from own wife &
child. My parents are much older than my wife's and we wanted to be closer to them, so my wife,
our son & I could see more of them, help them out in their old age. Not too much to ask, is it?
Expat in exile.As a result he missed the birth of his first-born child.
to public funds Despite being in a genuine loving relationship, the government has forced me into
becoming a single mother, juggling work, being a full-time mum and a wife. Family life is supposed to be a
right, not a privilege...but it sure doesnt feel like it! I hope one day I can be with the woman I love,
the culture and language are not going to damage my career as I need to financially support my
family.
18,600 threshold by 6.40 a month. I served 10 years in army, went to Iraq. Yet must spend another
12 months apart from my husband, for 6.40 a month! I am desperate to return home to
spend time with my parents in their final years as they are both fighting cancer,
but I cant leave my wife! As a British citizen, my country wants me to earn the right to live
with my family.
Page | 7
ADR
v24.07
Policy Recommendations
At an APPG on Migration meeting in March 2013, Lord Teverson asked for suggestions on how
immigration into the UK could be managed better, whilst also ensuring new entrants did not lead to an
increased burden on the taxpayer. The following includes some of the suggestions sent to the panel,
though by no means is this expected to be exhaustive or a solution to all family immigration issues.
Lord Teversons response to the letter was I agree with you absolutely that all UK citizens should be
able to reside in their own country with their own family, most of all their chosen spouse.
Non EEA Parents
Bond/guarantee, as in Australia where $10,000 is held for ten years and refunded in full only if the
parent has not claimed any benefits in that period. Interestingly, Australia encourages parents of its
residents to migrate when they are younger/healthier to encourage integration and allow them to
contribute to the Australian community, whether as childminders, volunteers, workers etc.
Written guarantee or ring fenced assets from the sponsor.
Income threshold as is in place for spouses. It does not make sense that on an income of 80,000
or so, the government deems it feasible for a British citizen to sponsor a non-EU spouse and 20 of
their children, but not one parent.
Mandate private healthcare insurance for terminal illnesses to reduce reliance on NHS.
Reserve the right of sponsoring parents as that of British citizens only. This is similar to what is in
place in USA. Or indeed, those not already in receipt of benefits.
Long-term visa, as in Australia and Canada allowing parents to live with their children for two
consecutive years
Quota system, limiting number of non-EU citizens each person can sponsor over specified period.
Rolling 3-5 year visa so that if the British citizens situation changes and they are no longer able
to look after their parents, the visa is not renewed.
Non EEA partners
Income thresholds to reflect minimum wage and regional differences in incomes and cost of living.
Allow for cash and non-cash assets, without excluding the first 16,000 as is the current practice.
Take into consideration the sponsor/applicants expenses and debt in assessing funds required.
Prioritise cases involving kids.
Allow for the potential income of the non-EU spouse.
Those with fluctuating incomes should not be penalised by only the month with the lowest income
counting towards the income threshold. This especially affects sponsors who are self-employed, and
those on maternity or sick leave.
Reduce to 12 months (from 30) the period for which the pre-estimate of financial viability is
assessed.
English language requirements should be such that they allow for the fact that the best place to learn
English is the UK, rather than remote parts of the world with little or no access to English classes
and English examination centres approved by the Home Office.
Page | 8
ADR
v24.07
Alex H
My grandma is alone in Kazakhstan.
Alex is a British citizen who moved to the UK with his mum about ten years ago, as a child. His mother
is a British citizen and lives here with Alexs stepfather.
Since living here, Alex and his mum have fully integrated into the UK. Its their home, they both work
full-time, pay their taxes, National Insurance and have revoked their Kazakh citizenships as well.
Their ties with Kazakhstan exist by way of Alexs grandmother, who at 69 lives alone there. Although
Alex and his mum make regular visits to her, and send her money to pay for her living expenses, its
now how they want her to continue the rest of her life.
Like many kids, Alex spent a lot of time with his grandma when in Kazakhstan. His mum, a single
parent worked long hours for the three of them to have a roof over their heads and food on the table.
When they left the country, the grandma was younger, healthier with an active social life.
Recently though, her entire network of friends and family have left Kazakhstan to live with their own
families, or are now deceased. She has no family or friends nearby, and her health is deteriorating every
day, surrounded by loneliness. She has issues with her pancreas and heart, and while Alex and his mum
have been paying for her medication out there, restrictions mean it is not easy to buy food in Kazakhstan
to meet the strict dietary requirements imposed by the doctor, as these are simply not available in the
town she lives in.
She is not physically able to do essentials. Some social services help out with the cleaning of the house
and shopping, there is no provision to help with regular checks to make sure she is okay. To help with
bathing and cooking. There are no private companies who offer that service that Alex has been able to
locate; and is it really prudent to entrust the care of a vulnerable person to a stranger who knows the
only family is in another country? There are horrific stories of abuse in the UK, despite our stringent
standards. What would it be like in another country with fewer regulations?
The family is worried about their elderly relative becoming a target of criminal activity; corruption is
rife in the area and they target the vulnerable, especially elderly who it is known have family around.
The family made a settlement application in 2012 before the new ADR rules were introduced, which
was refused on some confusing grounds; that there was no evidence of the money being given to the
grandma. The grandma has no income of her own and Alex and his mother provided for her by taking
money with them to Kazakhstan on their regular visits. Because this was not documented in the way
the Home Office wanted, the application was refused and unfortunately, the family lost at appeal as
well.
The family learnt their lesson and are now documenting the money transfers, although this means
incurring extra costs and making it harder for their grandma to access the funds. However, given the
nature of the ADR rules, the family is sure they would still not fulfil UKs requirements for an ADR
visa, deemed as a ban masquerading as a rule.
The family can provide for their grandma, even with private health insurance, without recourse to public
funds. They just want to be able to provide a home for her to live in, with her family. Neither Alex nor
his mum can move to Kazakhstan as that impacts their financial security thus affecting their ability to
pay for the grandma. They are now considering becoming yet another family forced to leave UK to
live in another EU country in the hope of family reunification, outside of the reaches of Home Office.
A drastic measure, but the only alternative to leaving their elderly relative to die alone, with health,
physical and emotional needs not being met.
Page | 9
ADR
v24.07
Alex S
The parents issue is the most important thing to me and I will move
countries if I have to rather than abandon them but I shouldnt have
to leave my home when I can guarantee to look after them with no
recourse to public funds.
Alex is a British citizen from Kent, Dartford with Oxford University as his alma mater. A property
investor and entrepreneur in the UK for 12 years and financially supporting his parents in Ukraine during
this period as well.
His parents are both 65 years old, living in rented accommodation in Ukraine because they sold their
property with the intention to move to the UK and bring their life savings with them. They have no
relatives other than Alex and his wife. They somewhat know the UK, having stayed here for a month or
two every couple of years, but travelling is proving more and more difficult with age and its unavoidable
symptoms.
Alex has worked hard and is earning over 100,000 a year. He is not on benefits (indeed, he wouldn't
even qualify). He wishes to have his parents with him here, to enjoy and share his success, after years
of hard work and sacrifices made by them all. It's well overdue. His parents would not qualify for
benefits in the UK, with a very clear no recourse to public funds stamped in their passport, but Alex is
willing to sign a waiver, provide a guarantee and take out private healthcare cover to alleviate any such
fears this government might have nonetheless.
However under the current immigration rules this is still impossible. Now Alex is not just going to
shrug his shoulders and say, "oh well" and think by sending money to Ukraine his responsibilities are
fulfilled. No, thats not how he was brought up and its not how he would want his children to treat
him. So Alex is considering moving countries. Going to another EEA country for a year or so where
he can have his parents with him and then using the Surinder Singh route to return to his home, the UK,
with his parents. What is being denied to him by the UK is allowed to him by Europe.
With his excellent credentials, he has already had job offers from Frankfurt and Zurich but does not
want to leave unless forced to. For him though the parents issue is the most important factor at the
moment and one for which he will move if he needs to. The point remains that he should not need to.
With him will go his money for a year, the boost so sorely needed by our economy.
Yes, Alex intends to return. But he might fall in love with his new home and never do so (supporters of
Tories net migration target with hands up in victory are oblivious to the fact that by encouraging exile
of our citizens we are damaging our own future).
Even if Alex does return, he won't forget what this government has done, and what the opposition has
let them do. People never do forget when its their own family and family life that is threatened. And
the saddest thing is - unless there's a change pronto, he won't ever trust the system in UK again, because
it will have failed him.
Page | 10
ADR
v24.07
Ali L
"But Mr. ... who keeps up with modern ideas explained the other
day that compassion is forbidden nowadays by science itself, and
that's what is done now in England, where there is political
economy."-Dostoevsky, Fyodor (1866). Crime and Punishment.
Translated in English by Constance Garnett
Ali is a foreign born British citizen; he is one of the brightest and best students our government competes
with USA, Australia, Canada and Ireland for.
In 2006, Ali, then an Indian citizen, came here for a one-year Masters course in Computer Security ,
subsequent to which he moved to the Points Based Tier 1 - General visa category then open to highly
skilled people in an attempt to encourage them to remain in the UK.
The promise was that applicants would be able to obtain permanent residency after five years, with a
route for elderly parents to settle here as well. So Ali made the choice to live here on that basis rather
than exploring options in other countries which then and even now allow for settlement of parents.
As an only child, Ali finds the ADR rules especially
harsh. His parents are both retired in India and aged over
70; they are more and more dependent on him with the
onset of age and its consequences. They also feel lonely
and left out, with depression taking its toll.
Alis dad has vertigo; not just the kind that makes you
dizzy when you look down from high up. Its so severe
that it impacts his ability to stand and even hear. His world
is slowly turning silent. Alis mum is unable to walk for
long due to arthritis. Their son is a much needed crutch.
Alis parents are living off their savings. But with medical issues, the pot is dwindling and financial
dependency on Ali is likely to increase. Ali has no qualms about supporting his parents he is
successful because of their sacrifices and able to look after them with no recourse to public funds.
The family could get by for a while with visits for a few months every year, however Home Office is
known to refuse even visit visas for elderly relatives, whilst making the settlement route impossible.
Ali has an excellent job; he earns a very good salary and has experience in the cancer research area,
writing software to screen new-borns. Every time the government states that elderly relatives would be
a burden on the NHS, Ali feels the irony. The NHS would collapse without migrants.
Most of Alis parents friends live with their own kids, in USA, Canada, Australia. Ali is ridden with
guilt that his parents are on their own. As much as he loves it here, Ali regrets choosing UK to make as
his home simply because of these rules. Its not easy to leave now that things are established; career,
finances and other commitments. But UKs stance on families has impacted his morale and the
perception of, and desire to integrate into, the UK.
The rules clearly target foreign-born British citizens and residents. They scream that no matter how
hard Ali will work, how much he contributes, how much of a home this becomes, he will always be
second-class because he wasnt born here. Ali is clear these kind of rules will ensure the brightest and
best no longer move to the UK; indeed, many of them will leave. At the detriment of our society,
community, economy and values.
Page | 11
ADR
v24.07
Ali N
"As a single mum who raised me having already lost a child, my
mum and I share a particularly close bond. I cant abandon her
when her health is so frail.
Ali is a British citizen, and has been living and working in the UK for over 10 years.
He is in the higher-rate tax bracket, having worked hard since coming to the UK and is a net
contributor to the Exchequer. He has never claimed any benefits from the UK government.
Alis mum is from Pakistan. She raised Ali as a single parent following separation from Alis
dad (and subsequently, the couple divorced). When Alis brother died at the age of two, Alis
mum naturally became even more protective with the bond between mother and son particularly
strong as a result of the hardship they have faced. Ali is now her only child.
Alis three aunts his mums sisters - are also all British citizens. Therefore she has been
visiting the UK regularly since around 1986. Since Alis move to the UK in 2005, his Auntie
Perveen aunt, a widow, has lived with his mother practically every single day. Every year they
would spend six months in the UK as per the restrictions of Ali's mothers UK visit visa and the
rest of the time in Pakistan.
However, on his mums last visit in June 2014, Ali found her suffering from rheumatoid
arthritis, depression and other medical complications which largely went undiagnosed in
Pakistan. His mum therefore remained here for treatment, as being unfit to travel, she was
unable to fly back. Ali instructed private consultants in the UK to help get her back to a noncritical state, having to date spent thousands of pounds on his mums treatment. Ali wishes to
stress that this was privately funded, and did not therefore cause any strain on the NHS,
cementing his claim that the underlying motive for wanting his mum here is simply to be able
to look after her day to day needs, not for free NHS care.
Ali has also moved out of his own flat, where his girlfriend still lives, and primarily stays with
Auntie Perveen and his mum, so as to be able to help with the daily chores and assisting her as
she battles her medical issues. Alis other two aunts live just five minutes away, so the family
see each other on a daily basis and are a very close-knit unit.
Alis mum remains very ill and struggles to perform basic chores independently. Alis aunt
Perveen, mainly due to old age is struggling with her own health problems and therefore is
unable to accompany Alis mum to Pakistan this time. As a British citizen, there is no
restriction on Alis aunts stay in the UK.
Alis mum holds a visitors visa valid till 2020, however, due to ill-health she is not fit to travel
long-haul, especially not on a regular basis.
Ali has thus considered moving back to Pakistan. However, a couple of years ago he bought a
property in London so financial commitments make it difficult though yes a property can be
sold. However, leaving the UK would also mean leaving his German girlfriend of over 4 years
who is not prepared to relocate to Pakistan because of the terrorist concerns as advised by the
FCO. It would mean starting from scratch, wiping the board clean of the last ten years of his
life, saying goodbye to his home, his aunts, his partner, his career.
Page | 12
ADR
v24.07
Whilst carers are available in Pakistan, their services are typically only employed with a close
and able family member overseeing the operations; the carer is supervised. This is not an option
available to Ali as there is no family in Pakistan able to perform even a supervisory role.
Moreover, its important to Ali that his mum has the affection and companionship of
family. Alis mum also needs coaxing to engage in exercise and to take her medication. Its
unlikely therefore that she would listen to a stranger.
Ali and his aunt therefore decided to make an application for settlement. They were as
expected, refused by the Home Office and have appealed on human rights grounds, with their
hearing scheduled for 16th July 2015.
Ali has to date spent thousands of pounds in legal and application fees.
Ali feels very dejected that the UK government has bolted the doors shut to even the elderly
and disabled relatives of British citizens. While he believes this is as a result of the pressure
Theresa May has found herself under to bring down net immigration further to the Tory
promise, violating the basic human right to private and family life is unlikely to earn them
any favours from the British public in the long run.
If Alis mum is forced to return to Pakistan, Ali believes this will violate the FCOs travel
advice, given the threat to his security as his family belongs to a sect which is currently being
persecuted in Pakistan. It will mean his mum is forced to leave her three sisters, who contribute
to her well-being. Ali and his girlfriend will break up, and Ali would lose his job, earnings,
friends and aunts too.
Ali refers to the governments own advice for travel to Pakistan for British nationals:
There is a high threat from terrorism, kidnap and sectarian violence throughout Pakistan. In
the aftermath of an attack on a school in Peshawar in December 2014, there is a heightened
threat of terrorist attacks, and kidnapping against western nationals in Pakistan. You should
be particularly vigilant at this time and take appropriate security precautions.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/pakistan
British nationals of Pakistani origin are at particular risk of kidnap for ransom. British and
other foreign national kidnap victims have faced extended periods of detention. While some
were ultimately released by their captors, others have been killed.
Source: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/pakistan/terrorism
Page | 13
ADR
v24.07
Chen
My mother would not be a burden on the state. She has enough
financial savings of her own to buy a property and pay for private
medical cover in the UK. She just wants to not be alone.
Chen is a British citizen. He moved to the UK in 2000 from Beijing as a student. His family
supported him by paying for his tuition fees and living expenses for the entirety of his student
years.
Chen is one of the crme de le crme international students the government is keen to ensure
continue coming to the UK after graduating from university, Chen received a job offer which
he accepted. After several years of working, paying taxes and NI contributions, Chen became
a naturalised British citizen.
Chens mother is alone in China. She is retired and wishes to join her son. An accident has left
her disabled and unable to walk unhindered. Her ex-husband, Chens stepfather was abusive
leading to their divorce. Chens mother has recently decided shed like to no longer be alone
and would prefer to live with her son her only child.
Chen understands people's concerns on the ever increasing public burden on NHS and other
public sector facilities. However, this will not be the case for his family. His mum was a
bookkeeper for a large state-owned company in China, with a great salary and fantastic benefits.
As she never lived outside her means, she managed to have good savings. She even owns a
property outright, without any outstanding mortgage. She's quite happy to sell her place and
use the money to buy a property here. She is also more than capable of using her savings to
sign up for private health care.
She would not be a burden on the society as some people perceive.
Chen is frustrated that its because he is a British citizen he is being denied the right to have his
mother join him in the country of his nationality. Non-EU elderly immigrants took up a
miniscule portion of the total immigration number even under the previous rules and so denying
people the right to look after their parents is not going to solve any of the perceived immigration
problems either.
Its clear to Chen that this is just yet another political manoeuvre that will serve to help no one,
least of all Brits and our country.
Page | 14
ADR
v24.07
Debarshi
I am a net contributor to the UK economy and wish now to also
contribute to my parents life.
Debarshi and his wife are both British citizens, having lived in the UK since 2005. He came to
the UK on a work transfer, and met his now wife Radha who was then here as an international
student.
Now Debarshi work as an IT manager in a bank, and his wife is a Tax Compliance Officer at
HMRC.
The current ADR rules are of concern to Debarshi, as the only child of parents living alone in
India. Whilst Debarshi is able to arrange for a carer, this would only ensure provision of
physical care. Only family can provide the emotional care, especially that needed during old
age when parents needs so often resemble that of childrens. No paid help can replace that.
If the current rules, effectively a ban on parents like Debarshis, remain in place, Debarshi and
his wife will have no choice but to move to a country where his parents can stay with them.
Not an easy decision given the efforts which they have gone to in order to build a life here, but
an easy one when balancing the need and responsibilities to those who gave him life.
Page | 15
ADR
v24.07
Dev
My mother was refused a visit visa, and now the Home Office,
despite the Judge ruling in favour of granting a settlement visa,
continues to refuse my mother entry, by appealing this decision.
Dev is a UK resident. He has been living here for years, and since then been diligently working
as a higher-rate tax payer, claiming no benefits.
Dev, his wife and child have all satisfied the requirements for British citizenship. However,
despite being a net contributor, Dev is being forced to re-assess his future in the UK, because
of his experience with the immigration rules which mean not only has his mother been refused
a visa to settle in the UK, but also prevented from visiting them.
When Dev was 12, his father passed away. As the eldest of four children, Dev was a huge
support to his mother, prematurely becoming the man of the house, and his mothers crutch and
confidant. As soon as he was old enough, Dev worked to help provide financially for the
family, ensuring his siblings got access to an excellent education and as per Indian culture also
paying for his sisters weddings. Dev shouldered the responsibility of a father and in doing so,
there naturally developed a special bond between mother and her eldest child. There is no
doubt that his mother is entirely dependent on Dev.
As time passed, and the other kids flew the nest, including one younger sibling also now based
in the UK, Devs mother found herself alone. She has trouble with things that the younger
generation takes for granted mobile phones, going out shopping, using an ATM. With two
of her children in the UK, including a grandchild, Dev was keen for his mother to come visit
them. There was no intention that his mother would live here. At her age, to adjust to a new
life, culture and indeed, British winter, would be very difficult. However, when a visa to visit
the UK was refused, Dev decided to apply for a settlement visa for his mum - before 9th July
2012 - as this would allow her to stay in the UK for as long as she wanted and whenever she
wished, without further visa hassles.
To his surprise, UKBA refused the visa, despite all the evidence showing Devs mum:
lives alone in India.
is unable to leave her apartment complex on her own
doesnt have any close family to help with everyday tasks; running errands, going to the
temple, seeing the doctor.
is entirely financially dependent on Dev
is unable to use modern technology like ATMs or mobile phones
doesnt have many friends where she lives having lived there for a short time
when unwell and in pain, was forced to phone Dev in the UK who then arranged for a
neighbour to take his mum to the hospital
As part of the settlement visa application, Devs mum was required to travel hundreds of miles
for a face to face interview at the UK embassy in Chennai. Luckily, a distant cousin happened
to be around at the time and Dev called in some favours to arrange for his mother to be
accompanied Dev paying for all the necessary travel and accommodation costs of both his
mother and the cousin.
Page | 16
ADR
v24.07
Little did he know that by being able to arrange this, the Home Office would use this as an
excuse to refuse the visa by saying his mother was not alone. That the cousin is distant, and
not living in the same city as his mother or even more importantly, that the responsibility for
his mothers welfare falls on Dev, not a distant cousin, seems to have been conveniently
ignored.
Indeed, if Dev hadnt been able to arrange for his mother to be accompanied, the application
would have also been refused as Home Office would say that the applicant did not attend the
interview as required!
The Home Office refused the visa; Dev appealed and the Judge ruled in favour of the family,
citing that there is a close tie beyond those of only an emotional nature between Dev and his
mother, what with Dev having, to all intents and purposes, provided a roof over not only his
mothers head, but the younger siblings as well. The Judge ruled that Devs mother is entirely
dependent on her son and therefore maintained that his mother should be granted a visa to settle
in the UK.
Unfortunately, despite what should have been a delayed happy ending, the Home Office has
appealed and for this family the battle continues.
According to the Home Office, the Judge has not taken into account the immigration rules (even
though he has).
According to the Home Office, the Judge failed to give reasons as to why Devs mother is
dependent on her (even though this is in fact very clearly indicated).
However Dev will fight the battle for the right of a son to look after his mother. For a son to
not abandon a mother who raised four children on her own. For the bond to develop between
grandchild and grandmother.
The result and nature of the battle will determine the future of this family in the UK. Whether
we retain the valued skills of Dev, or lose them to another country willing to afford family
rights to its migrants, time will tell.
Update: The Upper Tribunal too allowed the appeal, and Devs mother is now in receipt of her
settlement visa.
Dev has bought a larger house and is glad to finally be able to live with and look after his
mother.
Page | 17
ADR
v24.07
Dina
Since my dad and brother passed away, my mum has no one but me.
I cannot leave her by herself in another country so far away.
Dina is a British citizen. She has lived in UK since 2004, the year she met her husband, also a
British citizen. The couple married in 2005 and now are proud parents to a three year old girl.
Dina moved here after graduating from a university in Russia as a teacher of English and
German. She pursued further teacher training in the UK including obtaining the Cambridge
Certificate in teaching English. Dina now teaches English at Kent Adult Education Service.
Her husband is a visual effects artist in the film industry in London. They own a three bedroom
home, have never claimed benefits - nor would they be entitled to given their financial situation.
When Dina and her husband decided to
start a family, Dina did not really worry
about her parents, as her brother, a doctor
by profession, was there to support them.
However, the last six years have been
very tough for the family; Dinas father
died from cancer in 2009; her brother died
four years later of a heart failure in what
was a shock and devastating loss for both,
Dina and her mum.
Dinas mum has not recovered from the ordeal of losing her young son, her health has suffered
and all alone in Russia, all she now lives for are her visits to Dina and beloved granddaughter.
The family has not applied for settlement as Dinas mum is currently aged 64. However it does
not seem worthwhile applying under the current rules even when she turns 65.
Dina is the sole surviving child. Dinas daughter, the only grandchild. Other family in Russia
consists of Dinas two aunts, both older than her mum, living a 12-hour train journey away and
unable to support their younger sister.
Dina has no relatives in the UK from her side of the family; she misses her mum and longs for
her to be able to have a presence in their family unit. But as this is not permitted, Dina finds
herself experiencing feelings of guilt, confusion and sadness that she cannot provide a peaceful
family life for her mum, much deserved at this stage in life, and after all shes been through.
It is beyond comprehension that British citizens in their own country cannot have a single
elderly mum living with them!
Dinas husband is now on the lookout for jobs in Europe, so that they may move elsewhere
where they can be a family. Not letting in one person who would have no recourse to public
funds anyway, may see the departure of three British citizens who are no burden on the taxpayer
and net contributors. A boon for the net migration target, but at what cost for three British
citizens and the family, friends and employers they leave behind?
Page | 18
ADR
v24.07
Ethan
My parents are living in the most appalling conditions, when I could
easily provide them with a better life, living with me.
Ethan is a British citizen living in the constituency of Redbridge. He has lived in the UK for
over 10 years, never having claimed any benefits. His brother incidentally is also a British
citizen. He does however have two loving, if elderly and frail parents in Guyana. His only other
sibling is a sister who lives in USA but does not have the means to support their parents.
His parents are wholly, including financially, dependent on their two sons sons they worked
hard all their life in the hope of their having a better life than their own. Unfortunately, his
parents also suffer from ill-health. Ethans dad is diabetic, and his mum has been diagnosed
with rheumatoid arthritis and high cholesterol. She recently suffered a stroke, luckily a mild
one.
Ethan is saddened that due to work and financial commitments, neither he, nor his brother can
spend long periods away from the UK. And so he is being deprived from spending valuable
time with his parents, who he is otherwise able to fully support in the UK from his own income.
He does not need to claim benefits for himself, nor will he need to with them here.
His parents are not alone in Guyana. They are living with Ethans aunt in a one-bedroom
property. While his aunt is nice, she isnt able to provide the care for his parents the way he
could, would and should. Third party care in Guyana is extremely expensive and anything
affordable would deem that without immediate family that is able to keep an eye on things,
they won't be treated well. (Often enough we hear of our elderly in homes being
mistreatedimagine that a long flight away!)
How can you justify to your parents, let alone yourself, why when you are able to look after
them in the UK, have them living with you while they still have time, you fob the responsibility
for their well-being to someone else. Its not just about sending money overseas. Its about
being able to sit and talk about your day. Have a laugh together. Hold their hand. Smaller things
make the bigger differences.
Page | 19
ADR
v24.07
Fara
My parents need us but all three of their kids are British citizens
living in the UK and so we dont qualify to look after them when they
need us most.
Fara is a British citizen living here since 2001. Her husband is also British. Her parents are,
aged 60 and 70 and live in India.
Due to a death in the family, her parents home must be sold (as per the terms of her uncles
will who owned their apartment). Her parents dont have enough money to buy their own home,
and because of their ages, are unable to obtain a mortgage. They get by, with the pension her
dad receives, and help from their three children. Children all of whom are British citizens, yet
unable to bring over their parents to live with them, and care for them.
There is no financial clause Fara or her siblings can satisfy to show they have the means to look
after their parents. The rules just dont allow this, no matter how well off you are; no matter if
all your children are British citizens living in the UK.
Fara is considering going down the EEA route the only route left open to her. However with
two kids under the age of six, one of whom is physically disabled, its not going to be easy.
Fara is feeling the weight of the burden of having a child requiring surgery and parents due to
become homeless.
Three British siblings, British spouses and British kids - being denied the right to look after
their parents without recourse to public funds.
Page | 20
ADR
v24.07
Page | 21
ADR
v24.07
Jenny
I just want to be able to look after my parents (without recourse to
public funds) in the same way theyve looked after me and my child.
Jenny from Kingston & Surbiton is a British citizen with South African parents. She works for a very
reputable regulator with a secure, stable job.
She has also been supporting her parents for several years, which she doesnt have an issue with. After
all, shes in a position to do so only because they made sacrifices for her to be where she is.
Jenny also now has a child, a British child. As she cannot afford to pay 1000 in childcare every month,
on top of her living expenses - rent, bills, while also sending money to her parents, her parents have
been visiting her regularly to help with the childcare.
This may sound fine and dandy, but it's when you delve further you realise that parental sacrifices don't
end even in old age.
Jenny's parents take it in turns to visit the UK for 6 months at a time so they can help her with childcare
all year round, and so that she can afford to pay their living expenses back in their home country. Jenny
could, and will, never turn her back on her parents and stop supporting them as they are, due to
unfortunate circumstances, unable to support themselves.
So her parents are forced to take it in turns to visit their daughter and grandchild because they can only
stay here for 6 months in a year.
This raises several issues:
1) The parent who is in South Africa is alone, lonely and miserable for half of their life
2) The parent who is leaving the UK after 6 months has to regularly go through the heart-wrenching
process of saying goodbye to their own family, knowing they're going back to an empty existence.
3) Jenny's parents barely see their own spouse because of their own financial obligations deeming
dependency on their daughter necessary.
4) UKBA could at any point cease allowing the parent in even for 6 months. At any point. It has
happened to other parents, with UKBA denying them entry and saying they need to apply for a
settlement visa if they wish to visit their family in the UK regularly.
Like others in this position, Jenny has considered applying for a settlement visa. She knows it will be
rejected, but maybe then she could appeal.
While this takes time and money, her biggest concern is that by applying for a settlement visa she runs
the risk of her parents never ever being allowed back in the UK, because their having expressed the
desire to settle here will be interpreted by UKBA as an intention to live here, with a possible slapping
of a 10 year ban on even re-applying. It is grossly unfair that Jenny is not able to allow her parents to
make their home with her in the UK, without recourse to public funds.
Update: Jenny exercised her treaty rights by living and working in Ireland. She is now happily back in
the UK with her parents.
Page | 22
ADR
v24.07
Katharina
Not allowing my mum to live with us in the UK would mean I would move to
Russia. My husband would follow and 50 jobs in the UK would be affected.
Katharina is a British citizen, living in the UK with her husband, Richard, and teenage daughter, also
British citizens. Katharina and Richard met in Finland, when she was working there as a trader and
export secretary and he offered her a job. The two fell in love and the rest as they say is history, with
the couple married now for about eighteen years.
Katharinas mum, Tatiana, is 77 years old and from Russia. Since her retirement as an artwork valuer,
she has been a frequent visitor to Katharinas home for nearly six months every year, only sometimes
with Katharinas father as he was still working in the Russian Art Museum in St Petersburg. Their close
relationship has been further facilitated by holidays with Katharina and her daughter, in other parts of
the world (Katharinas husband could not take time off work because of their business interests).
Katharinas dad passed away in 2011, following which Katharina plays a more significant role in her
mothers life. Indeed, Tatiana is also like a second mum to Katharinas husband.
Tatiana is a heart patient, having suffered from a heart attack and her being on medication to thin her
blood. Continuous monitoring is required as the dosage varies depending on results of blood tests which
Katharina helps her mother with. Furthermore, such medication in Russia is usually bought over the
counter rather than on a prescription basis, and statistics showing 70% of all medicines are not
conforming to the required standards, and sometimes are even fake. Tatiana also suffers from arthritis
in her knee and spine, fainting spells, forgetfulness, fear, confusion and panic attacks when alone.
There is also concern for the level of medical attention in Russia; ambulance crew may need to be bribed
to take you and hospitals will not admit patients if they are full. It would be difficult for a heart patient
in her 70s to navigate the process. Particularly poignant for Katharina is that her father was the victim
of a fatal heart attack; he was in hospital when it occurred but it was misdiagnosed as anaemia. So
although in a private room, no one came to help him. The thought of losing her mum in the same way
is untenable.
Page | 23
ADR
v24.07
Furthermore, Tatiana has a history of collapsing relating to episodes of confusion and the building her
apartment is in is in dire need of structural repairs a 7-storey block built in 1969. Its condition and
poor management result in a regular need for internal maintenance work with which this 77 year old is
unable to cope, especially now without her husband.
Tatiana does have another child a son. However he is estranged from the family, having left home
ten years ago and subsequent to his leaving his wife and two children, his whereabouts too are unknown
his most recent known location was Monaco. Tatianas two three siblings have also all passed away
and those of her friends who are alive are immobile and being looked after by their own family. So
Katharina is her mothers only crutch.
It is difficult for Katharina to leave the UK, even for frequent visits. Her husband runs a factory in
Welshpool while she manages the administration. The factor is the largest producer of Ferro Titanium
in Europe. The couple also own a farm in Snowdonia with a herd of 80 highland cattle. Their business
interests make leaving for protracted periods impossible. Katharinas husband would also not be legally
able to carry out his business in Russia as a ferro-titanium producer, as in Russia this is considered
strategic material and thus strictly under the governments control. However, he feels that sending his
mother-in-law back to Russia alone would be like sentencing her with the death penalty.
So Tatianas removal would cause the family as a whole to contemplate leaving their way of life in the
UK in order to keep the unit together and Tatiana cared for.
What is bizarre to this family is that there would be no burden on the taxpayer if Tatiana were able to
live in the UK in fact, were she forced to go, its likely to be worse because of the potential job losses.
Accommodation is not an issue; the family live in a large property consisting of two houses and 14 acres
of land. There is a dedicated area for Tatiana in their family home she has her own bedroom, bathroom
and dressing room.
Initially, Katharina took her mum to a UK cardiologist working privately. However it was suggested
by the doctor and a staff member from NHS administration in Wales that Tatiana uses NHS services
even after Katharina explained that she did not mind paying for private cover. However they said that
because of a bilateral agreement between UK and Russia, the costs would be passed onto the Russian
government anyway.
Katharina is also well able to look after her mum; several years ago an account was opened for Tatiana
with a deposit of 10,000 with the funds used for Tatianas personal expenses, supplementing cash gifts.
This is definitely not someone who would ever need to rely on public funds as the familys resources
are significant and more than sufficient to cover Tatianas needs.
Tatiana not being allowed to live in the UK would also mean that the relationship enjoyed with her
granddaughter could not be maintained in its current form either.
The other issue faced by Katharina is the rules not permitting in-country applications. Surely where a
relative is suffering from ill-health, to expect them to leave the UK in order to make an entry clearance
application is nonsensical?
Katharina is adamant that were UK to refuse her mother the right to reside in the UK, she too would
need to follow her mum to Russia. Katharinas husband has indicated he too would thus feel compelled
to move to be with his wife and her mother. However the impact from such a move not only on this
family unit but the approximately 50 people whose employment their businesses are responsible for,
will be felt for a very long time. The impact on Katharinas daughter would be especially
disproportionate, given she is approaching sitting for her GCSEs.
Update:
Page | 24
ADR
v24.07
1) On 6th July 2015, the family received information that their application for permission to have a
hearing at the Upper Tribunal was once again refused. The family will make a new application next
week with a change of circumstances due to her new diagnosis; they are just astounded that it has
been three years since their first application, with no end in sight!
2) Katharinas husband is now planning to apply for Polish citizenship so that if despite all attempts
they are unable to satisfy the UK rules, he may be able to renounce his British citizenship in order
to make use of EEA regulations for Tatiana to reside in the UK as a family member of an EEA, albeit
no longer British, citizen.
3) In October 2015, Tatiana was diagnosed with dementia, and has been treated at Welshpool Medical
Centre ever since. It is well known that this condition is not treatable and though its progress is
inevitable, Tatiana has been prescribed memory pills to slow down the deterioration.
Now more than ever, Tatiana relies on Katharina for daily tasks. She suffers from psychological
problems which Katharina is able to provide assistance with 24/7 as her job allows her to work from
home. Although symptoms of the memory loss and confusions were prevalent a lot earlier, an
assessment carried out before the settlement application was disregarded by the Home Office who
argued the condition may never develop into a disease.
4) In more bad news, Katharinas husband has been recently diagnosed with a serious heart
condition requiring open heart surgery within the next 12 months to replace a failing valve. He
cannot travel abroad at the moment, even were he to leave his business here. To expect him also
to move to Russia would now be impossible on medical grounds as well as loss of livelihood.
Page | 25
ADR
v24.07
Mahi
We just want to look after our mother and have the means to do so,
yet were being told we cant.
Mahi is a permanent resident in the UK. This means she has earned the right to live here for
the rest of her life, without any conditions attached. Mahis sister is a British citizen, also living
in the UK. They are both married and well settled here.
Mahi earns a decent salary, certainly enough to look after her family without recourse to public
funds.
Their mum is aged 54 and a widow. Two of her daughters Mahi and her sister live in the
UK with their husbands and children. Her third daughter lives in USA. Mahis mum is
completely alone in India.
Yes she is relatively young and no, she doesnt need help being fed, bathed and dressed. She is
haunted by a loneliness. As she has always been a housewife, her life revolved around looking
after her husband, her children and her home. Her children and grandchildren her family
are all overseas. Her husband is no longer alive. She is completely alone.
She is lucky though. Mahi has been supporting her financially. Mahi and her sister have had
their mum visit them on three occasions now. Mahis mum liked being surrounded by her kids,
grandkids...it made her feel younger, more alive, less lonely certainly and less depressed.
Mahi and her sister want their mum to live with them permanently. They have the means to
ensure she can live here without ever having to fall back on public funds.
Yet they are being denied this and understandably bemused. They are not wanting to take their
mother away from her home country, to dump her in an old peoples home. They want to look
after her themselves, to ensure that they can return the favours that this mother bestowed on
themthe favours that have allowed Mahi and her sister to make a better life for themselves,
in the UK, providing services that we all benefit from.
Page | 26
ADR
v24.07
Manish A
If my parents are not able to move to the UK, I would have to leave
to leave, no ifs, no buts.
Manish is a British citizen, living in the UK along with his older brother, also a British citizen.
Their kids are all British citizens by birth.
Manishs parents live alone in India; their daughter does live in the same country, but because
of social and cultural norms, it is not possible for them to live with her as she resides with her
in-laws. The responsibility for looking after their parents falls on Manish and his brother.
A key concern for Manish is being able to look after his parents as they get older; currently
reasonably healthy, the situation is not time-critical at this point in time, but Manish is aware
that their health will deteriorate, and the current rules still make no allowance for that.
Regardless though, Manish wishes for them to be able to enjoy their life in the UK rather than
simply coming here only when they need help with everyday tasks like bathing, dressing,
cooking though even being in this position under the current rules would not suffice as they
would also need to prove that there was no (affordable) care available from a stranger.
When asked what he would do if his parents health does worsen, Manishs reply was I would
have to leave the UK in order to live with and look after them. No ifs, no buts.
No doubt being forced to take such a step would have serious repercussions for several other
British citizens, like Manishs wife and children.
Page | 27
ADR
v24.07
Manish G
All I want is to be able to look after my parents when they need me
most.
Manish is a British citizen of Indian origin, living in the UK for over 8 years.
He made an informed decision to become a British citizen and make UK his primary
residence; the people he met here and our multi-cultural environment were what convinced
him this was the right decision.
He is now concerned however that this decision is now taking him away from his parents in
India parents whose well-being is his responsibility. Parents who have sacrificed their
happiness to raise Manish to be the decent upstanding citizen he is today.
His parents have been through a lot of hardships and now Manish feels it is his turn to take
the weight of their shoulders; to take care of them. Yet he feels helpless because of UKs
immigration rules.
Manish is the sole earner in his family and has been helping them financially for the last few
years while trying his best to visit them every year or invite them over to the UK for a visit.
However the last few years has seen his dads health deteriorating. As a cancer survivor since
2010, things were going well, until 2013 when Manishs dad suffered from severe cardiac
arrest where he narrowly escaped death. Although recovered now, Manish is haunted by a
fear that this could happen again to him.
All Manish wants is to be able to look after his parents in their old age to have them living
here with him so he can look after them. He is prepared to take our fully comprehensive
private healthcare cover to ease the burden on NHS if thats the concern. However the door
has been slammed shut even for those who would not be a burden on taxpayers; even where it
means we lose skilled British citizens to other countries that allow family unity.
Manish is a higher-rate tax payer and has never used any benefits or exercised recourse to
public funds. He earns enough to support his family, including parents yet is being denied
the right to do so. He is not alone in finding UKs immigration rules for adult dependant
relatives vague and ambiguous.
He just wants to be able to look after those that gave him life, when they need him most. Its
not too much to ask.
Page | 28
ADR
v24.07
Montu
My mum is all alone and needs us for financial and emotional
support.
Montu is a British Citizen. He lives in London with his wife and two daughters, both of whom are
British citizens by birth.
As a Chartered Accountant, Montu has had a successful career, working with global organisations. He
is a higher-rate taxpayer, and contributed a six figure sum in taxes to HMRC over the past few years
alone.
Montu was brought up in Kenya, by loving parents, who taught him to be good to and respect the rights
of others, care for the elderly, work hard and live within ones means. These are the very values the
British government is making it difficult for families to adhere to, whilst simultaneously promoting
them and families as the bedrock of our society!
Montus father was the sole breadwinner and took care of the day to day running of the house. However,
his dad recently passed away after over 40 years in a happy marriage, leaving Montus mother
devastated and alone.
She has started to become depressed and her health deteriorating. As anyone who has been through
such an episode would appreciate, it is vital for the surviving spouse to have long term family support
after such an event. As the only son, this responsibility falls to Montu, whose mother is now completely
dependent on him for financial and emotional support.
UKs immigration rules however make it impossible for elderly surviving parents to stay with their
children in the UK, even without recourse to public funds.
Montu is therefore being forced to consider returning to Kenya (where security remains a major
concern) or to move elsewhere in the EU he is being forced into exile just to be able to look after his
widowed mum.
Either option will result in the cessation of Montu's employment in the UK and severe disruption of
family life for Montus wife and daughters, who as British citizens have the right to a British upbringing
and education.
Update: In September 2014, Montu moved to Ireland with his wife and children after obtaining a job
there. His daughters were 6 and 10 at the time. The family plan to relocate back to the UK by the end
of 2015.
When asked how he found the move to Ireland, the response given was highly stressful as the family
had to move abroad in a short space of time. With the move to Ireland Montu took a 45% cut in his
salary, because he had to accept a role which was two levels below his capability, simply because of
lack of demand for senior staff and the timing necessitating he take the first job he get to reunify his
family as soon as possible. This which cut particularly deep what with:
Ireland generally has a higher cost of living
Being unable to find a place in a good state school, Montus children went to private school, at a
cost of over 10,000.
Page | 29
ADR
v24.07
Despite paying for private school, the familys experience is that the quality and level of education
in Ireland is inferior to that in the UK, with the kids finding that much of what they are being taught
in Ireland, they already know from lessons received at their UK school. Montu and his wife worry
that the kids on return to the UK will lag behind the other kids who in this past year will have covered
subjects at a more advanced level.
Higher accommodation costs, with rent in Ireland even though the family went from a 4 bedroom
house with a garden in the UK to a flat in Ireland higher than Montus mortgage in the UK.
The change in accommodation did not affect Montus younger daughter very much, however the
older notices the difference, having to now share a room with her sister and grandma.
Maintaining costs for the UK property including council tax
Education aside, the adjustment on the part of the kids has also not been easy, especially for Montus
elder daughter who was really looking forward to the final year at her primary school. The little girl
occasionally laments over missing this experience and losing her friends.
The move has also meant that savings Montu has built up over time security for his family to ensure
that even in the face of any future adversity, the family would not need to rely on the state - have
depleted. With only enough savings to cover the familys expenses for another 3-4 months, if Montu
does not find a new job in the UK soon after arrival, he will need to claim benefits.
Montu is concerned about finding another job as ageism can be an issue in the City and having taken a
9 month career break before the move to Ireland (not knowing the move was in the pipeline) his CV has
taken a bit of a bashing since the role in Ireland is lower-skilled and thus hard to explain in job
interviews.
His previous employer a multi-national had agreed to hold Montus job only till December 2014.
As company since has been through a tough period resulting in restructuring and hundreds of
redundancies, it is unlikely they will be in any position to take Montu back on.
While with his skills Montu will eventually get a job in the UK, he doesnt think it will be an immediate
return to the salary he enjoyed before the initial move abroad.
However, despite the high price paid in terms of the childrens education, Montus career and the
familys financial security, Montu is grateful for being able to once again live with and look after his
mum. In his words, there is more to life than money and a job.
Page | 30
ADR
v24.07
Nikunj
The reverse discrimination we suffer from as British citizens in the
UK compared with fellow EU citizens, makes British citizenship
second-class
Nikunj is a British citizen, born in Birmingham. He works for an investment bank, while his
wife, Tanya, is a journalist.
The couple wishes to sponsor Tanyas parents, from India, to join them in the UK at some point
in the future, so their kids can grow up with access to both sets of grandparents. However under
the current ADR rules, this is not possible, even though Tanyas mum has suffered from a
stroke.
Tanyas parents have visited the UK several times, and to date, never been refused a visa.
However she wishes for them to settle here once they retire currently both are aged under 60
and working in Finland.
Their only other child, Tanyas brother, lives in the USA.
Nikunj and Tanya are worried at the barriers put up for even British citizens to sponsor their
non-EU relatives, even where the family has sufficient means to look after themselves, with no
recourse to public funds.
They feel that the UK is no longer for the British people; that despite paying exorbitant
application fees, it is only for the Home Office to treat their family as guilty until proven
innocent; that even visit visas are so frequently refused with the Home Office indicating that
the applicant intends to settle in the UK even though the intention in reality is a visit.
The couple is dejected at the reverse discrimination which British citizens in the UK are subject
to, given the ease of using EEA regulations for family reunification for other EU citizens, with
nil or trivial application fees, recourse to public funds and none of the barriers we see under the
UK rules.
Nikunj feels like a second class citizen of the country he was born in.
Page | 31
ADR
v24.07
Noman
My mum has no one in Pakistan as my brother and I live in the
UK. With a cyst causing bouts of unconsciousness, she cannot live
alone.
Noman is a British citizen who lived in Birmingham with his British wife, and three British
kids, currently aged 6 years, 4 years and 8 months. The family now lives in Ireland, exercising
free movement rights as the only means to family reunification.
Noman is a chartered accountant; his wife is a medical doctor who used to work for the NHS
when they lived in the UK. Her departure from the UK was also a loss to the NHS.
The decision to leave the UK was not made lightly, but was an easy one in light of the situation
of Nomans mum who lived alone in Pakistan, aged 60. Nomans dad passed away 14 years
ago and both her other children, Nomans brothers live outside Pakistan too one in the UK,
the other USA. Even Nomans aunt his mums sister lives in USA.
Nomans mum suffers from some health issues; osteo-arthritis, stress, high blood pressure and
in the last year alone, fell unconscious multiple times. CT scans revealed the development of
a cyst close to the brain likely triggering these episodes. The questions around when the next
episode will be, how long it will last, how the mum will cope if she falls unconscious whilst
something is on the cooker or the bath is running, causes fear and panic.and for Noman,
guilt. His mum struggles to stay standing for long, even prays seated in a chair. Doing the
washing and cooking are troublesome given arthritis.
The medical emergency system in Pakistan is virtually nonexistent and there are no registered care homes either, likely
because delegating the care of parents is unheard of in most Asian
cultures, and not something Noman could in good conscience do
anyway.
He was his mums responsibility as a minor; now ageing and in
frail health, she is Nomans responsibility. Noman is the most
financially secure amongst his siblings and thus pays for all his
mums living, travel and medical expenses. Its also important to
him that his own kids be afforded the opportunity to bond with their
grandma.
As is it difficult for the mum to travel alone and with no-one in Pakistan, Noman often took
take time off work to accompany her to or from the UK, or co-ordinated her journey with that
of other family members where possible.
Page | 32
ADR
v24.07
However, given the health issues would only worsen over time, Noman feared for when his
mum would not be able to travel frequently, or at all. Regular long-haul travel is not good for
her health. So whilst in the UK, Noman looking at sponsoring his mums settlement in the UK.
Advice obtained from several solicitors was all the same. It is nigh on impossible to
successfully sponsor a relative under the ADR rules in effect since 9th July 2012. Whilst there
was a glimmer of hope because of the mums health, legal advice warned it would be an
expensive battle money and time wise. However more alarming was being told that a
settlement application is likely to terminate the visit visa route too. Whilst the family does not
baulk at the time and money investment needed to allow the mum to live in UK, the inability
to even have her here for shorter periods in the meantime was too big a risk.
With the mums health deteriorating further, Noman could not let her live alone; there was no
scope for the family to live in Pakistan moving to a country with, relatively inferior education
and medical systems, deteriorating law & order situation, would not be doing his UK-born kids
justice. So Noman and his family did leave the UK after all, moving to Ireland in January 2015.
Noman found a job in his field there, although the pay is half of what he was earning in the
UK, thus not leaving any savings when expenses are allowed for.
The move has also been very stressful for the whole family. Initially it divided the unit, with
Nomans wife and kids remaining in the UK while he relocated to Ireland first, arranging
schools and accommodation, incurring expenses in effectively running homes in two countries.
As the relocation was mid-year, it particularly affected his childrens studies and this along
with Nomans wife having to give up her career, created some friction between the spouses.
Noman felt bad asking the rest of the family to make sacrifices so that he could make suitable
arrangements for his mum, but then that he says is what family is about, making sacrifices for
each other as happens at various points in our lives. Noman just never thought sacrifices would
be needed in a direct impact of the governments policies.
The family currently lives in rented accommodation and are looking at purchasing a property.
Despite the upheaval, Noman points out, At least, we are living together and my mother is
with us and being cared for. On a different soil maybe, but at least my mother is with me!
Page | 33
ADR
v24.07
Oksana
I am my mothers only child, my children her only grandkids. Yet
a government official tells us she cannot even come for a visit.
Oksana is a British citizen who moved to the UK about 15 years ago, after meeting her husband,
with whom she now has two kids. She lives near Edinburgh, in Scotland. Oksana is a fulltime mum. She doesnt work her husband works full time, earning enough to maintain the
family and ensure they have no need to claim any benefits.
Oksana's mum, then 64 years old, lived
alone in Russia. Oksana is the only child.
This is a family very close to each other.
Oksanas mum has visited the UK in the
past, allowing for the much valued
bonding between grandparent and
grandkids.
However, it had been over six years since
she was last here, as the travelling and visa
process have become too difficult what
with a nine hour flight to Moscow (Russia
Oksana, with her mum and kids on holiday in Turkey after
is huge!) for the visa application.
her UK family visit visa was refused.
This made the visit visa refusal the family had in 2013 particularly painful, on grounds of
insufficient documentation on finances.
The family was bemused and dismayed. A simple family visit visa was refused after an
extremely onerous process, yet six years ago it was issued in one day! It is heart wrenching
when a government official has the power to decide close family is not even allowed to visit.
So the family decided they would prefer to apply for a settlement visa to avoid any future visa
hassles, alleviating issues likely to arise in the future given Oksana will need to be there to look
after her mum on a daily basis, and travelling becomes more difficult with the process of ageing.
Oksana lives in a large home where her mum would have her own bedroom. Her mums
pension from Russia could be transferred to the UK. The family is happy to purchase private
health insurance and also sign a guarantee that there will not be any need to access benefits.
Her mum speaks decent English and has made lots of friends on her earlier visits, so integration
is not a problem either. Yet the settlement visa was also not suited given the incredibly
restrictive immigration rules for adult dependant relatives.
Oksana could not abandon her mum - so her family relocated to Malta. They lived and worked
there, enjoying being together. Several months later, circumstances changed but luckily the
family were able to continue to use their free movement rights to move to the UK, this time
with Oksana's mum in tow. The family is extremely happy that despite the Home Office rules
that otherwise would have separated the family, despite the stress of integration in a new
country, relocation not once but twice and consequent financial implications, love prevailed.
Page | 34
ADR
v24.07
Olya
I am the only child of my mum who is 69 years old. I cannot leave
her alone nor deprive my son of access to his grandma.
Olya has been a British citizen since 2002. She came to the UK as an international student, and
has been working for the NHS since 2008, as an IT engineer.
Olya owns her own house but with no family in the UK other than her
one-year old son, who is British by birth and to whom she is a single
parent. Olyas mum is widowed and now 69 years old, lives alone in
Russia.
For Olyas son, his family entirely consists of Olya and his grandma.
If the ADR rules dont change, Olya will leave the UK to settle in another country, taking her
NHS training and experience with her. Having made the UK her home though, and it being the
country of her sons birth, this is something Olya is hoping she does not have to do though.
Page | 35
ADR
v24.07
Puneet
It is my turn to do the looking after now.
Puneet is a British citizen who lives in London with his British wife, and British son.
He came to the UK in early 2006, for a company assignment on a work permit, subsequently
choosing to naturalise as a British citizen, and thus renounced his Indian citizenship.
Having devoted the last nine years to the UK, helping businesses like Vodafone, Ladbrokes,
TUI achieve significant milestones and contribute to our economy, Puneet has been rewarded
with regular promotions and is now a Senior Architect in a digital consulting company, also in
London. Puneet is a law-abiding citizen, duly paying his taxes and NI, a regular donor to UK
charities and places no burden on taxpayers.
With his career going from strength to strength, Puneet wishes to see his family as a complete
unit, thereby wants to sponsor his parents (both now aged 63 and living in India). He feels it
is also his duty to take care of their well-being in their old age, ensure his son has sufficient
time to spend with the grandparents, and vice-versa, in order to enable a strong bond to develop
between them. Puneet strongly feels that the current rules for sponsoring adult dependant
relatives means he, his wife, their son and his parents are all missing out on each others
company and love from being able to live together as the one unit they are.
Underlying feelings of missing out on
something, is a strong sense of guilt and
resentment.
Puneet is disheartened that though British,
with no right of abode anywhere else, he isnt
allowed to exercise the very basic human right
to live with family, to take care of his parents
when they need him most.
Puneet with his parents and son (his wife is behind the camera)
If the rules are not changed, Puneet has indicated that he will with almost complete certainty
need to leave the UK in order to be somewhere he can look after them, as taking care of them
in their old age, is a top priority. It is also an important lesson in life that Puneet wants to teach
his son that looking after ones parents is a must.
However, what this means for these other two British citizens in the family Puneets wife and
son, remains uncertain. Will the family break up with Puneet forced to stay away from his wife
and son to take care of his parents or will a British child miss out on a British upbringing and
education? Puneet is torn between taking care of his parents and ensuring a bright future for his
son.
The irony is that with Puneet forced out of the UK it is likely his employer would replace him,
a British citizen, with a foreign national! Surely this lays false to the governments claims that
the rules encourage integration?
Page | 36
ADR
v24.07
Ravi
My parents are alone in India as both my sister and I live here. Aged
70 and 80, they should not have to fend for themselves when we are
willing and able to look after them.
Ravi lives in the UK with his wife and daughter. Having arrived here in 2009, Ravi is now an ILR
holder and eligible for citizenship in March 2016.
An IT professional and entrepreneur one of the brightest and best UK politicians go to India to woo
Ravi provides his services to clients across the UK, mainly in the engineering and banking sectors, often
thought to be the backbone of the UK economy.
Ravi chose the UK as much as UK chose him, as he was offered a very good career opportunity, because
he believed that UK respected family life and certainly afforded its citizens and residents with fair
opportunities to live with immediate family, especially when with no recourse to public funds!
Ravis wife, also an ILR holder is a highly skilled professional working in the R&D department of a
multinational company, which has its development centre in the UK.
The couple has worked very hard with no recourse to public funds to build their life and career in
the UK, returning to the country in multiples by way of taxes and contributions to society, for the
opportunities they have been given.
Ravis mum and dad are aged around 70 and 80
years respectively; they live in India by
themselves, in an apartment belonging to Ravi, on
whom they are dependent financially and
otherwise. Both parents have mobility issues;
neither can drive and there is only so much even
good-hearted neighbours will do.
Ravi is very close to his parents; prior to moving
to the UK he lived in the same household as his
parents. There is no other immediate family
around as Ravis only other sibling, Veena, also Ravi with his mum and dad, on holiday
lives in the UK where she is a doctor working for
the NHS. As Veena tends to the needs of those already in the UK, her own parents are left to fend for
themselves, even in times of ill health.
Ravis daughter is also very close to her grandparents; even when Ravi and his wife lived in India, she
was looked after by her grandparents who provided the day to day care she needed as both Ravi and his
wife worked.
When Ravis wife joined him in the UK in February 2010, the little girl stayed alone with her
grandparents, who then became her primary carers until September 2010, allowing Ravi and his wife to
establish a life for themselves without worrying about entrusting their childs care to strangers in a
foreign country. When in December 2011 the grandparents indicated they were lonely and missed their
granddaughter, Ravi and his wife agreed she could spend an extended period living with them in India
again, where once again the grandparents became primary carers until April 2012.
The little girl is therefore especially close to her grandparents, and for them, she has been the focal point
in their lives when they otherwise would have been alone. The three miss each other very much; the
cuddles and affection so often a part of the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren.
Page | 37
ADR
v24.07
Contrary to the impression many have, that domestic help in India is cheap, the cost is increasing at a
dramatic pace, but the real problem is that its unreliable, disorganised and requires placing a lot of trust
in complete strangers the concept of criminal checks equivalent to UKs CRB checks, doesnt really
exist. Elderly known to have their only family overseas are likely to be vulnerable to scamsters.
Earlier in 2015, Ravis dad was hospitalised. His mum neglected to inform Ravi, not wanting him to
worry from afar. She thus tended to her husband alone whilst also battling her own diabetes and severe
arthritis. Later when Ravi discovered this, he indicated this pained me a lot, I cursed myself for the
helplessness.
The guilt invoked at being unable to be there for those who gave us life is difficult to explain in words;
not only can he not be there physically for his parents, or have them join him in the UK, but that they
feel as if they cant even tell him when one of them is ill, lest it cause him more stress, is hard to accept,
especially when Ravi is only in the UK because of sacrifices his parents made. Ravi curses himself for
being unable to be there during both the hard and happy times.
Ravi indicates that because of work commitments, its not possible for either him or his sister to leave
their work and take a long-haul flight to India every time they are sick of need medical attention. But
this means that despite having raised two caring, financially-independent children, his parents are now
in fact forced to be all alone.
With his mum suffering from depression, Ravis father also looks after her even while having health
issues himself. Its symbiotic relationship as families so often involve.
But its not just about providing care for
physical ailments. Its about being there for
each other. Having a cup of chai with your
dad, watching sitcoms with your mum,
playing with the drapes of your grandmas sari
for the little girl its the small things that end
up being memorable and thus missed.
Ravis sister, Veena, did consider sponsoring
their parents citizenship back in 2010, under
the old rules. However they did not want to
move then. They had a good social life in
India, in familiar surroundings. Moving to a
new country at this age, did not really appeal.
Ravi, his wife, face-painted daughter and grandparents.
However, now their friends in India all live with their own children and grandchildren; at social events,
they are the only ones alone while others come with their complete family there is a clear void in their
lives.
This elderly couple is lonely, understandably pining for what they see around them on a daily basis.
However, as parents who do not even let their children know when they are hospitalised, lest it cause
worry, the couple is keen to not disrupt the lives Ravi and Veena have worked hard to establish here
and have indicated that they want to move to the UK if it is not too much trouble for Ravi and Veena.
Ravi is bemused as to why his parents cant live with him. A hard-working, law-abiding, net contributor,
he just wants to be able to spend some time looking after his own parents in their old age.
Page | 38
ADR
v24.07
His parents would have no recourse to public funds, but Ravi is willing to also sign a bond that as their
sponsors, the rest of his family, even when British citizens, will not avail of any benefits for whatever
number of years is required. He is also ready to take out private health insurance to address the NHS
concerns.
Ravi and his sister are perfectly capable of taking care of their parents, and ensuring they wont be a
burden on the state. Yet they are made to feel like second class citizens denied the basic human right
and responsibility to take care of family.
There is also concern for the impact of the absence of grandparents in Ravis daughters life as
grandparents so often are the ones who teach their grandchildren about their language, heritage and
culture; its a very special bond.
If the rules are not changed to allow sponsorship of his parents, Ravi will leave his adopted country and
live where he can look after his parents.
Page | 39
ADR
v24.07
Rohit
My parents are dependent on me. While I can tend to their financial
needs from afar, emotional support can only be provided living as a
family.
Rohit is a British citizen who came to the UK from India in 2007 on a company sponsored visa
to support IT projects and finance processes for a UK based company. Since then he has
contributed to UKs economy by paying hundreds of thousands in income taxes, helping grow
several businesses with his contribution as an individual. With professional success has also
come a personal dream to have a similarly rewarding family life.
Currently working as an IT Project Manager/Business Analyst for UKs leading pharmaceutical
company, Rohit supports critical IT projects for the greater good of patients.
His wife is a Slovakian national, who also works full time. The couple own their 4 bedroom
house in London, and dont see any challenges in financially supporting their family currently
in India, once they move to the UK. The family there consists of Rohits parents, aged 63 and
72 years, and his sister, also dependent on Rohit.
The family made use of EEA
regulations (on the basis of Rohits wife
being an EU citizen) and applied for a
UK family permit for the mum, dad and
sister.
However, despite application of EEA
regulations
being
reasonably
straightforward, especially when the
sponsor is a non-British EEA citizen,
the application was refused.
Rohit hugging his wife, his parents are seated, and his sister in the striped top,
on a visit to India.
Rohit is certain the caseworker did not even read the applications or supporting documentation
properly based on the reasons for refusal instead he feels the caseworker from the outset
intended to refuse.
The reasons for refusal are bizarre; evidence of money transfers was provided going as far back
as 8 years (coinciding with the period Rohit has been in the UK) yet the letter indicates wanting
to see evidence of dependency for 19 years! Rohits parents and sisters only source of income
is that which they receive from Rohit, but because the funds for 8 years have been transferred
to a joint account, the Home Office claims that perhaps Rohit was transferring the funds on a
monthly basis to India for his own use there, without explaining how Rohit could have been
withdrawing funds from a bank or ATM in India, whilst being physically present in the UK!
The application made referred to Rohits parents health deteriorating; his father had a heart
attack in 2013 with ongoing difficulties with arthritis and his eyesight, whilst his mum suffers
from continuous cervical pain, high blood pressure and asthma.
Page | 40
ADR
v24.07
Receipts for the medical treatment were also provided to further show the dependency on Rohit
of his parents. However, this was also considered a reason for refusal by way of Home Office
saying that clearly because the medical
treatment had been sought and received, it
indicated this treatment was available in
India and thus the parents did not need to be
in the UK! The mind boggles as under EEA
regulations, where financial dependency
exists, especially at the level in this case, poor
health is not a requirement!
Rohit wants his parents and sister here in
order to be able to look after them personally;
to provide much needed emotional support
which may well alleviate some of the Bittersweet goodbye as Rohit is on his way back to the UK
physical symptoms. He also hopes that with a baby due in October 2015, his family has a
chance to be a complete unit, with the grandparents playing a part in the babys upbringing.
If his family were not able to be in the UK, the only option for Rohit would be to leave the UK
for a country which does respect family life. Accepting the change in home, jobs, salary is
unlikely to be easy. UK would also lose two taxpaying talented individuals, along with their
contribution to society.
Despite the refusal, Rohit is aware he can more easily avail of EEA regulations, but is astounded
by the reverse discrimination for British citizens by way of the ADR rules as compared with
the more family-friendly EEA regulations, and that even which the Home Office is not applying
lawfully (he is in the process of appealing).
Rohit simply wants the UK government to allow his family to live as just that, to live the Great
British Dream.
Page | 41
ADR
v24.07
Sarwat
As a doctor, I spend my life looking after other peoples parents and
grandparents, yet Im being told I cant look after my own mother.
Dr Sarwat is a British citizen and a doctor working on a geriatrics ward in an NHS hospital.
She looks after old peopleproviding her patients with the best care possible at a time when
they need support the most. As she helps other peoples elderly parents and grandparents, the
one person she is unable to help is her own mother.
The one person she regrets not being able to look after, hold the hand of, have a cup of tea with,
support and see on a daily basis, is her own mother living alone in Pakistan.
Here is someone who spends her life looking after our aged, and we are denying her the right
to look after the one person who gave her life.
Dr Sarwat is intelligent. She understands the rules now make it impossible for her to have her
mother live with herto have her mother live with her in the UK.
She is intelligent. She understands the rules are forcing her to choose between her home
country, albeit adopted, and her parent.
She is intelligent. She will in all likelihood make the right choice. But at what cost to our
country, our people, our patients and our beloved NHS?
Page | 42
ADR
v24.07
Saurabh
Why is the policy in the UK so inhumane in comparison to even
countries like China which promote looking after elderly parents?
Saurabh is a British citizen living here with his wife and son, also British. His parents live alone
in India. He is appalled that changes to the immigration rules mean an effective ban on elderly
parents being allowed to live with their children in UK, despite no recourse to public funds.
Saurabh and his wife both work and earn a decent salary, paying their fair share of taxes. They
own their house and fail to understand why if they are willing to accommodate and look after
their parents, at their own expense, the government interferes in their family life. His parents
are not scroungers, nor will they take someones job. They are not entitled to benefits. They
simply want to spend the remaining years with their son, daughter-in-law and grandson.
Saurabhs son turned four in July 2015 has been fortunate to spend some time in the company
of his grandparents. Saurabh is keen for this bond to continue and strengthen; to cultivate the
sense of family values in his son which can only come by what his son will see and experience.
When his son sees other children with their grandparents, he asks Saurabh, where is my
granny? Saurabh has no answer; how do you explain to a child the politics involved in
immigration rules designed to drive out British citizens?
Saurabh is having trouble reconciling the policy in the UK now, with that even in communist
states like China, where the government actively promotes family bonding, integration and
looking after elderly parents to the extent of passing a law to mandate this.4 This is a stark
contrast with UK practice, where the government promotes elderly to spend old age in solitude.
For Saurabh, if the rules dont change soon, he will be forced to uproot his whole family all
British citizens and move to a country where he can fulfil his duty and desire to be there for
his parents. He understands this is what the government wants increasing emigration whilst
reducing immigration is the only way they will satisfy their net migration target. However it
is not right that British citizens are forced out of their own country. That a British child is
denied a British education and upbringing.
The rules to date have already seen professionals leaving the UK, moving to countries which
allow elderly parents to join them. Saurabh believes this trend will continue, as more and more
British professionals find themselves impacted by rules preventing looking after those who
gave us life.
If the concern is a burden on the NHS, a more humane solution is to mandate private healthcare
cover. Why did the government not just do that?
Saurabh questions whether it is right to raise his son in a society which prevents elderly
dependent parent from living with their children what kind of example will this set for his
son?
Page | 43
ADR
v24.07
Shailendra
Poor immigration rules which lead to breaking up of families, will
only keep away highly skilled migrants and economic contributors.
Shailendra is a British citizen living with his wife and children, now aged five and one, who
are also British citizens. Shailendra is an Associate Director at an investment bank and both
he and his wife are high earners; they pay their taxes and contribute to National Insurance.
Shailendra came here on a Highly Skilled Visa (Tier 1) and has been working hard ever since,
yes to earn a decent salary to better his own quality of life, but also contributing to the British
economy all without claiming any benefits.
Shailendra is looking forward to spending the rest of his life here, having already established
himself here.
However, he wants his dependent and ageing parents, currently in India, to live with them, in
order to be able to take care of them, whilst also living as complete a family life as possible.
Culturally, it is the norm for children to look after ageing parents personally, rather than
outsource the care.
While Shailendras parents currently manage on visit visas, with the onset of the difficulties
which come with age, it is difficult for them to travel regularly. They are not jumping over
themselves to move to the UK. Leaving India and all that is familiar to them is not an easy
decision. However they are willing to relocate just so Shailendra does not have to sacrifice his
family, career, friends and home in the UK. However, the settlement visa regulations for
parents is making Shailendra re-consider his future.
Shailendras roots are in India, a country known for its rich culture and close ties with UK.
However, what the ADR rules do not make any allowance for is the close relationship that
Indian children share with their parents who are an integral part of the family anywhere, but
especially in Asia where the definition of family includes "parents, spouse and children".
Shailendra misses having a complete family. His older child especially, just like Shailendra
himself, shares a very strong bond with the grandparents, both over 60 and financially
dependent on Shailendra.
They need care due to their age related health issues and just sending money is not enough as
it defies the purpose of living together as a family, which is "to support each other in every
stage of life".
Most importantly, Shailendra wants to spend his life with his parents, care for them, and provide
them the same opportunity to live and develop closer bonds with his kids as they would have
got in India or anywhere else. Indeed, the same opportunity which Shailendra himself had with
his own grandparents.
Shailendra is bemused. He is self-sufficient, does not require any public funds and has the
means to look after his parents without any help. He is willing to sign a waiver for his own
access to state funds, provide a guarantee or deposit or bonds, and take private healthcare cover
for his parents to alleviate any such fears this government might have nonetheless.
Page | 44
ADR
v24.07
But it seems that the government has completely overlooked a very important aspect of
immigration, thus forcing him to consider leaving the UK just to be able to reunite with his
parents.
With Shailendra will go his taxes, disposable income and skills. Indeed, he is being sought by
agencies for roles in Germany and Ireland. With Shailendra will also go his wife and children,
and their right to a British education and upbringing.
However, he doesnt want to leave his home, however lucrative other offers. He cannot believe
that he has to go into exile just because the UK government cannot understand the value of a
very simple family relationship and definition of "family member".
Shailendra is aware that by exercising treaty rights he may be able to return to the UK with his
parents using the Surinder Singh route. The nature of UKs rules taking into account free
movement rights strikes him as particularly bizarre.
Several months of unsettling his life in UK, uprooting his wife and children, leaving his job
(thereby jeopardising his familys financial security) all so as to by the end live in the UK
with his parents, without recourse to public funds. What a convoluted process to achieve the
same aim of family reunification in the UK!
Rather than denying people their basic rights, Shailendra feels the government should make it
fairer and possible to reunite family members the value this brings to the community is cannot
be quantified.
Else, poor immigration rules will only keep away highly skilled migrants and economic
contributors, which UK desperately needs if we are to compete in the global environment for
quality resource with countries like USA, Australia, India, China, Germany and Russia.
Page | 45
ADR
v24.07
Shaun*
I earn over 100,000 - enough to look after my ageing & ill mum
without recourse to public funds. Yet Im told she doesnt qualify. So
who does?
Shaun is a British citizen, earning over 100,000 in the financial sector specialising in pharmaceuticals.
He doesnt normally show off his level of income. But its necessary to now to show his ability to
support his mother in the UK; provide the care, attention and love she needs, without recourse to public
funds. Something he is being told he is not allowed to do.
Shauns mother is around 70 years old, living in Sri Lanka. Shaun has dutifully visited her, helping her
receive medical attention for her worsening memory loss. Unfortunately, mental health issues are
under-diagnosed in Sri Lanka, as they often are in developing countries; things we take for granted the
early diagnosis of, are usually put down simply to old age, without any therapy, treatment or care.
Shaun however knew these symptoms were not usual. He persisted and found a doctor willing to
conduct a detailed testing. Results and an MRI scan indicate Shauns mothers condition is likely due
to Alzheimers disease, compounded by depression and a silent stroke.
His mother also has a history of high sugar & cholesterol - having had one stroke, shes at a higher risk
of another. But memory loss means she often forgets to take medicines, increasing the risk of heart
failure and another stroke. She cannot be left alone. She cannot cook as she often forgets the stove is
on. The doctor has recommended she not drive, as even familiar roads are often forgotten. Other
cognitive functions are fine, but are expected to deteriorate.
Shauns mother does not live alone. She is not a single parent, nor is she a widow. She lives with her
husband. But a husband who is verbally abusive and unsympathetic of her medical conditions or needs.
The situation has been escalating over the last 10 years; with both the parents residing in different rooms
of a housesomehow feeling lucky if they have managed to avoid each other all day.
It isnt easy for Shaun to admit his parents are only together because of cultural and social stigmas
preventing them from getting a divorce. Its no doubt difficult for any child to face, however much of
an adult you become.
However Shaun is facing it. He is an only child and while he calls his mother on a daily basis, he knows
she is lonely. She needs Shaun in the same way Shaun needed her years ago. Roles are reversed and
Shaun wont turn his back on the person who nurtured, provided for, looked after and loved, him.
Shaun has looked into finding home-help as a temporary albeit not ideal solution. Home help is paid
help. It is people coming in to do a job, one that can only really be carried out by family, a role which
Shaun feels should be carried out by family. The situation with his parents also means home-help is
difficult to find, because of the constant tension between the parents and the fear that outsiders will find
out the details of what is an extremely private and delicate situation.
Other than his daily phone call, Shauns mother doesnt get the opportunity to converse or interact with
anyone. This lack of stimulation exacerbates her depression and mental deterioration. Shaun feels
helpless as his mother slowly deteriorates into a semi-vegetative state a mother who he so badly wants
to have return to her happy, active and vivacious self.
Update: Shaun has left the UK and is now living in a country which does allow for the sponsorship of
parents.
Page | 46
ADR
v24.07
Sree
I have paid over 100,000 in taxes and NI contributions in five years.
All I want is for my mother to stay with us and have the means to
look after her without recourse to public funds.
Sree is a British citizen from Middlesex. Her mother is 70 years old and prior to Sree exercising free
movement rights, lived alone in India. Srees dad died in 1993 and her only other child lives in USA.
Srees mum is not highly educated, relying on Sree for financial and emotional support since becoming
a widow. Dependency which has only increased with age. Srees mum chose not to re-marry to ensure
Sree remained her priority. An incredibly unselfish choice. It is now Srees turn to respond in kind for
the sacrifices made.
Srees mum has visited UK regularly; although more recently travelling long-haul proves more difficult.
In order to facilitate visit visas it was necessary for Srees mum to be self-sufficient, so Sree transferred
properties and money into her mothers name. As Srees mum does not yet have any major physical
care needs, the appearance of her as the applicant being financially sound presented yet another barrier
in the already insurmountable ADR rules.
To Sree, her mother is a vital, integral, member of the family
unit she is not extended family. Her mother has seen Sree
get married, helped her during the early days of motherhood
and then been there for the break-up of her marriage.
Srees two sons have also spent a vast amount of time with
their grandmother, having been raised by her from 2008, when
they were aged 6 and 12, until their move to the UK to join
Sree, in 2012. The boys initially stayed back in India because
of UK visa restrictions.
The bond between grandmother and grandchildren is very strong
because of the primary (sole) parent role played by Srees mum since
2008. Indeed, Sree admits that even now, to the kids, their
grandmother is more of a mother to them than she herself is.
To have left her mother alone in India would be akin to casting her
aside now that she has fulfilled her purpose in raising Sree and the
two boys. There is also an underlying sense of duty - to look after
her mother and not tear apart grandchildren from their grandmother.
Though reasonably physically able, the natural process of ageing and stress from being apart from all
family for protracted periods since 2012 has broken her a bit, with management of daily chores also
difficult. The children are emotionally bonded to her and it broke their hearts as well to see someone
they love so much suffering alone.
Sree is self-employed, with extensive experience working in the IT department of a major life science
company. During her entire life in the UK, Sree has worked and paid her taxes promptly, never availing
of any state benefits. She is a higher-rate tax payer, and in the five years to April 2013 alone, paid over
100,000 in taxes and National Insurance contributions.
Page | 47
ADR
v24.07
Sree is financially secure enough to support her mum without recourse to public funds and if UK allowed
for sponsoring elderly relatives, would have been willing to take out private health insurance, provide a
monetary bond and guarantees.
Sree has paid a huge amount in taxes without ever claiming anything in return. All she wanted was for
the chance to stay with her mum, so UKs rules left Sree feeling gutted. Her mother has always been
there for them, and now they were being denied the right to provide a safe and secure life for her in
return.
The rules left Sree reconsidering the decision to live in the UK, as horror at the rules and sadness and
guilt for what they meant ate her alive.
Finding that she could do as an EU citizen what she couldnt as a British citizen have her mum live
with her felt very much like a lifeline.
Page | 48
ADR
v24.07
Tejinder
I am being forced to choose between my wife & kids, and my elderly
parents.
Tejinder is a British citizen living in Birmingham with his British wife and two British children.
He had arrived in the UK in 2005 to gain international experience in his domain. He grew to
like the country, bought a house and naturalised in 2011.
Tejinder is one of three children. His younger brother lives in Switzerland, and his parents and
sister in India. His sister graduated from Leicester University with an MSc in bio-informatics,
before returning to India to look after their parents.
Tejinders mum is over 65 years old and his dad 70. He is a retired senior class one officer
who used to work for the Indian government. A dad who did all he could for his son.
They have visited Tejinder and their grandchildren many times on a family visit visa. However
travelling back and forth is not very easy anymore and Tejinders sister cant cope looking after
them on her own.
So in May 2012, Tejinder sold his house, uprooted his wife and children and moved to India to
fulfil his responsibility to look after his parents the old rules he felt were not easy to satisfy
either, although the current rules are impossible. When his wife and kids couldnt adjust to life
in India, finding it too foreign, too different, too un-British, Tejinder had no choice but for the
four of them to return to the UK in 2013.
Tejinder remains racked with guilt at having abandoned his parents but also feels that he cannot
abandon his wife and kids, or expect them to live in a country that is alien to them.
UKs immigration rules have slammed the door shut on Tejinder being able to look after his
parents, with no recourse to public funds. This man is at a loss as to what to do next and the
only option seems to be to go move to another EEA country, exercising the treaty rights
afforded to him by the EU for family reunification a right so clearly denied by his own
government.
Page | 49
ADR
v24.07
Veena
If my parents cannot move to the UK, my husband and I, an
anaesthetist and microbiologist, may need to take our skills and NHS
training to another country.
See also: Ravi (above)
Veena is a British citizen, living in the UK since 2004, with her husband and two sons, who
also are British citizens.
Both Veena and her husband are doctors in the NHS, serving our country in a much valued
profession for a much revered institution. Veena is a microbiologist, and her husband an
anaesthetist.
The couple has worked very hard to build their lives and career in UK.
Grateful for the opportunity they have found in the UK, they have made it their home, paying
taxes and looking after our sick and elderly.
Veenas mum and dad are around 70 and 80 years old respectively; they live alone in India
with no other family there. Veenas only sibling, Ravi, a software engineer, lives in the UK
too. Veena concurs with Ravis account of the impact of the rules on their family being
unable to be there for their mum and dad is painful, looking after others in the UK, seeing them
accompanied by their children strikes a chord at the realisation that her parents remain alone
on such visits to the doctor.
With her son now 13 years old, Veena also wishes to have her parents here for him. Her son
spent his early years in India, and is thus especially attached to Veenas parents.
If Veenas parents are not allowed to be in the UK, her family faces a very difficult choice,
between leaving all they have worked to build in the UK, interrupting their sons education to
uproot and move countries again, to abandoning her parents.
The family feels this is not right they have the means to look after their parents in the UK
without any burden on taxpayers. They just want the opportunity to do so.
Page | 50
ADR
v24.07
Yana
As British citizens we have fewer rights in Britain than our EU
friends and even their non-EU partners.
Yana is a British citizen and lives in Edinburgh with John, her British husband and her two
British children.
Yana has a wide and varied circle of international friends - Patrick from Ireland married to Jing
from China, Andy a Scot married to Katarina from Poland, Jos from Spain married to Lisa
from Argentina, and Mike from Netherlands married to Olga from Russia. Then there are Yana
and John, both Brits. Indeed, Yana recognises, through her friends circle, that what makes
Britain great is how multicultural we are. This is what makes our country rich.
They come in all different shapes and sizes; Jos prefers coffee to tea and Jing goes for rice
over potatoes. But when this group meets up, they have a good time together, comparing stories
about families and experiences from around the world. Yana is reminded how small the world
is and how we all share the same common wishes and experiences: the desire to give our
children the best possible start in life, the longing to be together as a family and the heartache
from being apart from your loved ones.
Theres not much to tell Yana apart from her friends until it comes to UKs immigration rules.
This is where Yana and John, both as British citizens are the odd ones out and therefore
disadvantaged.
Yanas mum is a Russian citizen, living in Russia on her own since Yanas dad died in a car
crash two and a half years ago. Yana has no other siblings to help look after her mum.
After many years of waiting, in 2012, Yana
and John were fortunate to be blessed with
twin girls. Yanas mum retired from her job
to come to the UK for six months on a visitor
visa to help with the babies. Following the
difficult years after Yanas dads tragic and
unexpected death, it was good to see her mum
happy again and engaging with her
granddaughters.
Yana is therefore keen to have her mum live
with them, with no burden on the State.
John, Yana, her mum and the twins (spot the tartan!)
Under the previous immigration rules this would have been possible and they were planning to
apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain; however, following the introduction of the new
immigration rules in July this year, Yana is in total despair as the route has effectively been
completely closed off.
The situation is causing severe distress; instead of enjoying motherhood Yana spends most of
her day desperately trying to find a solution.
Page | 51
ADR
v24.07
The new rules have set the proof of dependency so high that it is actually impossible to foresee
any circumstances whereby a visa would be granted to a parent of a British citizen. Should the
sponsor earn a reasonable salary, its deemed they can afford to pay for care in the parents
home country; if the sponsor doesnt earn a reasonable salary, they cant prove they can support
their parent without recourse to public funds. So with money or without it, elderly parents are
blocked from the country.
As these rules apply only to UK citizens, within Yanas circle of friends they are the only ones
affected, because both her and husband are British.
Even a non-EU citizen living in the UK with their EEA or Swiss spouse or civil partner can
bring their family members (children, grandchildren, parents, grandparents, brothers, sisters
and cousins) into the UK so long as their EU partner can show a family member is dependent
on them. So, for example, a Russian citizen married to a citizen of France, Germany, Poland,
Hungary, etc. can bring their Russian mother to live permanently with them in the UK, but
Yana and John, as British citizens, are denied that same right, in their own country.
Yana is being penalised because she has a mother who is not British, and thus is deprived of
the right to live comfortably with her family in the country of which she herself is a citizen.
Why? Since coming to the UK, Yana has studied at her own expense, volunteered with
charities, worked hard, paid taxes. She has never claimed benefits.
As parents, Yana and John want to stay in their own country and raise their kids to be British,
but if they do this, then they are being told by the current government that they must abandon
Yanas mother and that she has to be vegetating before her entry to the UK can even be
considered (and even then it would be rejected under the current rules). They do have the
option of exercising free movement rights in order to unite their family, but feel it is unfair that
families are forced to make such choices, just because theyre British.
Update: Yana, John, their twins and Yanas mum moved to Ireland, exercising their EU treaty
rights to live together as a family. About a year later the family relocated to the UK, extending
their use of treaty rights under what is commonly known as the Surinder Singh route.
The couple were able to make the move to Ireland only because of Yanas redundancy payment
and Johns Scottish employer allowing him to take voluntary severance. They feel the longterm costs while hard to calculate are significant in terms of lost earnings and reduced pension.
Yana found a part-time job in Ireland, but with John unable to find suitable work, the family
lived mainly on their savings. It was particularly hard financially and with the twins to be
living in B&Bs for the first few weeks while they sought permanent accommodation.
The couple were able to rent out their home in Edinburgh which helped ease the burden
somewhat, though living in Ireland cut into their savings because of expenditure on things
like healthcare mainly for the twins, and around 2500 incurred in relocation costs to and
from Ireland; moving possessions from Cork to Edinburgh cost 800 just on its own.
John moved back to Scotland a few months before the rest of the family as he was successful in
getting a job there. This meant the family was living apart from each other from March till
May, creating additional stress and expense with his trips back to see the family on weekends,
at 120 each time.
Page | 52
ADR
v24.07
Yulia
It is essential that my baby grows up knowing my side of the family.
Yulia is a British citizen, born in Ukraine where she lived with her mother, Tatyana and brother
Sergey. At the age of six, the family moved to Uzbekistan, following Tatyanas job as Manager
of Quality Control and Laboratory at a card and paper factory.
Yulia came to the UK on a work visa three times between the ages of 19 and 23, working at a
telecommunications company. She returned to the UK in 2001, at the age of 24 and naturalised
as a British citizen in 2005. From the year 2001 to 2014, Yulia worked full-time, paying into
the system by way of taxes.
Whilst Yulia was building a life in the UK, her brother moved to Russia and her mum to USA
because of the lack of jobs suited to her qualifications in Uzbekistan and Russia. Tatyana
continued to help support both Yulia and her brother.
In 2010, Yulias brother Sergey passed away. A devastating loss to Yulia and Tatyana, the
resulting grief bringing them even closer. It was at this point, having lost a loved one, they
realised the fragility of life, deciding they make the most of life by spending it together.
So Tatyana started the process for Yulias visa for America, where the processing time is eight
years for a non-married child over 21 years of age, but it is automatic in the end, so just a matter
of waiting. However, whilst this application was being processed, Yulia met Mike. They met
in 2012, married in 2014 and chose to reside in Liverpool, where Mike was born.
When Yulia fell pregnant, she gave up her job to be a stay-at-home mum. Were Yulias mum
able to live in the UK, she would stay in their spare room, or in a second property Yulia
owns. Even disregarding the no recourse to public funds, Tatyana would not be a burden on
the taxpayer.
Aged 60, Tatyana is physically able and the family wants to be together to share their lives even
while Tatyana is able to do things for herself. Tatyana has worked all her life, she wants to
come here and work too, to pay into the system; as someone who speaks English, Russian,
Ukrainian and even some Polish, Tatyana would be an asset in the Liverpool community with
a large Russian/Polish community, so finding a job wouldnt be a hardship.
Page | 53
ADR
v24.07
Tatyana devoted her own youth to making choices solely for the betterment of her children, it
thus pains Yulia to see her mum all alone now.
Baby Nadia full name Nadia Anne Tatyana, Anne being Mikes mums name, reflects the
importance of both grandmothers in the lives of this family - was born in February
2015. Tatyana visited for two weeks in March where she got to hold her only grandchild and
it is important to Yulia that Tatyana does play an active role in Nadias life.
It is essential that the family unit is complete, so that Nadia can grow up knowing her grandma
her only living relative on Yulias side of the family. Yulia meanwhile misses having her
mum here, while her little baby girl is growing every day.
As the current ADR rules would not even allow for Yulias mum to live in the UK once she
were 65 years old, the family is due to restart their American visa application, this time
including Mike and Nadia on it.
As Yulia is married, the original application - still in place - will need to be adjusted, and again
the family waits.
However, the dilemma faced by this family is that Mike doesnt wish to leave his family behind
something Yulia empathises with, having lived apart from her own mum for a very long time.
Relocating would thus break up this family - Yulia and Mike would have to leave Mikes
parents, sister, niece, uncles and aunties behind, not to mention the friends made over the years.
It would make so much more sense both financial and emotionally for Tatyana to move here,
so a British man doesnt have to leave his country and family, the British-based family doesnt
have to lose Mike and his little unit, a British child can grow up in the UK with all of her
immediate family, and a British wife and mum, albeit naturalised, doesnt have to choose
between her adopted home and her mum.
Page | 54
ADR
v24.07
Zack
As an openly gay man, I cannot move to Pakistan to look after my
72 year old mother.
Zack is a 41-year old British citizen, born and raised in Pakistan. He moved to the UK when he was 21
years of age and has not been back to Pakistan since 1996. As an openly gay man, Zack does not feel
safe there.
Zacks mother is also from Pakistan. She lives in Karachi on her own, after her husband, Zacks dad,
died 16 years ago. There is no family in Pakistan who can help look after her, as only family around is
her 78 year old sister who is disabled and an 82 year old brother who is in the process of moving to
United Arab Emirates to live with his son.
Her other siblings live in the UK a younger sister who is a retired teacher living in London (residing
in the UK for 40 years) and two brothers who are very well established, having lived in the UK for 47
years. She is very close to them and with Zack, her only child, living here too, she has very strong ties
to the UK, coming every year on a visit visa.
However, now 72 years old, the process of applying for a visa every couple of years is too onerous.
Zack is also very concerned for her well-being, as there is no one physically around to support and help
her when symptoms of her severe arthritis and high blood pressure flair up. He worries about her safety
too, living alone there.
Zack has been in a relationship with a fellow Brit for the past 16 years, now his civil partner. They both
work full-time; Zack for a prison charity and his partner a barrister/academic.
While they cannot leave everything to move to Pakistan, if nothing else for reasons of safety, the couple
is financially in a position to take full responsibility for Zacks mums expenses if she were to be allowed
to come and stay with them. Zack is the only family she has who can look after her and Zack feels very
sad that the current immigration rules prevent him from doing just that, unless he gives up his home,
husband and career. Unless he gives up his life to go live on a false one in Pakistan, pretending to be a
straight man.
It doesnt seem fair that Zack, a British citizen be told by his own government through rules such as
these, that if he wants to look after his mum, he risk his life, sacrificing everything he has worked so
hard for over the last 20 years.
Page | 55
ADR
v24.07
The right to live with your partner without interference from the State for Aaron;
The right to have both your parents looking after you, for their child.
Aaron earns just under the 18,600 mark. Combining his income with that which Kano could
earn, they easily satisfy 18,600. But Kanos income cannot be included, thus highlighting a
huge oversight in the rules.
Not only is 18,600 too high, it does not allow for geographical differences and is much higher
than the income criteria required to be excluded from qualifying for welfare benefits. It also
shows a complete disregard for the potential value of the spouses income.
In practice, both Aaron and Kano would work, each earning a salary that would be taxed and
relied upon for their living expenses. Why then is the criterion restricted only to Aarons
income?
Aaron is being pushed out of his own country, by his own government, for no reason other than
that its mission is to achieve a poorly selected and arbitrary net immigration target in the 'tens
of thousands'.
Page | 56
v26.01
Page | 57
v26.01
If the immigration officer at port of entry had known this, she would have been refused entry on this
basis.
This is because apparently she should have applied for a spouse visa rather than a visitor visa; however,
at that time, they were genuinely only intending to visit for a family reunion as Andys brother was
visiting the UK at that time with his Canadian wife and their newborn daughter.
Despite leaving UK within the six months allowed under a visitor visa, by applying as a visitor rather
than a spouse, according to Mark Harper, Molly deceived the UK Border Agency, and this alleged
deception means that she cannot visit UK for ten years, even though she has proved she is not an 'overstayer'. David Laws confirmed that Harper's stamp of deception would remain in Mollys file, leaving
this poor couple to face the reality that they would remain separated unless and until Andy could find a
high paying job.
They all miss each other so much and while there appears to be light at the end of the tunnel, with Andy
receiving a job offer paying over the threshold (which should in theory qualify him to sponsor Molly
six months down the line), it raises location and their children as major issues. So, the family faces
further heartbreak over the next six months.
Page | 58
v26.01
The job is in Cornwall, 3 hours away from home in Somerset where the boys are settled in school and
playgroup. As his job involves travelling, Andy would need a live-in child-carer. He cant cope with the
thought of another person taking the place of his sweetheart and the children's mummy another woman
the kids would be looking up to as a mum.
Taking everything into account they have decided that the boys should stay with their grandparents
temporarily, while Andy is working and until a better solution can be found. Andy will see them as
many weekends as possible, but he won't be able to spend the school holidays with them, read them a
bedtime story, tuck them into bed or be there to soothe away any nightmares.
Andys job began in late October and so, exactly six months later, on his eldest childs sixth birthday,
the couple believes they should qualify to begin the application process for a spouse visa. By this time
the family will have spent nearly 8 months apart; including Christmas, and all their birthdays.
The children have already stopped attempting to speak Chinese and it breaks Andys heart that his kids
are losing their heritage and that memories are being created without their mother being a part of them.
If Molly was here, theyd be moving to Cornwall together, as a strong happy family, but instead theyre
being split up in a scenario reminiscent of Australias Stolen Generation a disastrous episode in that
country's history. Have we learnt nothing from past mistakes?
Andy is tired and desperately sad, yet somehow finding the energy to stay strong.
I miss my wife so much and feel so heartbroken for her having to explain to friends, family,
neighbours and colleagues, why she cannot be with her loving husband and sweet little boys. Shes
so brave, so patient and trusting that someday well be reunited. Im so very proud of her.
Who with a modicum of decency could break up this family? British MPs could and therefore do.
With the 8 hour time difference the boys only get to Skype their mummy at weekends. A clearly demoralised Andy says:
Devon (3) now calls us Computer Mummy and Daddy.
Page | 59
v26.01
Anne
Are these the family values the government wants to promote? Keeping
parents and children/grandchildren apart, breaking up husbands and wives?
Anne is the British mother of a British son who, by this governments account, should not have fallen
in love, married and had a child with a lovely woman, because she happens to be from the USA. Anne
is also the British wife and main carer of a British man who is disabled.
Anne recognises that, as she gets older, she will need
assistance from her son, for herself and her husband. The
rules in place mean her son is forced to live apart from his
wife and daughter. They also mean shes not permitted to
be with her son and daughter-in-law and is prevented from
spending time with her granddaughter. NOTHING is right
about this situation.
This is a proud, if not rich, family.
Annes daughter-in-law, her son and the grandchild she has never met.
They missed the wedding of their son to a woman who is now a much loved member of the family.
While it was painful missing her sons wedding, the financial and practical constraints of Annes
husbands disability meant they couldnt travel. They do, however, expect their son to be able to live in
his home country, with his family.
18,600 is a lot of money for him and Anne, on top of the daily expenses of living and substantial visa
application fees (not all have parliamentary salaries, generous expense accounts and cushy pensions).
Annes son has been saving money for a spouse visa and paying rent in the UK while also maintaining
and paying for accommodation for his wife and child. Babies are expensive, as anyone with a child will
tell you. Yet he managed for a long time. Until these rules came in.
The stress of being apart from his wife and child is, in itself, difficult; but the impact of the rules, which
suggest to him that he may never be with them, were he also to be here for his parents, caused a
meltdown, leading to the loss of his job. So, overall, this is now a worse situation for everyone, her son,
his wife, their granddaughter, Annes husband, Anne and the entire extended family and community.
They now cant even afford to fly to America to see the child unless friends and family help. This
family cant help but wonder if these are the family values the UK government wants them to adopt.
Meanwhile the situation is taking a toll on everyone's health. Anne is on anti-depressants and blood
pressure tablets. Their fifteen-year-old daughter is feeling the stress of the situation she can't
understand why she can't see her little niece and sister-in-law. Their other daughter has their son living
with her as he has now also lost his home, so has no choice but to move in with family.
The government needs to realise there are real people affected by these changes, not just government
statistics. The rules were already hard to meet in the first place, the fees of hundreds of pounds were a
lot for the majority of mainly working people.
British people, in their own country, are being torn apart from their families!!! What has this government
done to the country and why? Who will look after us as we grow old? Who will look after us when we
have breakdowns? And who will answer the questions the next generation asks about why
discriminatory and racist policies were allowed to be put in place, policies preventing Anne's son's
children getting to know their father and grandparents?
Page | 60
v26.01
Page | 61
v26.01
Ben
I hope common sense prevails and my family does not have to be
broken up.
Ben is a British citizen from North Wales. He has two British children with his wife from Indonesia.
It is his choice of partner which has led to his current predicament.
Bens wifes application for a UK settlement visa has been put on hold as they dont meet the current
income requirement. This is despite the fact that Ben, as her sponsor, has 40,000 in cash savings and
has stated his intention to secure employment upon return to the UK.
Ben has spent the last nine years teaching English in Indonesia, promoting the virtues of the UK and
British society, including our laws, customs, diversity and sense of decency and fair play. Now that
he wishes to return to his homeland to spend more time with his parents, and for his own British
children, he is faced with an unenviable decision.
His Indonesian working visa is due to end, following which he will have to return to the UK. His
eldest child, a daughter aged six, will have to return with him as she is already enrolled in a local
primary school. His wife whose visa application is on hold due to the legal case and appeal currently
in the High Court will not be able to join them. His youngest child, a son aged two, will stay with his
mother. Therefore not only will husband and wife be separated also brother and sister, mother and
daughter, father and son.
Ben started part-time work at the age of 13 and since starting full time employment in 1995 he has
never received or requested any help from the state in regards to unemployment or housing benefit.
He has always paid his own way without recourse to public funds.
He left the UK in 2005 to teach in Indonesia, a country he knew very little about and didnt know the
language. In the eight years there, he has risen from the position of Teacher to Head Teacher and then
to Director of Studies in a busy and successful private language school. He fell in love and got
married, to be blessed with two lovely children. He has always supported his wife and kids without
any help from the government.
He has no intention to now seek unemployment or housing benefit upon return to the UK as this goes
against the ethos he was brought up with as a child, that one must work hard and pay ones own way
in life. He is willing to sign a document waiving his right to claim benefits if this would placate the
Home Office and enable his family to be united.
He is bemused. Surely, someone who can make a successful life in a foreign country requiring the
learning of customs and language from scratch, would be able to replicate that in his home country
where he is familiar with all and has support from family? Indeed, his parents live in a property which
is fully paid for and is willing for Ben and his family to live there for as long as they need to.
Page | 62
v26.01
Page | 63
v26.01
these new rules, be required to work for six months before he could even apply for his wife to join
him (adding another six months or so for the application process).
This requirement that a 2 year-old boy be separated from his mother or father for a year or more, is
completely devoid of heart or reason.
So now Colin is left with a stark choice his 80 year-old mother or his 2 year-old son and wife.
As a British citizen, he has been put in this position by the British government, and finds himself
alternating between despair and fury. These feelings are intensified when Colin compares his
situation with that of his younger brother, who in 2011 married a Polish woman and in 2012 became
the proud father of twin girls.
Colins brother, sister-in-law and nieces are able to live together in Bala as a family under the EUs
freedom of movement laws. No visas required, no minimum income or savings needed, no forced
separation demanded. In the past 12 months his sister-in-laws brother and wife have also migrated
from Poland to live and work in Bala.
Colin is clear. He by no means objects to their freedom to move there but as a British Citizen who
cannot even bring his wife to the UK, the knowledge that EU nationals can come and go at will, and
seem to have more right to a family life in the UK than he does, finds the British governments
treatment of British citizens a very bitter pill to swallow.
Everything about these rules is wrong that theyre designed purely to reduce numbers to an arbitrary
election promise and thus damning families seems to be ignored. The barring of third-party sponsors
is particularly infuriating, what with Colins brother willing and able to help them out.
Colin and XXX keep going by in their more fanciful moments, talking about writing their story as an
epic tale of emigration, spanning a century (her great grandfather left Bala in 1907), an ocean and a
continent, and coming full circle with the original emigrant's great-great-grandson returning to and
settling in the town he left 100 years earlier.
They find it helps, in the face of the indifference, arrogance and hypocrisy of the Home Secretary, to
cling to dreams of romance, love and destiny, in the hope that they will eventually triumph.
Sometimes it feels like they're all they have left.
Page | 64
v26.01
Page | 65
v26.01
Douglas
My wife and children are in Nigeria, denied entry because I am selfemployed. The requirements are so onerous I am in constant battle
with UKBA.
Douglas is a British citizen living in Kent. He was brought up in England and has worked and paid
taxes for the last thirty years. His time now is being spent battling UKBA to obtain a visa for his wife
and two children, currently residing in Lagos, Nigeria. In his sons first two months, Douglas has only
seen him for 10 days.
The application process for Douglass family is even more complex because of UKBAs requirements
for those who are self-employed, which is the case for Douglas, even though his wife has passed the
language test and satisfied UKBA that their relationship is genuine.
Items which Douglas has been allowed to deduct for tax purposes for his income, have been excluded
from the income allowed towards the income threshold of 18,600
Douglas regrets missing out so much on his newborn sons life: I will never be able to get these
moments back, such as missing his first smile. This separation affects the wider family, not just
Douglas. His parents are elderly and therefore incapable of making the journey to Lagos so they are
yet to meet their new grandson.
Valuable savings are also being spent on travelling to Nigeria to
spend time with his family..so Douglas is suffering from a
financial strain as well. Having family overseas also means he is
working less, because he has to take time off to go see
them..which means his income and
savings situation become more dire. Its
a downwards spiral he has found himself
in, made all the more worse by Douglas
having to support another household in Nigeria as his wife cannot work with a
newborn and an infant child, Nigerian visa fees and private healthcare cover
for his wife and kids.
Douglas is being forced to support two households rather than the one, if his wife and children were
allowed to be with him in the UK.
Douglas is roughing it himself to make ends meet, renting out the bedrooms in his home and sleeping
on the sofa bed in the living room. If Douglas were allowed to have his family here, he wouldnt need
to live like this, hed have his family with him and his income would be spent in the UK, thereby
making a greater contribution to the economy.
The Entry Clearance Officer denied his wife entry into the, stating that there was nothing stopping
Douglas from living and working in Lagos. However the officer neglected to consider Douglas's
situation, as he also has a son from a previous marriage, which means he cannot relocate to another
country else it would mean abandoning his first born.
Page | 66
v26.01
Page | 67
v26.01
Eric works as a Head Chef. When he applied for a settlement visa for his wife and two children, both
born in Kenya, he earned 23,124. With overtime and bonuses included, he earned 24,000. The visa
was still however refused because this is 800 short of the 24,800 needed to sponsor a spouse and
two children.
Despite Eric not claiming benefits indeed, by the governments own account, earns so much he is
disqualified from claiming benefits, this family is told they cant be together because of 800.
A married couple with two children. A father who has not even seen or held his son. A father who
knows his son through Skype. A father not able to be there for his wife and daughter either.
Eric has tried living in Kenya. However he was unable to find a suitable job. With a family to
support, they decided it made financial sense for Eric to return to the UK, his home and have his
family move here.
But because of 800 they are not allowed to be together.
The family made a video of their plight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KrMqtuvcck
Page | 68
v26.01
Page | 69
v26.01
Page | 70
v26.01
She cried and cried; thinking about England night after night. Manuel would simply tell her that one
day shell be able to come home again.
The stress caused further health problems, with Hayley suffering from chronic gastritis and IBS. The
doctors recommended she relax and return home where it would be safer.
Hayley ignored the medical advice - she did not want to leave Manuel. In May 2013, the couple got
married not only making them feel like the happiest couple on earth, but providing Byron with his
wish to have a daddy who would love and raise him. Hayley feels every day that she and Byron are
lucky to have found such a wonderful man.
When Manuel however was posted in an even more dangerous part of
Colombia, they agreed it would be safer for Hayley and Byron to
return home.
Hayley has since been in London seeking employment paying over
18,600. She is spending a lot of money on babysitters just so she can
attend interviews. She has given up on her dream of going to
university. She is heartbroken and at a loss as to what to tell Byron
when he asks why his daddy is not with them. How can she explain to
a 4-year old that mummy doesnt earn enough for the government to
let daddy in.
Manuel is a good hardworking man. He isnt a criminal nor someone
who will sponge off the system or other people. He is willing to leave
his home and career to ensure a better life for his wife and stepson. Manuel is now not only Hayleys
husband, he is also Byrons daddy.
Out of the first four months of their marriage, they have only been able to live together for one. Hayley
feels that she hasnt even had the chance to yet learn what it feels like to be a wife.
She feels betrayed and cheated by her own government. How is it they expect her to find a job paying
18,600 while having a child to look after, being forced once again into single parenthood? She needs
time to heal and excessive stress is more likely to play havoc with her health.
Hayley is determined to help other people and has written a book about her experience. She hopes to
prevent teenage pregnancies and raise awareness of rape and domestic violence. She is now an author
having self-published her first book through Kindle, Lead towards the unknown.
She has dreams and is prepared to give the UK her all. In return she hopes the UK would just allow her
to live with her husband.
Page | 71
v26.01
Page | 72
v26.01
The difference of course, is her son and her dad. The education, upbringing, culture she wants her
nearly two year old son to have. He is a British child who deserves to grow up in Britain. Her dad is 66
years old and not in good health. Jade also needs to be here for him.
The spouse visa application took six months since the date of submitting it, until the final decision came
through during which time the new rules had come into force requiring Jade as a young mum forced
into becoming a single parent to earn over 18,600.
Jade is clear that its impossible for her to earn this amount as a single parent.
It screams of rules where only a child with high-earning parents is allowed a
two-parent family. She is also clear that the Home Office is just worried
about statistics and therefore are trying to force British citizens to leave.
Jade is currently juggling two jobs; yet she is unable to earn 18,600 while
also being a single parent. Non-EEA nationals have NO RECOURSE TO
PUBLIC FUNDS, so how is it that her partner will be a drain on the system?
Indeed, if Merouane were able to join Jade, it would actually mean Jade was
less reliant on other taxpayers. He would help ease the burden of parenthood;
the juggling of two jobs, childcare, managing household duties, as well as caring for her dad.
If Jade had her husband by her side, they could work in shifts to ensure someone was always around for
their son and her dad.
Its clear to her theyd be much better off as a team, bringing in two incomes.
In the meantime, her son is missing out on his dad; she is missing out on having the support of her
husband and her husband is missing out on everything.
Jade will not give up. She refuses to rollover and leave her home country...make her son leave his
home..make her dad leave his home or abandon him. Its clear to her the fight is not to just be with a
family member, but to ensure children have access to two parents; that our parents have us to look after
us when they need us most, in their old age.
Jade will keep fighting until her family is all together again.
Page | 73
v26.01
Page | 74
v26.01
Juliet
I am keen for my small family to be near my parents, to gain
recognition of our family as a legal unit and be around to look after
my parents as they get older.
Juliet, a British citizen and a qualified teacher, lives in Thailand. She is hoping to sponsor her civil partner, a
qualified chef, to return to live in UK with her and their twins. The couple, who met in 2009, planned to live with
Juliets parents in West Sussex, but are unlikely to be able to secure work in the area prior to arriving here..
Her familys local MP is Peter Bottomley.
We had the most amazing year success in our attempt to
become pregnant, the wedding in Hanoi. We had no idea about
the new visa rules as wed been tied up starting our new life
together and supporting Great Britain in the Olympics. We
never planned to raise our family in Bangkok we were
conscious that we couldnt be a legal and protected family here.
I feel very strongly that I want the twins to bond closely with my
own parents. We discovered the impact of the new rules and felt
like wed been hit in the face with a sledgehammer. Absolutely
devastating.
Juliet and her partner, with their newborn twins
Juliet feels people including politicians simply dont understand the implications of these new rules. She
realises she is one of the lucky BritCits, in the sense that she is currently living with her spouse and employed
abroad; but, despite her earning over the 18,600 threshold, it is unlikely they will be able to move to the UK as
planned. This is especially problematic for them because, as a same-sex couple, they cannot stay together
indefinitely in Thailand where their civil partnership is not recognised; with kids in the picture this is especially
important UK law allows for Juliets partner to register legally as the second parent of their children at birth, but
not to live where these laws apply!
For ex-pats, returning from abroad is a period of great adjustment and the arrangements can be time-consuming.
Juliet was aware that, under the previous rules, she could return to the UK and allow herself some time to adjust
to family life. Juliet and her partner would have been able to look for work with her parents offering support in
the form of childcare and living costs. They would have been able to demonstrate no need to access public funds
as the couple have modest savings of their own and a property in the UK.
Juliets parents were more than happy to provide third party support if required and were delighted Juliet wanted
to raise her children close by. They will also need Juliet close by to look after them, as they get older.
All these plans were thrown out the window, however, with the changes on 9 July 2012. The new rules require a
job offer to be signed and sealed in the UK before allowing a successful spouse visa application. As a primary
school teacher with 9 years experience, in theory this poses no problem and just a slight change in the couples
approach. But getting a job offer as a teacher from abroad is not easy most schools will require lesson
observations as part of the interview and give preference to those applying from within the UK.
If Juliet wants to move to the UK with her family, her options are now:
a) Find a teaching job in advance, not easy;
b) Move with their children and look for a teaching job, facing at least six months apart from her partner during
the twins formative years;
c) Stump up 62,500 in cash and demonstrate she wouldnt need access to it over the next few years.
In the case of (a) or (b) this would mean a probable move to London, without support from her family; (b) would
mean being a single parent trying to meet the 18,600 income criterion while looking after two children.
London makes proving secure accommodation problematic. Are the couple expected to take out a rental contract
on a London property they have never seen while they await the visa result, throwing money down the drain?
Would they be penalised for applying while using the homes of friends with a spare room, or a couch for Juliet to
sleep on, while she is job hunting?
Page | 75
v26.01
The 1985 Overcrowding Act states that living rooms DO count as bedrooms, but the rules qualification of for
their exclusive use may rule this out. Another example of the measures put in place for no reason other than to
present an obstacle and prevent decent hardworking Brits from exercising their right to live in their own country.
In London, Juliet would also lose the family support she moved home for and her parents would lose the support
they will increasingly need from her. Additionally, she would have to spend half her salary on expenses such as
childcare. In this case, she would qualify for working tax credits benefits she would not be in need of if she were
just allowed to be here with her partner!! How is breaking this family apart better for the British economy?
As Juliets brother is in the same position working in Tanzania, with a Tanzanian partner the future is quite
grim for Juliet parents, both British, both getting old, and both alone in the UK. For now, they can handle the
long-haul flights to Asia and Africa, but this will become an increasing burden. They are being denied the right to
see their grandchildren and being denied to have, in their old age, their own children around them. Juliets parents
were tax-paying public sector workers throughout the whole of their working lives, until retirement. Why should
they too be denied such basic rights by our politicians, who are being paid to look out for British people's interests?
Juliet has been employed without a break since she qualified as a teacher in 2004, is a graduate with not one but
two postgraduate qualifications, and worked in UK state schools for five years. Like many others, she is now being
prevented from returning to her home just because she fell in love with a foreigner.
Juliets partner is also a graduate and has also been gainfully employed or managing her own business for ten
years without a break. Juliet says that if the rule changes had come with fair warning, discussion and publicity,
she could have planned her life around them. She never imagined when she left on a two-year work contract in
2009 that she would be prevented from returning to her own country.
The very core of fairness for all applications has been removed: assessment on a case-by-case basis of couples
demonstration that they wont need state help. Whatever the government says, peoples whole circumstances
demand proper consideration. By their very definition, the new Fixed Requirements are utterly unfair. Juliet
suspects removing the use of discretion and assessment of individual cases results in a reduction in processing
times, thus giving the impression of improved efficiency. Better for Britain? Better for MPs' propaganda!
Tearing apart families causes untold suffering at the most personal level, and the welfare of innocent children
should be properly prioritised. For children, the security and love of their family is of vital importance and
destroying or interrupting them can cause irreparable damage. The Conservatives said this themselves in their profamily pre-election spiel but is it a qualified importance that can be disregarded on the most arbitrary
technicality? What hypocrisy! What damage they will do!
This isnt a couple coming to the UK to sponge off benefits. This is
a couple coming to the UK to give
their kids British kids a better life, and to provide support and
care for ageing British parents, to allow kids to bond with their
grandparents.
They are not asking for anything more than British citizens have a
basic right to already.
Page | 76
v26.01
Page | 77
v26.01
Kelly
All I have left is the hope that, one day, these rules will be made
fairer, so I have a chance at the family life we so desperately want.
Kelly is a 27-year-old British woman married to an Egyptian man, with whom she has a son (British).
They met in December 2009 while she was holidaying in Egypt, following which she spent a year
travelling to Egypt for weeks at a time to see, meet and spend time with his family. They married in
October 2010 and have just celebrated their second wedding anniversary albeit, sadly, not together.
After they got married, they lived in Egypt, but it was a huge culture shock for Kelly; despite her
numerous visits there is a big difference between visiting and living there. While they tried their best to
make it a home for her, she just couldnt fit in with the lifestyle and the culture there.
Soon after moving to Egypt she fell pregnant; although she was extremely happy and excited about
becoming a mum for the first time, she couldnt enjoy the pregnancy as she would have liked.
Thus Kelly and her husband decided she would go back to England to have the baby and her husband
applied for a visit visa to be there for the birth. Unfortunately the visa was refused. At that point Kelly
decided to stay in Egypt for the birth, as she wanted her husband with her for the birth of their first child.
But in her seventh month of pregnancy she developed DVT and was hospitalised in Egypt. For reasons
of safety, Kelly and her husband decided it would be better if she went to the UK, without him, for the
birth to ensure she received proper treatment in case there were any further complications.
Their son is now three and half months old and has yet to meet his father. It's a very hard situation to be
in, knowing that not only is her husband missing out on their sons life, but that their son is missing out
on getting to know his father.
Kelly would like to be reunited with her husband but is undergoing medical treatment and is cautious
about raising her son in a place that she hasnt been able to adjust to herself.
Under the current immigration rules though, shes finding it impossible to envisage a situation where
she, her husband and their baby could live together. For her, a salary of 18,600 for her might as well
be 186,000 it is so difficult to attain.
Its sad this family is torn apart because our government puts a price on being a family and Kelly dared
to fall in love with someone from outside the EU; so now she is being forced either to live as a single
mother, without her husband, or to move to Egypt where she doesnt want to live, despite the fact that
both Kelly and her son are British and thus, effectively, being kicked out of their own home and their
own country.
Kelly spends all day thinking of ways of being the happy family she always wanted to have, but options
are running thin. All she has left is hope that one day the rules will be made fairer, so shell have a
chance at the family life she so desperately wants and should have the right to.
Update: Kellys husband received a visit visa in December 2012 after winning
the appeal, returning to Egypt in May 2013 as per his visa conditions. Kelly and
their son went to Egypt in June to see the family there in June. While it was great
at the beginning, because of the political situation, they are now stuck in an
apartment, which given Kellys history of DVT is not healthy. Kelly intends to
return to the UK and find work paying over the threshold, which wont be easy
being forced into single parenthood.
Page | 78
v26.01
Kevin
I havent seen my wife and son in nearly a year and my family in
Britain hasnt met or held my son.
Kevin is a British citizen who met his wife while travelling and they have been together for five years,
though they were in no hurry to move to the UK.
After being made redundant by his insurance-company employer, they decided to live in Asia for a
couple of years. While in Hong Kong, they were blessed with a beautiful son.
As Kevin does not have a degree, finding a suitable job in Asia proved to be near impossible, but with
a child to look after it was imperative that Kevin have a good job and provide for his family.
So Kevin decided to return to the UK and six months later he obtained a permanent job with a basic
salary of 16,000. Two months into this job, however, the government brought in the minimum
threshold, meaning that his target earnings would keep him way below the threshold.
With bonuses the 18,600 may be achievable, but given the volatile nature of sales, there might be the
odd month where he cannot maintain the annual average required, which means that his wifes visa
application would be rejected.
Kevin has been living apart from his wife and near-one-year-old son for almost a year. He has already
missed his sons first Christmas; he will miss his first birthday, and he will only see his sons first steps
on Skype, rather than in person.
Kevin is close to a nervous breakdown; whenever he sees a family together with a toddler his heart sinks
and he is unable to put aside everything he is missing out on.
Kevins wifes family think Kevin has chosen to leave his wife and son in their home country rather
than bring her to the UK. This has brought shame on his wife's family as well as embarrassment.
Kevins immediate British family have neither met nor held his son. His son does not know his British
family. The new rules are a prison sentence for Kevin and his family.
Even if Kevin were to find a job paying 18,600, the visa process requires that he wait six months before
applying for a spouse visa. This is far too long, especially when you have been living apart for a year
already. This Tory government is demonstrating how out of touch it is with the people of Britain today.
For the sake of everybodys sanity, welfare, physical and mental health, these rules must be scrapped
sooner rather than later.
Page | 79
v26.01
However when Scott applied for a visit visa in 2010, he was refused as he didnt have a job in the US.
The couple went into battle against the Home Office in the appeals court and won a 2-week visit. When
Scott applied for a visit visa again a year or so later, he was once again refused, so Leighsa and Alex
have not seen Scott for over a year.
Leighsa is working. But she doesnt earn anywhere near 18,600. She does however earn enough to
support her husband. However the immigration rules take no consideration of that.
Leighsa and Scott dont have the money to fight the Home Office yet again. Alex needs to see his dad,
his dad needs to see his son. A son who is 11 years old and in need of his father. A son who is going to
start at a new school, on the verge of his teenage years when a fathers mere presence, let alone support,
can make so much difference.
Leighsa and Scott are both experiencing issues by the enforced separation. Leighsa suffers from anxiety
for which she is seeking medical help and little Alex is just depressed and crying a lot. This is yet
another family resorting to Skype to ensure parent-child are able to see each other, but its a route
which doesnt allow for hugs and kisses...the daily support. Maintaining a marriage with 3500 miles is
also not a picnic. Being a single mother, especially when its not out of choice, is stressful.
Scott is a qualified computer technician - his earning capacity is huge. Leighsa is in university hoping
to extend her own earning capabilities also this is a family that does NOT want public funds. All they
want is a chance to be a family, to raise their son in his country of nationality UK - and do the right
thing by him.
Page | 80
v26.01
Page | 81
v26.01
UKBA said Lizzie had not shown evidence of her savings. This despite her having submitted bank
statements, although she admits they were a few months older an ISA which only sends out statements on
an annual basis and premium bond statements which were first sent to Lizzies parents home and then to
Chile. But the money was there and she did the best she could to obtain evidence of her UK savings from
Chile, while also juggling recent motherhood.
Lizzie is furious that rules clearly discriminating against women are in place; rules which systematically
penalise women - for having kids, for adopting the traditional role of homemaker, for sacrificing their career
to care for their family. For being women - who historically and statistically are paid less than men.
Legal advice indicates Alexander wont qualify for a visitors visa as he has displayed an intent to live here.
So the only way for the family to see each other is for Lizzie to travel to Ecuador, on a 15+ hour flight with
a toddler. She cant remain there as she is employed here and doesnt want to jeopardise her income here
lest she lose her appeal. So she is juggling childcare and employment.
The real victim of these rules is Lizzie and Alexanders little girl. Geneva Convention was created to protect
families from exactly this sort of abuse. Her daughter only sees daddy through Skype for an hour each day
and her mother is constantly stressed, tired and struggling. This is not how their family was. They were so
happy. Lizzie never dreamed the system could get things so wrong; her family is torn apart just so politicians
can say theyre being "tough on immigration". She is upset British citizens are made the scapegoats for a
political agenda. Shes hurt UK has let her down; angry that no one is accountable for the misery caused.
Following the visa refusal the couple appealed; they engaged the services of a barrister and contacted
Lizzies local MP who was very matter of fact about the situation, with the conversation revolving around
Page | 82
v26.01
"why my husband is a contribution to the country". This surprised Lizzie as to her Alexander not being
allowed to live with them was clearly outrageous, whether or not he was skilled. Without him Lizzie was a
single mother, dependent on her parents and had it not been for them, dependent on the state! Lizzie felt
her self-worth and abilities to perform as a mother and employee had been severely undermined by the
extra stress and strains of constantly worrying about reuniting the family.
The MP wrote a letter of support to the ECO in Brazil in April 2013. In the meantime, Lizzie found herself
desperately coaxing her daughter to "perform" on Skype to satisfy the increasingly frustrated and worried
Alexander that the little girl was alright, happy, and though missing him, coping. But the child rebelled
against the tedium of screen-time crawling, standing and walking for the first time, without her dad.
Slowly, Spanish was forgotten and English took its place. However, none of this seemed of any
importance; only Lizzies income was looked at.
Lizzie went to the media to share the plight of her family at the hands of the Home Office, and like so
many, even wrote to David Cameron. And like so many, she received a standard response that her letter
had been forwarded to the Home Office. In November 2013, the couple heard back with another refusal
from the ECM. By now, Lizzie had worked for 6 months, earning a salary in excess of 18,600. Despite
the refusal, this information was sent to the ECM for review once again.
By this time though Lizzie had lost all faith in UK immigration and thus looked at alternatives for family
unity, like living in another EU country. Desperate to be together for Christmas the family decided to meet
in Ireland, to then scope out options but at least, spend the holidays together. In the previous ten months,
the family had been together for only three weeks and the separation was taking its toll.
Lizzie drove for seven hours to Holyhead and took the ferry to Dublin on December 16th. Whilst on the
ferry, Lizzie received an email from her MP indicating that their appeal had been subject to a special
review, and that a decision had been made to grant the visa. Lizzie could not believe it. The turnaround,
the timing, that in fact it was all over.that the next time the couple said goodbye it would be for a matter
of weeks, not months! It was the best Christmas present one could have asked for. Lizzie drove straight
from the ferry to Dublin airport to pick up Alexander and told him the good news. The next three weeks
were like a fairy tale, with the couple starting 2014 together and knowing they would be finally able to say
we would continue together. To this day Lizzie isnt sure why the application was reviewed; the news
reports, the letter to the PM or the email to her MP which showed six months employment in the UK?
Whatever, the family is grateful they are finally together.
Update January 2015:
Alexander has been in the UK for eleven months and the family couldn't be happier. The couple had to relearn how to live together; adapt to sharing parenting duties and allow Alexander to make mistakes Lizzie
already had, to get to know their daughter once again, and forge a father-daughter relationship. Shortly
after his arrival, Alexander was unwilling to discipline their daughter for fear she wouldn't love him. Now
he is far more secure of his importance in her life and feels confident in taking a more fatherly role in her
upbringing. They have "in jokes", sing special songs together and even take days out without Mummy.
Alexander has adjusted to speaking English all the time, working in a factory job until he the now more
suitable job working at Virgin Health Care, living with his in-laws, English food, our climate, and making
new friends. Red tape around trivial things like car insurance and NINO meant he relied on Lizzie
constantly reiterating how much independence he had lost.
The couple has had to be patient with the other and dont forget how fortunate they are to be together, nor
the misery of being apart. They start 2015 with much to look forward to, with Lizzie on the verge of
completing her AAT accountancy qualification and the imminent arrival of their second child.
Lizzie says: I think our lives will always be a little more complicated than your average British family but
together we can overcome so much. We are positive about our future in the UK and feel fortunate but I
remember how hard it was to get here and wish the best of luck to those struggling against these rules. I
had so much support from my family and from the people I turned to for help; my MP, local journalist and
the community I live in. I know others have many more hurdles and I hope they find a way to battle on, to
not give up; I hope these rules change.
Page | 83
v26.01
Lorraine
My daughter cant leave the country and her husband cant remain
here. What about their innocent son. Why should a British child be
forced to live without a parent?
Lorraine is a British citizen. She is also a mother to a British citizen, Emma, and a grandmother to a
British citizen, Aymane. Her son-in-law, Driss, happens to be Moroccan. And herein lies the source of
the battle this family has been waging with UKBA for months now.
Emma met Driss and as has been happening since the beginning of
time, this young couple fell in love. They got married and several
months later Lorraine received the wonderful news she was to be a
grandma.
Lorraine and her husband visited Emma and Driss in Morocco. They
were horrified to see their daughter living with no electricity or running
water; sleeping on a floor. Certainly no place for Emma to be in during
her pregnancy.
For various reasons, Lorraines daughter returned to the UK to give birth, assured shed be looked after
by her mum through the rest of the pregnancy. While the entire family was delighted, they were more
so when Driss received a visit visa to be with Emma for the birth of their first child
Lorraines gorgeous little grandson was born in September 2012, and Lorraine doesnt have the words
to explain how much she loves and cherishes him. He is her world and shed go to the end of it for him.
While it was never Emmas intention to remain in the UK, shortly after giving birth she became disabled
diagnosed with severe arthritis. Much of Lorraines time is spent with Emma - helping and supporting
her. It is not possible for Emma to return to living in basics with her health as is without her mum to
help her.
Emma is currently having chemotherapy to suppress her immune system attacking her joints. She
therefore needs full time care which she receives from her husband, and Lorraine when she isnt
working. Emma is unable to leave the country. And UKBA have told Driss he isnt allowed to remain
in the country.
Surely everyone is entitled to a family life, Lorraine asks why should her grandson be left without a
daddy ?
Lorraines daughter and son-in-law have appealed for him to stay in the UK; the fate of this family is
currently in the hands of UKBA. It is impossible for Emma to earn 18,600. Lorraine would always
support her daughter, son-in-law and grandson financially. There is no reason this family would be a
burden on the taxpayer...if only the government would let them remain a family
Page | 84
v26.01
Page | 85
v26.01
On c) Neil is perplexed as according to the information available on UKBAs website, they should have
been able to switch categories of visas.
Its not surprising that this family fees that UKBA is just finding reasons
to punish them. Indeed, even Citizens Advice Bureau has struggled to
understand this third point of contention.
UKBA has indicated they plan to remove Emily wife from UK and send
her back to the Philippines if they do not appeal against this unfair
decision. They have also told this family that should the appeal fail,
Emily will not be able to return to the UK for another 10 years. Emily is
the wife and mother of British citizens, who are now left at a loss,
overcome with the fear that by appealing an unfair decision they could
lose and thus be faced with a 10 year ban, or accept an unfair decision
and not be able to live in the UK!
Neil must either accept that the family will be broken up by UKBA or their family unit will be forced
to leave UK in order to stay together.
All this family wants is for the nightmare to end. Neil and Emily are British citizens, and they should
be treated as such. Their family and their values should also be respected and cherished - not dismissed.
Neils story has also been covered in the local media
http://www.lep.co.uk/community/shock-as-filipino-wife-faces-being-thrown-out-of-britain-1-5505434
Its a sad day when two British citizens are made more welcome in the Middle East than the UK, just
because their mother and wife is Filipino.
Page | 86
v26.01
Page | 87
v26.01
Courtney is amazed our rules are more stringent and imposing than in America, which despite being a
process rife with red tape, welcomed Nick, granting granted him permanent residency.
Nick never imagined the hurdles the family would have to go through
to allow him to live in his home country with his family. This couple
had thought they had shared their last goodbye once they got engaged
in 2006. On the day they said their, I dos, it never occurred to them
that theyd be going through the same thing six years later...let alone
putting their son and families through the same emotional ordeal.
The family has been apart since May 2013. Its difficult enough being
away from your best friend and partner but to have their child without his father is just indescribably
cruel and difficult to explain to a child. The whole family has been ripped apart and what should have
been a fun summer running after their little boy together has become misery.
With the couple missing celebrating together their six year wedding anniversary and Elliotts 3rd
birthday, the family is growing desperate to find a way to reunite.
Nick is yet to find a job paying over the magical 18,600. However even once he does, its a wait of
over six months while he collects pay slips, and then the application processing period which can take
several months in itself at the most optimistic.
Nick and Courtney have good days and bad days; as the time passes though, their patience is running
out and so are their options. The family is considering exercising the treaty rights afforded to them by
the EU in order to be a family a right denied to them by our own government.
They are still keen on making England their home; being close to
Nicks family and allowing Elliott the opportunity to learn about his
culture and bond with his family...but theyre also finding it hard to
rationalise staying and paying taxes in a country that so clearly does
not want them.
To say that this couple was blindsided by these new requirements
is an understatement. There have been a lot of tears, anger, and
resentment but in adversity the couple is also getting stronger, especially through the support network
they have come across with others similarly affected by clearly unfair immigration rules.
This is a real family with the right to live as such. They have faith that with love in their hearts and
fight in their gut, they will triumph over a ludicrous government policy. For now the family takes each
day as it comes in the hope that something will materialise allowing mum, dad and Elliott to be all
together again.
Nick,
form:
Courtney
and
Elliots
story
is
also
in
video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFxCcrBcWmU
Update: The family will be relocating to Ireland and exercising their treaty rights in September 2013, in order
to be together once more. Rights which denied to them by the UK government are afforded to them by the EU.
Page | 88
v26.01
Page | 89
v26.01
Page | 90
v26.01
Page | 91
v26.01
Sarah
As a result he missed the birth of his first-born child.
Sarah is a British citizen from Bradford. Sarah met her husband in the UK, and they lived together as a
family in England for 18 months before his visa expired. They should qualify for the right to live
together under the Zambrano ruling but delays on the part of UKBA are keeping this family in limbo.
Sarah has two kids from a previous relationship, and a child with her husband (this is her first marriage)
who she is trying to sponsor to move to the UK from Turkey, so their family can be together. Her two
eldest kids call her husband dad, even though he is not their birth father. That is how close this family
is.
Sarah does not satisfy the 18,600 income threshold. She is in receipt of benefits, including income
support and child tax credit. However, this will change when her husband joins her, as once he is
working (there is already a job lined up) Sarah will cease to be eligible for benefits which are means
tested (although she will continue to receive tax credits in respect of the children).
Sarah relocated to Turkey with her family and eventually decided to move back to the UK for her
childrens education. They applied for a visitor's visa for her husband, so that he could be here for their
childs birth, but the visa was refused on the grounds that because his family was in England they
thought he may not return to Turkey. As a result he missed the birth of his first-born child.
It has not been an easy time for Sarah, what with having to give birth alone, raise not one but three kids
alone, and then have a faulty toaster set their house on fire.
Sarah, her husband and the three children stay in touch using MSN, a webcam and Web chat every day.
They have applied for a spouse visa for him; however, under the new rules, they may as well just donate
more money to the British government which seems intent on tearing apart this family rather than
understanding that being with her husband is what would be best for Sarah and her three children.
Page | 92
v26.01
Sarah (Malaysia)
I have two kids who miss their dad so much...even our appeal date
is 9 months ahead.
Sarah is a British citizen. She has two children, aged 2 and 4. Her husband is a Malaysian citizen. While
Sarah and their kids returned to the UK over 15 months ago, her husband is still in Malaysia. He was
not granted a family visa. In December he was refused entry because Sarah did not earn 18,600, even
though they submitted bank statements showing savings and job offers exceeding this amount.
They put in an appeal in January and were given an appeal date in October 2013.
Despite being turned into a single parent to two children, Sarah is not claiming a penny in benefits. Her
husband is paying for everything. Including the solicitor they have hired for the appeal.
Her four year old cries every day for her dad; the stress is taking its toll on all of them.
The family miss each other and are exploring all avenues to unity.
Update:
On 24th October, Sarah had her appeal hearing in London. In what is becoming more and more
prevalent, yet another applicant beat the Home Office. The judge ruled that the original submission
does show they meet the financial requirements and therefore the couple has evidenced they have
sufficient money, and ruled on section 8 of right to a family life.
The judge has asked the Home Office to rush through the application as the family has been apart for
long enough.
Page | 93
v26.01
Sarah (Thailand)
I cant believe I may never be able to return home, as breaking up
my family for several months just isnt feasible.
Sarah is a British citizen living in Thailand with her Thai husband.
She initially came to Thailand to work with Burmese refugees but
fell in love and started a family--always with the intention of
returning to the UK.
Under the new rules Sarahs salary does not meet the financial
requirement, nor will it ever. Indeed, it would be near impossible to
find a job in Thailand that would meet the requirements as local
salaries are simply not in line with those in the UK.
However, combined with her husbands salary, they meet the requirements, but the new rules do not
permit his income to be considered.
So, to return to the UK, we are now facing the choice of:
a) Sarah returns alone with their two children, seeks employment paying over the stipulated salary
while placing them in full-time childcare and somehow coping as a single parent until she
qualifies to qualify to sponsor her husband OR
b) remaining in Thailand indefinitely as a family unit, depriving her British children of a British
education and their British family.
Even if Sarah opts to return to the UK alone, she would not be able to
avail of her parents' support in terms of accommodation or childcare as
the salary stipulations means she would almost certainly need to seek
work in London or another large city where childcare costs are very high.
Both Sarah and her husband are highly educated both have completed
their Masters, have a decade of professional experience and her husband
speaks fluent English as well.
They have looked at the alternatives such as the EEA route, but find this costly and impractical for a
young family.
Sarah finds it hard to believe she cant bring her family home and therefore may face a life abroad
indefinitely.
Page | 94
v26.01
Page | 95
v26.01
Sean
I am desperate to return home to spend time with my parents in
their final years, as they are both fighting cancer. However I cant
leave my wife.
Sean is a British citizen who for the past 10 years has worked in South East Asia. His wife is from
Thailand and together, they have a three year old son, also British. Seans parents, also British, live in
the UK. Unfortunately, they are both battling cancer and Sean is keen to spend time with his parents in
their last few years and ensure his son gets to spend that incredibly precious time with the grandparents
that for many of us, has been invaluable in our own lives.
However, because of this government, Sean and his son are now facing the prospect of never being able
to return here - to their home, their family and the lives they are entitled to.
Seans parents are devastated at the prospect of never seeing Sean or their beloved grandson again.
They are depressed, habitually in tears and at a time when cancer is attacking them, so is this
government.
Sean is horrified that his little boy will never experience a family Christmas or the warmth and love of
his grandparents.
This government has deemed that in order for Sean, as a British citizen to return to the UK he must
abandon his wife because he just doesnt make an arbitrary amount of 18,600 in the developing country
he is living in an amount he doesnt need there.
This government has deemed that for Seans son to be able to live in his home and get to know his
grandparents, he must either live with his mum in Asia or his dad in the UK.
This government is encouraging the breakup of a marriage and family, forcing British citizens into exile,
and forcing elderly British citizens in a time of need, to battle debilitating diseases alone.
Whats even more unbelievable is that these new rules only affect British citizens with non-EU spouses.
Other EU citizens have the freedom to live in Seans home country with their non-EU spouses but
because Sean is British he has extra hurdles to jump over.
We have no answer for Sean when he asked us to explain to him why he, as British citizen, and his son,
also a British citizen, are forced to live in exile. The rights of Seans non-European spouse are not the
issue here. The issue is around the rights we afford British citizens and families, and the heartbreak this
government deems it justified to wreak on our own.
When did we become a society where an elderly British couple battling cancer are forced to do it without
their British son to support them? Perhaps the government can tell us why.
Update:
On 1st September 2013, a British family was divided. A British father and his three year old British
son were forced to go and live in exile so the father could work in Spain. They have never been there
before and dont speak the language.
From the perspective of each family member affected, on how they feel about the immigration rules
and the route they are forced to take:
Page | 96
v26.01
My little boy has brought them so much pleasure over the last months and he in turn has learned so
much from them. He loves them so much it will be a terrible thing to take him away from them. There
will be real heartache and lots of tears when we leave. I really do not want to go, but if we stay my son
will lose his mother. What choice do I have?
I have chosen Spain as I think it might be the best place for me to find work as an English teacher. I
am scared though. How will we cope? What about language and culture problems? How will my son
get on? If I we cant survive there what will we do? I cant work in my wifes country and she will not
even be able to enter mine. We will be in limbo. We will have to split up. My son will have a
broken family.
Grandparents:
We are coming to the end of our years and all we want is our family around us. Having our son and
grandson around is the best medicine we could possible get. But now we have to say goodbye to them
at the airport. We dont know when we will see them again. This is tragic.
We dont understand why after all these years as hard working, law abiding British citizens we
are faced with this situation. What makes us really angry and ashamed to be British is that any other
European citizens can just walk into England and live and work just like that. An unmarried
Polish/Thai couple with no children can just move here without restriction, yet our British grandson is
expected to live without his mother.
Wife and mother:
This is all my fault. I feel so bad for breaking up my husbands family. My parents in law need their
son and grandson. I said maybe I should just leave and go home. I couldnt though. How can any
mother be expected to leave her child. I would be quite happy to go back to my rice farming village in
Thailand, but it is not a good place for my child and my husband cannot work in my country. I only
want what is best for them. I dont really matter in all of this.
I thought western countries were very civilised. I dont really understand why this is happening.
I am sure no other country would allow a mother to be taken from her child or expect a father
and child to live in another country.
Three year old boy:
I want to be with nanny and grampy. I dont want to see anyone cry. I dont want my daddy to be so
anxious and sad. I dont want to lose my mummy. I want to go to school and learn. I want everyone
to be happy.
Page | 97
v26.01
Page | 98
v26.01
Page | 99
v26.01
Page | 100
v26.01
Page | 101
v26.01
Page | 102
v26.01
Page | 103
v26.01
Andrew
What if my 92-year-old grandfather dies, without ever having met
my wife, and she cant even pay her last respects at his funeral?!
Andrew, a British citizen, has lived in Spain with his wife from South Africa, for four years. They had
a beautiful beach wedding and some members of his family from England attended the celebrations.
Despite being British and South African, respectively, they
did not encounter any problems with the Spanish
authorities regarding issuing a family member spouse visa,
and his wife is now a Spanish resident. She has had a
residence card for 5 years, which clearly states on the back:
Family Member of EEA National.
With this card they are free to travel around the whole of
Europe. They can even enter the UK's overseas territory of
Gibraltar, where Andrew works.
They just cant enter the UK (the country of which Andrew is a national!) and where the rest of his
family is.
EU law states in 2004/38/EC that any family member with an EU-issued residence card of more than 3
months duration does not require a visa to enter any other EU member state. But in direct violation of
the law, UK government refuses to recognise EU-issued residence cards, insisting on its own residence
cards. As such, in order for his wife to come to the UK with Andrew even for a two-week visit! they
have to apply for an EEA Family permit. And thus the red tape, and the farce, begins.
To obtain this family permit, Andrew has to prove that he is working in another EU member state. So
if he was unemployed it would be impossible for his wife to visit the UK without applying for a regular
visa at a cost of 250 for South African nationals. Fortunately he does work, and as such he is able to
provide such documentation.
The EU rules require that there be no prohibitive cost or process for the issue of an EEA Family Permit
(indeed, it must be free), yet the UK tries to circumvent this legal requirement by referring to it as a
visa.
In the past, they have had to fill out a 12-page form requesting financial details, relationship history, 10year address history, etc. Then they had to make an appointment at the British Consulate in Madrid
500 miles away necessitating a 7-hour drive and a hotel stay, i.e. substantial further expense. Given
that the next available appointment was 2 months after filling in the visa application online, there was
undue delay on top of the expense!
Also, they charge 15 to return the passport and documents via DHL and it can take 3 weeks to process
an EEA Family Permit, which is referred to as a decision.
Page | 104
v19.01
This might not seem too bad if that was it, and Andrews wife was then clear to enter the UK to visit as
often as she wished. But no! After all this, she can only enter the UK as long as Andrew is with travelling
with her, and the permit only lasts for 6 months. After this time, they have to go through the entire
laborious process again!
They wanted to visit the UK in August. By the middle of October they still hadnt received the
decision. They are determined to go for Christmas, especially as many of Andrews family have not
yet met his wife, including his grandfather, a 92-year-old war veteran who is quite poorly and may not
be around for much longer. And there are nieces and nephews who want to meet their new auntie too.
Andrew is keen to show his wife where he grew up, his home town, his school, his friends. These are
all perfectly reasonable expectations and something that he never thought would prove to be so difficult
in his own home country, given that they were welcomed with open arms by the administration in Spain.
The UK's policy of forcing them to apply for an EEA Family Permit falls well outside the Free
Movement Directives of the EU, so much so that the EU challenged the UK to change these laws back
in April or face court action. However, this UK government seems intent on remaining defiant and is
willing to pay millions of pounds in fines. using taxpayers' money, rather than be a law-abiding
government that has respect for its citizens, i.e. British voters.
Update, end October 2012:
Andrews wife was refused entry clearance and an EEA Family Permit. The UKBAs view was that
Andrew and his wife did not provide sufficient documentary evidence that Andrew was working or selfemployed in another member state prior to returning to the UK and therefore the regulations do not
apply.
In fact, Andrew submitted:
letter from his employer, on a company letterhead, stating that he had been employed for the
evidence of last 4 years permanent employment, with a salary over 30,000
copy of his work contract;
payslips from preceding three months.
It is likely the refusal was on the grounds that Andrew works in Gibraltar but lives in Spain we dont
know. No explanation was given, and theres no one to contact to clarify the reason for the refusal.
Having checked with EU Commission, Andrew received confirmation that the UK government
has acted illegally by refusing his wife a family permit.
Will Andrews 92-year-old grandfather ever get to meet Andrews wife? Will this family be able to
gather together for Christmas? Ask the British government.
Update: Andrews wife did not receive the EEA family permit in time for their scheduled trip to the UK.
Nevertheless, Andrew and his wife did get to spend Christmas with his family and his wife and
grandfather were able to spend valuable time together.
Page | 105
v19.01
Page | 106
v19.01
"Furthermore, you have previously resided in the United States of America, and during further examination you
admitted that you overstayed your visa there, this causes me to doubt that you will comply with any restrictions
attached to a grant of leave to enter the United Kingdom."
This third reason gives the impression that Marcia attempted to abuse a short-term US visitor's visa by
overstaying in an attempt to become an illegal immigrant. Nothing could be further from the truth. As Marcia
informed the Immigration Officer during her interrogation, she had been living in the US in continuous legal
status for almost 14 years. She had official USCIS paperwork in her possession to prove this, which was
examined by the Immigration Officer. Until May of this year, her entire life was US-based and she had good
reason to believe she would continue to live there up until the last days of her final visa. She had been a
graduate (F-1) student for many years, then worked under OPT for a company who subsequently sponsored her
for H1-B status. The security requirements for her position were later changed by the US military to exclude
non-citizens, so she was unable to continue in that position.
She was advised that in order to remain in non-immigrant status she would have to change to B2 visitor status.
This is a long process Marcia went through, however by the time the B2 status was processed, the US sequester
had been put in place and her prospective employer was subjected to a hiring freeze.
Her B2 status was due to expire on 27th March and she was not informed of the freeze until only 10 days earlier.
At this time she made arrangements to leave the US as quickly as was reasonably possible given that she'd lived
there for nearly 14 years and thus had a lot of roots to sever (car, house lease) not to mention the prospect of
being separated from her fianc for an indeterminate time.
Although Marcia did stay briefly beyond the end of that visa, this is considered normal by US immigration and
carries no penalty up to a 6 month overstay. "If you overstay but not more than 180 days you must leave the US
but you can apply for a visa to return immediately." Marcia never faced removal proceedings in the US.
Instead, she voluntarily chose to leave less than two months into the six-month grace period.
These are hardly the actions of a person recklessly ignoring immigration laws. The third reason for refusal is
therefore also shown to be invalid. Indeed, given the US has not penalised Marcia for her very slight over-stay
it is bizarre that the UK does.
In addition, the Officer made no mention Marcia being married to a British citizen travelling with her
presumably because clear family connection may mitigate the flimsy grounds for refusal.
This is a pair of newlyweds, intending to only stay with their British family through Christmas and New
Years. It should not be a function of the a government agency to tear citizens apart from their families.
Christian understands there is pressure on the UK Border Agency to appear to be tough on immigration. It is
probable that officers have targets for refusing applications, with the UKBA website brags about cutting migrant
numbers.
Christian cant help but wonder why his wife was picked out for further questioning in the first place. A British
citizen travelling with his Commonwealth citizen wife would seem on the surface to be one of the most
straightforward possible cases. Marcia is extremely intelligent and highly articulate. She comes from an
English-speaking country and English is her first language. She holds three university degrees, a BSc in
Biochemistry, an MSc in Agricultural Diversification/Sustainable Rural Development and a US MSc in Food
Science and Nutrition. Had the immigration officer at the initial encounter spoken with her, she would have
been able to ascertain this for herself.
However, throughout all the questioning where Christian was present, the officer addressed all questions,
whether pertaining to Christian or Marcia, directly to him, speaking of Marcia in the third person, effectively
treating her as if she were a young child or a foreigner with no grasp of the English language. Even when
Christian re-addressed questions to his wife, and received clear, concise answers in perfect English, the officer
waited for Christian to "translate" the answers. It felt to this couple like racial profiling playing a major part.
Page | 107
v19.01
Christine introduced Ziad to her parents when they came out to visit in August 2010. They loved him
and by the time she left Syria in October felt he was the man she wanted to spend my life with.
They stayed in touch via Skype and phone, speaking as often as they were able to; exchanging gifts and
letters back and forth through mutual friends travelling between the two countries.
In May 2011 the couple got engaged, planning to marry in Scotland amidst Christines friends and
family before she moved to Syria to live with him in Damascus where Ziad had a thriving real estate
business. Christine was optimistic about finding work with the UN or another humanitarian agency and
Damascus was a city she loved with many close friends there, both Syrians and internationals who like
her, were committed to staying there long-term.
However the Syrian Revolution changed all that. As a British citizen, Christine immediately became
an object of suspicion by the regime and Ziad was worried for her safety in Syria, particularly because
of the advocacy work she was doing to raise awareness about the situation in the UK.
As refugees flooded out, doors were closed on them from all sides. Getting a visa to the UK was
impossible, and their plans to work in the Gulf received a blow when it too shut its doors on Syrians.
Christine carried on visiting Ziad however as she couldn't live without seeing him - but the security
situation was deteriorating swiftly and it became impossible to stay. By the time she left for the last time
in October 2012 Christine had gotten used to the check points and car bombs, sounds of shelling
throughout the night, plumes of smoke over the city skyline and attack helicopters overhead. The
couple was even shot at by snipers when they went to visit Ziads mother for dinner during Ramadan.
In December 2012, Ziad decided to flee the violence in Syria and join his family in Cairo but then they
discovered he could not apply for a settlement visa from Egypt as he was neither an Egyptian citizen
nor permanent resident. Christine was devastated. Ziad had no choice but to return to Syria and wait
for the embassy in Beirut to process Ziads application.
Page | 108
v19.01
They pre-poned their wedding plans, which was a difficult decision as theyd always wanted to celebrate
with family and friends but with the security situation as it was Christine didn't want to wait any longer
and so after getting married, they applied for a settlement visa for the UK in April 2013.
Christine begged Ziad to remain in Lebanon and not return to Syria but rampant inflation and
unemployment has devastated people's savings and Ziad - like everyone else they know - simply cannot
afford to stay in Beirut, one of the world's most expensive cities, as he awaits a decision.
The following six months were horrendous, with one heartwrenching attack after another leaving Christine in fear of her
husbands life. The Home Office rejected the settlement application
the first time round even though Christine meets the financial
requirement and her husband has passed his English Language test
at the British Council. The reason for refusal was claiming that the
application did not include all the necessary evidence.
In the digital age, the Home Office rejected a bank statement
showing cash savings of 58,000 in addition to Christines annual tax-free salary of 13,590, because
it was an online statement, even though it had been stamped and verified.
They also claimed that without the certificate of entry into the KET the certificate provided of passing
the exam was invalid. No common sense was allowed for...how would Ziad have been able to pass the
exam if he hadnt been allowed into the room to sit the exam?!
As Home Office refused to let them just then include the missing
documents in the initial application, they reapplied on 15 July 2013
with the additional information also present.
However, given the serious escalation in the situation in Syria
particularly in and around Damascus, the couple is very worried. Ziad
lives only 15 mins away from the chemical weapon attack sites of late
August, where a day later there was a huge car bomb. Ziads car has
been was sprayed with bullets and he has been detained. No one knows why. Ziad is under threat from
the regime who may not now allow him to even leave the country.
Christine asks, even while the UK considers how they will get involved in the Syrian situation, is does
the UK Government not have a duty of care to the Syrian family members of UK citizens? Given that
imminent military intervention has been considered, should the government not first help get our family
members out the country or at the very least speed up their visa decisions? Given Cameron's
determination to 'protect civilians in Syria' why can he not start by protecting Syrians with proven ties
to the UK?
Christine is not asking for special measures to circumvent the rules (in any case she meets the visa
requirements) but simply for her government to stop dragging its feet in determining the visa for her
husband given the war in Syria.
Page | 109
v19.01
Visa Application
At some expense they engaged UK VISA and IMMIGRATION to prepare the visa application which was
presented in Nairobi in January 2012. However, Christine was diagnosed with TB and thus followed
six months of treatment. While the family is now blessed Christine has been given the all clear and is
in good health, they face devastation under the new rules, as their new application in August 2012, was
refused.
Employment
Christopher works for Enara Community Care as a domiciliary care worker. He cares for elderly in their
homes, starting work at 6.45am and sometimes until as late as 9pm. His annual salary is c15,500
which, combined with a pension of 3,746 from Probation Service, gives him an annual income of
19,246.
Page | 110
v19.01
He is considering employing a local solicitor who has indicated there is a case for appeal with fees over
4,500. Christophers savings are being depleted by having to finance life in Kenya for his wife and
stepson, maintaining his life here and the additional cost of maintaining regular contact with his wife.
Christopher believes in his marriage vows and is firm in his commitment
to his wife. He is lucky to have a supporting family and friends who are
praying for Christopher to be reunited with Christine and Michael. Like
other BritCits, Christopher is realistic about why we have immigration
rules; but he feels that the draconian way these have been imposed,
without regional income tolerances or respect for British citizens being
taken into consideration is just plain unfair.
He believes the rules brought in make a mockery of the Conservative
partys manifesto commitment:
Strong families are the bedrock of a strong society. They provide the
stability and love we need to flourish as human beings, and the
relationships they foster are the foundation on which society is built
Britains families will get our full backing across all our policies
We need good, strong families to help our society work well. We will support families to stay together.
Update: Christopher and one of his daughters went to the First-tier Tribunal on 5th July and
presented the facts of their case, in response to the visa refusal. A Home Office representative
suggested there was no need to grant Christophers wife a visa as Christopher could go and live in
Mombasa. The appeal judge in his report however wrote "...I do not accept that it is reasonable to
expect the sponsor, a British citizen, to live in Kenya, if it were possible, or another part of the world
as yet unidentified. It would be to deprive him of the benefits of his British citizenship"
So the appeal was allowed on human rights grounds even though Christopher falls short of the income
level by approx 17.00 per week. The Judge accepted Christopher has no accommodation costs and
that his "...resources are more than adequate to accommodate and maintain the appellants."
The judge also awarded fees against the Home Office of 280.
Now Christopher and his family wait a further 4-6 weeks as the Home Office has 28 days to " seek
leave to appeal against the appeal decision " before making plans to be reunited once more.
Page | 111
v19.01
Claire
Just because the ECO appears to not have bothered to look at the
paperwork, we may have to wait for two years.
Claire is a British citizen living in South Africa with her South African husband and British daughter.
They applied for a UK settlement visa but were declined on the basis that they dont meet the financial
requirement as defined in paragraph E-ECP.3.3. This is even though they do meet the financial
threshold. The ECO claimed that Claire did not have a firm job offer in the UK, even though she had
enclosed a copy of her contract of employment in the UK with a start date of 1st July, also showing she
would have been earning over 18,600.
This family has naturally appealed the decision. However they are now waiting for their appeal to be
dealt with, simply because an ECO appears to not have bothered to look at all the paperwork.
An additional point of concern is that they have been informed their appeal could take up to two years;
theyve been told that its unlikely that her husband would be issued with a visitor visa now, given he
has applied for a settlement visa.
So this family waits and waits, considering perhaps the exercise of EU treaty rights just in order for
three British citizens to be able to return home as a family.
Page | 112
v19.01
Dan
I cant believe I may never be able to return home, as breaking up
my family for several months just isnt feasible.
Dan is a British citizen. His wife is from the USA and they have been living in Florida for four years
with their two daughters...both of whom are British citizens.
The time is right for this family to return to UK, their homeland. A homeland even for Dans American
wife who did most of her growing up here in the UK though never obtained citizenship a fact they so
dearly regret now.
Dan finds the financial requirements extremely complicated and convoluted; but having made sense of
them, and despite having earned over 18,600 p.a. in the US, he is still unable to return home with his
family.
He is not able to satisfy having a job offer starting within three months of the application. As Dan cant
afford multiple trips to the UK and can't afford unpaid time off work unpaid it would otherwise mean
he earned less than 18,600.
He is frustrated that the UK government expects him to have a job offer before he is even allowed to
return here. He questions whether the UKBA realises:
1) The impossibility of securing a job via a phone interview.
2) The difficulty in getting time off and the general lack of vacation time in countries outside the EU in
order to get to the UK for a job interview.
3) The cost of flying across the Atlantic for a job interview.
He is also amazed that this wifes earning potential, as a skilled professional is completely disregarded,
as are the tax dollars they are currently paying to the Inland Revenue Service in America...tax which
would otherwise be paid to HMRC.
He is also bemused; if he returned to the UK with his two British daughters, the three of them would be
eligible for all kinds of benefits at a great cost to the British taxpayer. So it is in the best interest of the
British taxpayer to allow Dans wife in the country...she would work, pay taxes and be ineligible for
any benefits, whilst also rendering Dan and his daughters ineligible by way of the household income
being over the qualifying threshold.
Dan does not want to return home for benefits. So he will not let his family be split up and we will find
a way for the family to be together in the country they have a right to live in.
Page | 113
v19.01
Page | 114
v19.01
Page | 115
v19.01
Update:
At the end of October 2013, Daniel and Rachel received a letter from the Home Office. Despite the
fact that they have provided clear evidence to show Daniel earns over 18,600, the Home Office has
said their application is on hold indefinitely, because they do not meet the financial requirements of an
annual salary of 18,600. The Home Office was however generous enough to offer Rachel the option
of withdrawing her application and losing her application fees.
This couple is now stuck in limbo only because the Home Office does not appear to have staff who can
read an Accountants Statement of Income.
They will be working with their solicitor to see how best to proceed with this. Home Office rather than
actually reading the documents submitted, thought it easier to put them in the delay pile.
Daniel is reasonably confident the courts will stand by their original verdict in regards to the Income
Requirement ruling and at least, while their application is on hold the couple gets to remain together
as it was an in-country application. However its very frustrating for Rachel to not be able to do
anything or go anywhere; to be unable to make any sort of contribution to society or even partake in
any activity.
Update 2
Daniel and Rachel were put on hold for not meeting the income requirements according to the Home
Office, despite HMRC, Certified Public Accountants and bank statements showing otherwise, pending
the result of the MM case.
Rachel and Daniel grew increasingly worried as the days, weeks, and months passed without any
word. After that awful Court of Appeal judgment on the MM case, the couple was prepared for the
worst and had begun the process to re-settle in the USA.
Much to their surprise however, in October 2014, they learned that Rachel's visa had been approved
(begging the question why the MM case was used as an excuse to put their application on hold
pending the judgment given the lack of relevance). It couldn't have come at a better time, as the
couple are also expecting the birth of their first child.
Page | 116
v19.01
Page | 117
v19.01
hands of her family back in the US. The goal appeared to be to put sufficient pressure on the
detainees to force to them choose to leave the UK.
Kelly was held at Yarls Wood for over a month. A messy battle was necessary to get her out of there,
and that too on bail. The couple did manage to go ahead with their plans to marry but continue to face
a traumatic and expensive legal battle to allow Kelly to live in the UK with her husband.
Home Office has decided Kelly no longer falls under
asylum seeker rules, but the standard family immigration
rules and the family is in the middle of appealing to the
courts. Meanwhile, Kelly is terrified she will be sent to
Yarls Wood again. The arguments made against Kelly
being allowed to remain in the UK involve suggesting
Darren leave the UK, with no regard for who will look after
Darrens parents, or the statement from a doctor that
without the medical care Darren receives in the UK, his
own lifespan will be shortened.
Home Office states as part of their refusal that Darren and his family are not Kellys real family as
theyre not blood relatives; that the couple can continue their relationship online; that no one in
Darrens family earns money. All factoring in to their reason for refusal.
They seem to not understand that financial situation does not factor in to an asylum claim, that
Darrens parents are elderly, that Kelly has not claimed any benefits and that as Darren receives a
Disability Living Allowance, his spouse would in fact be exempt from the financial requirements
anyway. There is no regard for Kellys occupation as a musician and writer, not only would she be
working and paying taxes, but under UK immigration rules shed have no recourse to public funds.
There is complete disregard for Darrens health issues leaving the UK would mean he would not be
able to afford the testosterone injections thus hindering the couples chances of having a family,
Darrens parents becoming grandparents. Leaving the UK would mean Darrens quality of life would
reduce, his bones would become brittle without the injections. Doctors have even said cessation of the
injections would shorten Darrens longevity. Home Office does not understand or does not care.
All this family wants is to be left alone to recover and move forward, yet the Home Office seems
determined to spend an exorbitant amount of taxpayers money in what feels to this family like
deliberate malice.
For the familys petition: https://www.change.org/p/theresa-may-theresa-may-stop-your-abuse-ofhuman-rights-stop-splitting-up-our-family
A message from Kelly:
What I feel makes this particularly unjust is that one of the reasons the Home Office give for removing
the unwanted is to prevent a burden on the tax payer. I would like to point out that through all of this I
have never once claimed a penny from this state and never had any (or would have any) intentions of
doing so. And yet, in detaining me, not only have the Home Office placed severe financial stress on my
husband and his family, but on the taxpayer themselves as my detainment has been completely
unjustified. It has cost everyone more money in the time I was detained than in all the months leading
up to, and since then. Who at this point is causing unnecessary burden to the taxpayer?
Page | 118
v19.01
David
It took 8 months for UKBA to process my wifes application..and we
had to jump through hoops to prove we had a real marriage in spite
of having a child together. So my complete sympathy is with others
going through the process.
David is a British citizen who has personally been affected by the new immigration rules.
Since David married his wife from the Philippines nearly three years ago, the British government has
made their lives a misery; causing unnecessary stress, worry and suffering in trying to prove that their
marriage is genuine even though they have a son together. David finds this outrageous and ridiculous
how can you prove you are in a genuine marriage if the proof of a child is insufficient?
They had to submit Davids passport while his wifes application for indefinite leave was being
considered; they had to send countless documents and fill out lots of forms. They had to pay an
extortionate amount of money even for applying for his wife to remain in the country that is that of her
husbands and sons.
Although David is in the fortunate position of having received a successful decision on his wifes
application, it was after eight months of stress, worry and anxiety. His complete sympathy goes out to
all families that affected caught in the complicated web of these immigration rules.
Page | 119
v19.01
Page | 120
v19.01
Page | 121
v19.01
This was a particularly hard refusal to get over as the couple had been certain theyd finally be able to
start their lives together but were once again forced apart.
Six months down the line, Euan has been able to demonstrate he has the necessary amount of savings
and they have made their third application.
They dont know whether the visa has been refused or granted; theyve just been told that a decision
has been made.
It has been a year and a half since Euan and Megan started this horrific journey of being allowed to
be together. Euan has lived and worked in Scotland his whole life, and is a successful musician
making more than enough money to support their lifestyle.
Megan graduated with honours from a top Boston university with a degree in Child Psychology. She
has extensive experience working with children with autism and is eager to work with children with
disabilities in Scotland.
Most of all, they are just a married couple wishing to live their life together, yet being forced to live
3,500 miles apart. This decision the government has made has cost them nearly $10,000, and their
family life has been put on hold.
While both remain hopeful that this time Megan will receive the
settlement visa, theyr both know the fight is not over.
Other families and couples should not have to go through
this. Euan should not be stripped of his rights by his own
government simply because he has created his own successful
business that just misses out on the threshold officials in London
deem fit.
The UK government is destroying well-meaning young couples and families who simply want to
work, contribute, and live together in the country of their origin.
Megan has been treated like a benefit-seeking drain on society and has been forced apart from her
husband while he as the British citizen must prove his worth.
The government has surpassed being strict into territory which is unfair, unjust and simply cruel.
The most insulting part of the entire process is that after going through all of this madness, spouses are
only entitled to live with loved ones for two and a half years. Then they have to go through this
nightmare again.
Page | 122
v19.01
Page | 123
v19.01
France, but helping his son meant he got caught up in the crash, and missed the boat.
So he rented out his renovated house and went to France on the off chance that some work would come
his way. He succeeded in obtaining a language assistant job in Lille.
As before, he paid all the deductions in France and living/ travelling expenses (not tax deductible), more
tax on his French salary in the UK, and tax on his rental income. He came back to find the flat he had
rented out trashed, not for the first time, and had to spend several weeks sorting that out.
In late 2009 Gerard was fed up, lonely and disillusioned. However, finally, things were to take a turn
for the better; the mortgage was nearly paid off and Gerard met his now wife, Vilai. They spent a lot of
time together in Thailand and UK.
Last year Vilai applied for a visit visa in Bangkok, but was turned down, with the usual insufficient
reason to return, despite having a long-term job to go back to and proof of same. While querying the
decision, Gerard contacted his MPs office and other individuals. Mysteriously, the decision was
reversed and no explanation was given. Gerard wanted Vilai to marry him while she was here, but she
had promised her boss she would go back, and so she did.
The plan in December 2011 was for Gerard to spend more time with Vilai, his fiance, and proceed to
marriage if and when they were both sure. She always was, he became so, despite and perhaps because
of some cultural differences, and they got married.
The intention was Gerard would return to UK with his wife, but they were hit by the English test
requirement; it had to be taken and passed before applying for a visa, along with the health checks.
Gerard firmly believes, in line with various studies, the place to learn English is in an English-speaking
country, by immersion (acquisition), not just in a classroom. Soon it became apparent they wouldnt be
travelling together as Gerard had urgent matters to attend to at home. He did hope his wife would be
with him in time for the Olympic torch through his village. Alas, it was not to be.
Vilai sat the English test in March and passed first time, although it took until May for the certificate to
arrive. There was then an IOM query over her TB test, and it took another two months for the all-clear
to be received. All these delays meant that they could not submit a spouse visa application before 9 July.
Finally, in August, she was able to apply for a settlement visa, pay over 800 and wait up to 12 weeks
for the UKBA to decide if this married couple could live together.
Worse was to come. Vilais application was rejected as UKBA wanted a vast array of additional
documents. No chance was given to respond. It was a rejection and probably another 800+ to be paid
before they would reconsider the spouse's application. The UKBA appears to be happy to advise what
they want after they turn you down; then, on subsequent applications, they may find something else,
and so it goes on. They dont ask for more information during the waiting period, which is scandalous.
What does Gerard think of all this? He thinks its appalling. What should have been a happy joyous
time after a decade of misery turned into an edelweiss trampled on by Douglasboots. HMRC is happy
to accept the thousands he pays in taxes, meanwhile the UKBA is even happier to take the visa
application fees, and find spurious reasons to reject visa applications, in order to take yet more fees.
This government doesnt care how long they keep married couples apart, they dont care about British
citizens and their spouses, they dont respect marriage or family. Article 8 is just a thorn in their side.
All British citizens hear about are scam marriages, terrorists, drug dealers and people-trafficking. They
are choosing to ignore the many decent honest citizens who just want to live with their family.
Page | 124
v19.01
Page | 125
v19.01
More importantly: why couldnt Home Office have contacted them? The second they opened the
envelope and the payslips tumbled out, theyd have been able to spot that something wasnt quite
official enough for them.
In the meantime, Ziah may lose the job she has been offered a job that would mean she starts paying
income tax because she cant prove she is allowed to work here, even though she is! So, we start
our long and arduous climb up the slippery pole that is the appeals process.
Receiving an EEA residence permit really is a formality: apparently it used to be possible to rock up at
an office with a pair of passports, a marriage certificate, a couple of pay slips and a tenancy
agreement, and theyd stamp the EEA residence card into your passport there and then. The whole
process would take less than a day. The underpinning laws havent changed, but the process has
morphed from taking 4-hours to 4400 hours.
To prove the payslips and other digital documents are effectively originals, Haje was advised to
purchase a rubber stamp; his lawyer said Its only 30, buy one. Its the Home Office, logic does not
apply.
As they prepare to put in their appeal, Ziah realises Home Office never returned their original
marriage certificate. So she sends a letter to the Home Office, asking for her marriage certificate
back. In response, they received a most insidious letter from EO2 LNC21 (as their case worker is
known - god forbid they actually get the real name of the person deciding their fate) claiming to work
for the UK Boarder Agency (sic) application was seen and decided by myself, and that there was no
marriage certificate in your application The caseworker goes on to say that the application did not
contain a covering letter stating the contents of the application and the only record this office has that
there may have been a marriage certificate included in this application is the application form.
The absolutely incredible thing about the latter statement is that the couple included the marriage
certificate and a cover letter specifying this. How can they be so sure? Because the Home Office
returned their cover letter to them!
It does appear that Home Office puts up artificial hindrances in the way, even for people from the EU
(and their family members), because they are trying to dissuade potential migrants from EEA
countries as much as possible. Is that legal? Absolutely not. Does the Home Office care? Actions
speak louder than words.
Haje finds it hard to explain exactly how powerless he feels when facing a government agency which
finds it easy to flout the law. Doubly so when what ought to be a simple formality becomes an
unsurpassable wall that stands between the right-here-right-now, and being able to start a life in the
UK as productive members of society.
Ziah would love to work. She would love to start paying taxes. Both her and Haje would love to be a
shiny example of exactly the kind of immigrants we need in this country.
Now if only the Home Office would let them.
Page | 126
v19.01
Page | 127
v19.01
Page | 128
v19.01
Page | 129
v19.01
This couples experience of the UKBA is unfortunately not an anomaly. We await the result
of their appeal and hopefully justice will finally prevail for this couple.
Page | 130
v19.01
Page | 131
v19.01
Nevertheless, it was a beautiful ceremony followed by a lovely honeymoon before JoJos work
commitments required her to return home. So it was that the couple began married life on different
continents. What was supposed to be their first magical Christmas together with all of JoJos family,
turned into a sad phone call, with bad phone signal and getting cut off on numerous occasions.
The couple comforted themselves in the knowledge that the appeal deadline was the 22nd February and
that in two months they would be reunited, since their appeal case was rock solid and full of irrefutable
evidence. Unsurprisingly, JoJo and Loc did not receive any decision from the UKBA by 22nd February
as required. HM Courts and First Tier Tribunal wrote to inform the couple that they would have to
attend an oral hearing to appeal the decision.
A lawyer they retained for the appeal was unphased and unsurprised by UKBAs behaviour. She
informed the couple it was common for UKBA to not even open appeal documents and simply wait the
five months afforded to them, to then allow it to automatically go to a hearing.
Delaying tactics presumably in the hope that the relationship would not withstand the pressure.
Despite all this, JoJo and Loc feel lucky compared to many other families in similar situations as they
dont yet have kids and so arent enduring the pain of raising a family apart. JoJo is very fortunate to
be able to earn over 18,600 to qualify for a visa. Loc didnt have to take an English test because there
isnt a testing centre in Gabon. But that doesnt stop them feeling angry and frustrated. This treatment
by the UK government is a breach of human rights.
Their appeal hearing was scheduled for June 2013, more than a year after the initial application. JoJo
and Loc tried to remain optimistic, whilst preparing for more delaying tactics and preposterous claims,
determined to prove love conquers all.
In March 2013, Loc received an email informing him that the appeal had been successful, asking him
to take his passport to the embassy in Cameroon. However the embassy was unaware of this; finally
agreeing to send his application to Ghana - a process which would take a further two weeks. Only to
find weeks later there had been no progress...after several times being told the equivalent of the cheque
is in the mail he was told the visa printing machine in Ghana was broken, so hed have to wait another
month, or they could send his passport to another country with a working machine.
JoJos father went to the UKBA office in Croydon. After an hour of not even being allowed through
the door, he finally got to speak to someone who knew staff in the Ghana office. Two hours later, he
received a call from Ghana promising him the passport with the visa was being sent back to Cameroon
the very same day clearly the machine wasnt broken after all.
Six more excruciating days went by. Finally, on 2nd May, the passport
arrived and Loc could return to Gabon to take the flight to UK on 7th May
where JoJo met him at the airport. At passport control Loc was taken aside
and questioned for over an hour then finally allowed through. Then the
now not-so-newly married couple was finally reunited.
The entire application process ended up taking nearly one year, costing
over 5000 and a lot of heartache. What should have been a simple application process was turned into
a shambolic and frustrating process by the UK government in a misguided aim to cut immigration and
break apart British families.
Page | 132
v19.01
Page | 133
v19.01
With happy hearts the family welcomed Clyde and Xu Dan at Heathrow on 18th December 2011. Xu
Dan visited her grandmother-in-law as well, spending a fantastic Christmas, followed by a tour of UK
where Clyde and Xu Dan met relatives from Shropshire, North Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.
Clyde longed to live in the friendly communities among the narrow boats moored on river Cam and
used his savings to buy a boat. He received job offers from English Language schools in Cambridge.
At the same time, Xu Dan left UK complying with the visa conditions and went to Belgium to be with
her in-laws. It was only AFTER a settlement visa application was submitted and paid for (over 1000)
that fine print indicated those with temporary residence rights in Belgium couldnt apply for a settlement
visa. So Xu Dan took her first solo plane journey back to China and after some complications, submitted
the application. The visa was rejected - UKBA wasnt satisfied Clyde would earn 18,600; though from
his performance to date indicated he was set to earn at least 21,000. It is impossible to describe the
distress & devastation caused to the whole family.
The offer of support of Clydes parents was ignored, as was the rent-free accommodation in Joyces
mums home; also ignored was the fact that Clyde owned his own residence i.e. the boat for which he
therefore wouldnt have any accommodation expenses. The income which could be earned by Xu Dan
was also ignored, as a fluent Mandarin speaker.
They immediately appealed in November 2012, though the hearing will take place after June 2013 at
the earliest, which means the couple is separated for a further minimum 9 months.
Joyces husband couldnt cope with the constant issues surrounding Joyce and her family; he suffered
from depression and felt neglected and subsequently left Joyce.
This family is now completely broken because of UKBAs farcical immigration rules.
Joyces plea is for MPs our representatives, to take a hard look at how your draconian immigration
rules are affecting British citizens, rules which dont contribute to supporting families nor stabilising
society in any way.
Page | 134
v19.01
Leanne
My husband is my life and he's the best thing that's ever happened
to me - it kills me every day I am forced to be without him
Leanne is a British citizen. Her husband is a citizen of Egypt and therefore not allowed to live in the
UK with her.
Leanne met her husband in Greece, where he has lived and worked for over six years. They have been
together for the last four, and got married in April 2013, in Greece. They know they will need to be
apart for over six months possibly twelve if not longer. Six months to show Leannes payslips and
savings (she earns less than 18,600 but together they have 22,000 savings to supplement this for
satisfying the financial requirement). Another six months or longer for processing of the application.
Although the financial considerations are in hand, Leanne is petrified her husbands visa will be refused.
Their view very much (not surprisingly!) is that UKBA seems to be finding reasons to refuse visas left,
right and centre, often for spurious reasons.
At 31, Leanne already feels like she doesnt have enough time. She was diagnosed with bowel cancer
at the age of 20; after bouts of chemotherapy and surgery, she was told she would not be able to have
her own biological kids. So given that her hospital has indicated she may be able to have IVF, its so
urgent that this couple gets the chance to make their own family. However they cant take it further
without her husband by her side.
Leanne is scared..if her husband cant join her any time soon, with that not only are her rights as a
British citizen jeopardised, but so is her very natural human right to have a family
On 25th June 2013, Leanne cried tears of joy. This is the day she was returning from hospital after one
of her regular checkups for cancer.
However, the reason for the tears was the ray of hope for her being united with her husband. Leannes
brother sent her a link to a BBC article, following which she watched a Newsnight program telling her
of EU providing justice where the British government snatched it away, via the Surinder Singh route.
The resulting questions though show more than anything that this route isnt one taken lightly; nor are
British citizens with non-EEA families expecting our streets to be paved with gold. They also show the
shameful fear the government has successfully instilled in the very people its being paid to represent.
Does this mean I dont have to be apart from my husband any longer?
Can the government close this route too?
How long do I have to be working there?
Can my husband work there as well?
Will my husband then be allowed to work in the UK, if we return here using Surinder Singh route?
There at no point have been any questions on accessing benefits which under UKs immigration rules
non-EEA family members dont qualify for any way. If anything people have been adamant that with
their spouse here they would have less need to claim benefits because of the multiple incomes the family
would be earning.
Page | 135
v19.01
Page | 136
v19.01
Maria
I satisfy the financial threshold, but as we have not lived together,
how do I prove a durable relationship to the Home Offices
satisfaction?
Maria is a British citizen from Northern Ireland, with a boyfriend who is a citizen of the USA.
They have known each other since 2000 when as teenagers they became friends, staying in touch across
the Atlantic through emails and phone calls.
In March 2010, their relationship developed into something more than just friends. They visited each
other twice a year and now wish to make their relationship more permanent by living together in
Northern Ireland.
Maria earns 30,000 a year, well in excess of the 18,600 requirement. However, they are not quite
ready for the commitment of marriage and so flummoxed by how to prove that theirs is a durable
relationship when they have not been living together so dont have joint household bills, tenancy
agreements or a mortgage.
This is a couple who simply wants the opportunity to have a proper relationship, explore the potential
for a future together before rushing into marriage. A couple that should be admired for being mature.
Yet this is a couple that is afraid they will be caught in the Home Office net of finding reasons to refuse
visa applications rather than using common sense.
Page | 137
v19.01
Paula
The government expects me to leave my job, my ability to support my
family and just move countries, else be apart from my husband!
Paula is a British citizen. She was born and raised here.
She is extremely angry that someone she doesnt even know...someone who doesnt even know her, is
telling her she cant live with her husband...the man she was allowed to marry!
Paula earns over 18,600 as the manager of a charity. Her husband has passed his ESOL exams and is
currently devouring Charles Dickens novels. They have never had recourse to public funds. Paula does
have a medical condition which requires medication and supervision.
This couple has spent a lot of money on immigration lawyers, yet been refused leave to remain.
The message to this British citizen is; leave your job, your ability to support your family, maintain your
medical condition elsewhere...move to another country!
Page | 138
v19.01
Page | 139
v19.01
Page | 140
v19.01
The couple responded by Shafik sending in the original documents and appealing against the decision
in April 2013. In May the court sent him a pending appeal, suggesting they re-send the application to
the embassy to review, and that if the original decision was not overturned by late September then they
would hold a judicial review of the decision.
Shafiks solicitor told him that given the unlikelihood of the
embassy overturning the decision, it is likely it would be March
2014 for their case to be heard in court, and June 2014 before
they received a decision.
These timescales are unacceptable for any family, but especially
one where the affected family member is in a war torn country
like Syria.
Shafik is aware that the Home Office has processed only two settlement visas for Syrians in the past
three years.
Shafik is trying to keep his fiance free from the stress and misery she is ill and there is a shortage of
medication in Syria at the moment. He speaks to her every day for the limited time that there is
electricity there, trying to keep up her hopes.
However he is worried. The security situation in Syria is deteriorating day by day. His fiance is in a
warzone and is in real and constant danger every day. For them this is not just about the basic human
right to be allowed to live with your family, but a right to life.
Page | 141
v19.01
Page | 142
v19.01
Page | 143
v19.01
Despite both Steve and Yoko being educated and fluent in English, they were having trouble
navigating the immigration rules therefore instructed a solicitor to help them with their application,
incurring more expense.
The solicitor advised that though the application could succeed, the caseworker might ask for six
payslips for Yoko as proof of the source of their savings. However, as Yoko has been on maternity
leave, she did not receive any payslips.
Their solicitor told them that where the caseworker asks for additional evidence, if this is not
furnished within two weeks, the application is refused and the application fee is lost.
The couple could not risk that. Not just because of the application fee, but because Steves employer
had offered him another years contract. A visa application refusal would have meant Steve would
have been forced to remain in Japan, unemployed, but also unable to return to the UK.
So the family decided to delay their application until Yoko has been back at work for six months, just
so she could get six payslips.
This should ensure the Home Office has no legal reason to refuse their application (though the couple
is aware this doesnt mean the Home Office wont refuse it!). However, the inflexibility of the rules
has meant their daughter has had to go into daycare and theyve been forced to put their plans on hold
for a year just to satisfy utterly pointless bureaucratic requirements.
In the meantime, their daughter still hasn't met most of her family, and Yoko and I have to cope with
raising a kid without any family support for another year.
Whats even worse is that when eventually Steve and his family are able to move to the UK, they
won't be able to buy a house or invest their savings in any way, because theyll have to keep them in a
current account for the next five years to satisfy the ongoing requirements.
Steve is fully aware that he is one of the luckier victims of his countrys family immigration rules. He
has not been separated from his wife, and he knows they will be eligible for a visa in the near future.
However his case does highlight that even where you are reasonably well off, even where you do
satisfy all the requirements, even where you can prove you are in a genuine relationship, bureaucracy
could be what puts up a giant barrier in the path to family reunification.
Page | 144
v19.01
Page | 145
v19.01
Steve followed the news and various immigration boards closely. The more he found out about how
the rules were going to change without a parliamentary vote, the more outraged he became.
By June 2012, Steve was fortunate to obtain clarity that because his fiances visa was under the old
rules, theyd continue, even for the spouse visa, to not have any income threshold applied to them.
Steve had wisely made some investments which meant they were okay for a period of not working.
In late June 2012, the couple got married.
More good news followed with August seeing
Steve finding work again earning over the 18,600
threshold, albeit a threshold which does not apply
to him. So the celebrations continued and in
November 2012, Yuriko received her spouse visa.
However Steve was angry with his country and his
government. He had been put through an
incredible amount of stress, just because he had
fallen in love with someone from another region of
the world.
Yuriko & Steve on their wedding day
So despite his situation being resolved, Steve attended the 9th July 2012 demonstration against the
rules, joined by his wife. He remained active on various online forums, when he was approached by
Sonel to join as the other half of BritCits an invitation he accepted in order to make a difference and
campaign against rules designed to tear families apart, even though his own was intact.
Steves IT skills were a great aid to his creating the website www.britcits.com to reach an even wider
audience.
The collation of stories of British citizens affected by UKs immigration rules to raise awareness and
drive change by lobbying politicians, liaising with media and forming a support group for those
impacted, has over time gained momentum as the horrific nature of the rules have became even more
apparent.
Page | 146
v19.01
Tom started a new company in March 2013, but was disappointed to learn that he cannot sponsor his
wife to join him until the company has been in existence for one year to meet the strict evidential
requirements of Paragraph 9 of the Appendix FM-SE, which require the latest annual tax return and 12
months' bank statements.
The company is doing well. Indeed, Tom has already earned the requisite 18,600 income, but it is
only because they do not have certain documents for very valid and legitimate reasons, they have been
advised not to apply at this time.
This evidential rule vaults form over substance and adds a further layer of red tape on self-employed
persons, who must wait 12 months to sponsor a loved one even more than the other categories of
employment who need to show 6 months documentary evidence.
Elizabeth is a trained attorney and broadcast journalist.
Page | 147
v19.01
expensive
and
Tom is a British citizen from the East Riding area, just west of York. His partner, Olya is from the
Ukraine and lives in Kiev.
As Tom is a musician by profession, the couple has been lucky enough to travel all over Europe together
for best part of the past two years. Their life together so far has been an adventure, full of all the care
and love that anyone in a healthy relationship will know of. Olya is also lucky that as a linguist (fluent
in English, Russian, Ukrainian, Spanish with some Polish and also now learning Greek) her employer
allows her to work remotely, as long as she has a computer and wifi access, making their nomadic
lifestyle possible.
They never had a problem obtaining visas for other
European countries for Olya. However, when they decided
it was time for Olya to come home with Tom, meet his
friends and family they came across immigration horror.
Olya's passport is full of visas and stamps from visits all
over Europe and indeed many parts from outside the region
as well. The visa denial for a UK visit visa was completed
unexpected. So they submitted a second application.
Flights were bought as required for the application and fees
paid.
Olya declared her savings and job status. Her parents provided 'emergency funds' just in case theyd be
required, of over 1000. However the Home Office refused this application as well, stating that this
amount was insufficient (even though Olya was only wanting to be here for two weeks); they also
refused on the grounds that Tom did not declare his finances and prove that he could support Olya
during her trip. Even though she didnt actually need financial support from Tom given her own
financial situation.
They made several visits to the visa application centres, which proved to be awful. The staff accepting
applications were rude for no reason; Olya, an otherwise strong woman, broke down in tears after one
such visit resulted in the staff humiliating her in public.
During a visit to Kiev in June 2012, they emailed to try and arrange another meeting. Around this time
they met a number of younger Ukrainian friends some without jobs or savings - who had applied for
visas to the UK successfully. These were visitor visas just like the one being sought for Olya, except
their reasons for visiting the UK was sightseeing and the club scene.
Tom and Olya are both, working people in a relationship. Theyre bemused why they were being denied
a visa to see family and friends, while those for comparatively more trivial reasons were being granted
the same type of visa, serving to highlight massive inconsistencies with visitor visa policies.
The couple submitted a visa application for the third time, going over the top with supporting
documentation. The expected processing time passed and they still had no answer, and the date of their
flights was fast approaching. A chaser call led to their being patronisingly told to "wait like everyone
else has to". On the day of the flight, Olya waited with her father outside the Passport Centre with her
bags packed. The passport never came.
Another flight missed. Another chaser led to their being eventually told that the decision had been made
some weeks ago, but the application was 'stuck in the system'.
Page | 148
v19.01
The third refusal was a huge blow. Olya was deemed to have used 'deceptive means to obtain access to
the UK'. An incredibly demeaning remark and unbelievable to the couple that anyone could come to
that conclusion from their very standard paperwork.
Apparently the case handler thought it was suspicious that a large
amount of money had entered Olya's bank account and disappeared
after the previous visa refusal. Indeed, the person appeared to not
have read the supporting paperwork explaining that the funds were a
loan from Olyas dad, and returned when not needed for the UK trip.
Olya was informed she could only make an administrative appeal and
that the denial would remain on her record for a period of ten years.
Bear in mind, all this just for a visitors visa.
Tom is dreading the problems they will face when they decide to get
married. With her language skills, countries should be falling over
themselves to welcome Olya. Yet Tom fears that UKs immigration
policies would even reject her as the wife of a British citizen. He
never would have believed without first-hand experience, how
discriminatory and contradictory his countrys immigration rules are.
Tom now regularly visits Ukraine where he tours successfully as a
musician, selling out venues and generally being met with a great deal of support there. Olya has now
met Toms family during a holiday in Cyprus. The couple remains closer than ever yet kept thousands
of miles apart for ridiculous bureaucratic reasons.
Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights states: "Everyone has the right to respect for his
private and family life, his home and his correspondence. There shall be no interference by a public
authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in
a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of
the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the
protection of the rights and freedoms of others."
Toms certain this is not being honoured in their situation.
Page | 149
v19.01
Page | 150
v13.12
Page | 151
v13.12
English language course. Then she would return to Russia and make another application but and
theres always a but it is not permitted for Lionels wife to study while on a family visit or tourist visa.
Manifesto a farce
In the Conservative pre-election manifesto Mr Cameron made a great deal about his views on the
sanctity of marriage and family values. This rule makes an absolute mockery of his views. It effectively
prevents people such as Lionel and Svetlana from living together as a family.
This rule is ludicrous; the majority of couples who are affected by this rule have every intention of
learning English and studying for the Knowledge of Life in the UK test in order to apply for ILR. A
better solution would be to make enrolment on an English language course, once in the UK, a condition
of the visa.
This couple done everything correctly; they considered the fact that Lionel was made redundant and
decided it would not be correct to make an application until he had secured employment. Now, the
government has implemented a minimum gross income which, fortunately, Lionel can currently meet.
However, with future checks and current economic climate, there is no guarantee he will continue to
meet it for five years.
Family visit visa
They applied for a family visit visa but were unsuccessful. Svetlanas parents live in Russia and her
daughter (Lionels stepdaughter) is studying at Kiel University; the UKBA felt that this wasnt sufficient
to guarantee that Svetlana would leave, and therefore refused her the right to visit her husband.
As time goes by this couples only solution is to accept enforced exile and for Lionel to look for work
in another European country.
Yet another Brit being exiled from his country. This is what these UK politicians have brought this
country to.
Update: Lionel and his wife have moved to Germany. They are currently living in a hotel but hope to
secure their own apartment soon. They have otherwise been settling in well and are liking Germany.
Lionel has also been successful in obtaining a job there. Our best wishes to this lovely couple on a
long, happy life together.
Page | 152
v13.12
Page | 153
v13.12
Samantha
Although I satisfy it, the income threshold is too high; and the best
place to learn English should be in the UK. Why make our family
take very difficult tests other than to encourage us to give up?
Samantha is a British citizen. She married her husband, an Egyptian citizen, in May 2012. They were
together for four years before tying the knot, and Samantha lived in Egypt for nine months before
returning to the UK in September 2012.
She returned home to get a job. She knew the immigration rules had changed and so she thought of
herself especially lucky to find a job immediately, paying well over the 18,600 required.
For this couple, the hurdle proving insurmountable, is the English language test. Her husband speaks
good English but his reading and writing are not so good. He took a test in February which he failed;
July sees his second attempt.
Samantha understands that at the end of the day, its up to her husband to pass the exams. But she is
bemused by how difficult they make it for candidates...almost as if they want the candidates to give up.
Results for the test are due in August/September; hopefully he passes. If not, he will have to wait till
November to re-take. To Samantha its a joke that she cant be in her home country, with her own
husband, without recourse to public funds.
Despite satisfying the income threshold, Samantha believes its too high; she doesnt understand why
foreign spouses need to take an English test, which is not remotely basic, with hours of speaking,
listening, reading and writing. She doesnt understand why the test cant be taken in the UK surely it
would be easier to learn English surrounded by it.
Page | 154
v13.12
Page | 155
v13.12
Aimie has been told that for them to meet the financial requirement for her husbands
visa, she would have to have been earning a salary of 18600 for at least 6 months prior
to the visa application. However, as she is a student, they have been relying solely on
their part-time jobs and scholarships.
Aimie feels the new rules for financial requirement are unjust as they dont take into
account individual circumstances. Aimie cannot simply move to another country for
them to be together as she still has three years left at university. She also cannot simply
drop out of university and earn 18600, as she doesnt have the work experience and
would not have the qualifications without her degree, to earn that figure.
Indeed, on minimum wage she would earn approximately 12000, which is far off the
threshold.
To Aimie its nonsensical how 18,600 could be considered reasonable; as a student she receives less
than half of that income, and is still able to pay her bills. The unemployed people on JSA are earning
less than that figure and are able to live.
Aimie does not need luxury items to love her husband.
Page | 156
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 157
Financial requirements
v24.07
Miad complained to the visa consultant who had been helping him (provided by the UK college). The
consultant apologised profusely, offering to refund the visa fee. The visa adviser said Miad could
make another application - instead of going back to Iran, he could simple send the money directly to
the college. Miad asked if this was allowed. The consultant told him that yes, this was allowed. So
listening to his 'expert' advice, he re-applied. And, surprise surprise, he was refused again. Miad was
hopping mad! Again, he was given an apology and a feeble excuse that it had been fine for other
students. This visa consultant again refunded his visa fee - but by this time Miad was again out of
pocket from expenses whilst living in Turkey!
Why was Miad using this useless man's services? Because he had been told by the college that, if
Miad didn't use him and his application was refused, he wouldn't get his college fees refunded!
Miad went back to Iran in August. He had to get the money back from the college which he put in an
approved bank and waited until he could go for a second time, to Turkey - in September - and apply
for a third time.
Thankfully the application was successful this time.
In the meantime, the family migration rules had changed. Miad arrived in the UK in October 2012
and started college straight away. His student visa expires in August 2013.
In January Alexis had to give up college. Had she been able to complete her course, she could have
aimed for a better job, better career and better future - for all four of them. However, because of the
rules, the onus only fell on Alexis to find a job paying over 18,600.
Alexis has been on medication for anxiety and depression with the threat of state-enforced separation
hanging over them.
Page | 158
Financial requirements
v24.07
Alice
Were not asking for hand-outs, just the chance to live as a family
unit.
Alice is a British citizen living here in the UK, in Norfolk. She is 34 years of age, with an 8-year-old
daughter from her first marriage. In May 2010 she met a lovely man who happened to be Tunisian, and
more than two years later, in June 2012, they got married in Tunisia.
They previously applied for him to come here for a 6-week visit in December 2011 and were refused
entry, even though they had a guarantor (Alices reasonably well-off father) AND had savings to pay
for the visit. The reason for the refusal was that the UKBA felt he did not have enough reason to return
to his country following the visit!
They subsequently decided to apply for a spouse visa following the marriage but missed the deadline
for the rules changing.
Alice lives in a small town in Norfolk where a salary of 18,600, particularly in retail the industry she
works in is very difficult to obtain.
The language requirement is not an issue her husband speaks fluent English and even has a TEFL
certificate.
Alice is a single mother and has been using her savings to visit her husband in Tunisia (last year she
managed three visits) because he can't come here, even for a visit!!
Like countless other families affected by these rules, Alice spends most of her life on Skype and is
regretfully beginning to accept that she may never be able to be with her husband, because otherwise it
would mean keeping her daughter away from her dad.
She is at a loss, she feels discriminated against by the British government. Alice is not asking for
handouts, just the chance to live as a family unit.
Alice, and hundreds like her, is exactly the sort of person we and UK politicians should be protecting.
Page | 159
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 160
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 161
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 162
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 163
Financial requirements
v24.07
Aneela
I hope the rules change so families can stop being split up.
Aneela is a British citizen, born and bred in the UK.
She has been a single parent raising a beautiful little boy on her own for the last six years. After her
divorce Aneela had vowed she would never marry again; love, she decided, wasnt for her.
However, on holiday in Pakistan in 2012, staying with her nan and cousins, she met her now husband
during an Eid celebration. Aneela had actually met him many times before, but never spoken to him.
They then met for every day of Aneelas stay in Pakistan. He acted as Aneelas tour guide, showing
her sites in Pakistan she would not have been able to go to alone. Aneela extended her one month stay
by another two weeks to prolong their time together, and then extended it yet again.
It was soon clear to Aneela and her family that what had started as a friendship was now developing
into something much more serious. Aneelas family was not keen. They thought things were being
rushed and tried to keep the couple apart. However, love knows no boundaries. Aneela married the
man she loved in secret. In him seeing the good role model and father she wanted for her son, as well
as a good husband for herself.
Aneela was risking the displeasure of her family with this relationship, but she knew in her bones this
was the man who made her family complete.
She returned to the UK looking for a job paying over the required 18,600. However it took six months
to do so, and in that time Aneela found herself disowned by her family. Her husband was being told by
all and sundry that he could do better than Aneela, a divorced single mother.
However the couple stuck by each other. Aneela returned to Pakistan where they had an official
marriage ceremony with her in-laws present. To Aneelas surprise and pleasure, her in-laws have
accepted her and her son, and they speak on the phone every day.
Now Aneela works two jobs to make ends meet, with Aneelas sister and her friends helping out with
babysitting.
Aneela desperately hopes the immigration rules change so families can stop being separated.
Page | 164
Financial requirements
v24.07
Angela
Angela is a British citizen who met her South African husband in Scotland in 1999. They have been
married for 13 years, spending almost all the time in South Africa. They had a wonderful life there
and were very happy, with a stable business and two beautiful children.
In 2008, their life changed with Angela discovered she was pregnant with their third child. Although
delighted, the family was also a little scared given Angelas history of miscarriages. It was a difficult
pregnancy, tackling work and two other children and advised to take bed rest.
Angela was given cortisone injections to strengthen the babys lungs and a stent inserted when Angela
experienced kidney problems. She was determined to carry the baby to as close to full-term as
possible but lost the battle with the doctor at 34 weeks and had a Caesarean. She is grateful every day
that she did so, as at 28 weeks the baby had actually stopped feeding and growing.
July 2009 saw their baby born, weighing 1.6 kg. The baby was very ill and kept in ICU, with two
holes in her heart and a stomach infection. However even when the family was told the baby had
Downs Syndrome, to Angela her baby was the most beautiful miracle she had ever seen.
Against all odds, the baby pulled through and nine weeks, one day later the family took her home.
The first couple of years were bittersweet, and a mixture of joy and worry. The family had been
warned the babys life expectancy was a maximum of two years. The baby proved the medics wrong.
It was at this time that Angela decided she wanted to return home to the UK. Her sister, who had
moved over to South Africa to be with them, had to go back too and she felt that her kids would
benefit from a life in the UK and the freedom and feeling of safety.
However, as they began to make plans and arrange the documentation to facilitate coming home, more
health problems arose, with the baby diagnosed with Primary Pulmonary Hypertension. One of her
heart chambers had grown to three times its size because it struggled to pump blood. The family
cancelled their UK plans as the baby would not have survived the flight.
The family almost overnight moved house, to live at sea level to allow for more easier breathing for
the baby. This fighter baby astounded doctors once again with her pulmonary pressure levels coming
down from 89 to 35 over a two-year period.
Angelas family has spent four years keeping the baby alive. Now they are
in a position to once again think about their original plans to return to the
UK, where it would also be better for the development of all three of her
children. Schools in the area Angela lives in, in South Africa, have refused
to admit her youngest child, citing lack of manpower and skills.
As Angela gave up her business to care for her daughter, using a substantial part of her savings for
medical costs, she is unable to satisfy the financial requirements of the post July 2012 immigration
rules. Although not poor, they dont have much money. However when UK slammed its door shut
Angela realised EU had left its open.
Though not poor they dont have much money. Moving to Ireland just to one day be able to move to
the UK involves upheaval and expense not once but twice. However at their family meeting the
decision was unanimous and the family made the move to Ireland. They sold everything they had in
South Africa, cashing in their pensions to fund the trip and three months later settled in Ireland.
They are not sure when they will return to the UK, taking each day as it comes.
Page | 165
Financial requirements
v24.07
Anne
I dont know if I will ever see Scotland again.
Anne is a British citizen who has been living in Australia for 45 years. She has been married for 43
years to an Australian man.
She is keen to spend her later years at home in Scotland. However, when they looked into applying
for a visa for her husband, they received a rude shock.
The visa fees alone would be over 600, without any guarantee of success. Indeed, the couple had
been warned that applications were refused for the most minor of things.
This is a couple that has enough money to buy a house in Scotland. Their combined pension from a
lifetime of work in Australia equates to 300 a week. However, none of this is good enough.
Anne is firm in her belief that Australia is a Commonwealth country and Australians fought with and
for Britain in every war. Having her husband being treated in such a way makes her wish Australia
would exit the Commonwealth.
This is yet another family who would not be a burden on the system as they have more than enough to
look after themselves.
Anne is now facing a future without her beloved Scotland. She isnt even sure she will ever be able to
see it again.
Page | 166
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 167
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 168
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 169
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 170
Financial requirements
v24.07
Brian
I wont give up and will move to Ireland if thats the only way I can
be with my family.
Brian is a British citizen, he is 70 years old and retired. Brian is also married to a woman from Brazil
they knew each other for a year before getting married nearly a year and a half ago.
As almost every single married couple does, this couple too wishes to live together. As Brian needs to
be in the UK with 4 children and 10 grandchildren here, this isnt surprising - he wishes to settle in
the UK, with his wife.
However, the Secretary of State does not see it that way. Brians wifes application for leave to remain
was refused, with the advice they received from the government being that there was no reason why the
couple could not carry on with their family life in Brazil.
Brians wife would have qualified under the pre-July 2012 rules, increasingly being dubbed inhumane,
unfair and xenophobic.
Brian will not give up, however is considering exercising his treaty rights as an EU citizen to ensure his
family is broken up which would mean coming out of retirement and finding a job in another EU/EEA
country, just to be able to one day, return home. At any age, but especially his, he shouldnt have to
fight for his right to live with his own family, in his own country.
Putting a 70 year old in a situation where he has to come out of retirement, move countries and prove
his right to be with his wife is something worthy of politicians hanging their heads in shame.
Page | 171
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 172
Financial requirements
v24.07
Claire
My parents are shocked that the support they can offer us is not
considered at all.
Claire is a British citizen married to a man from Fiji.
She has been personally affected by the immigration rules which are now forcing her to choose
between a life outside of her home country and away from family and friends, or spend several
months, maybe even years, apart from her husband while she finds and works in a job meeting the
income threshold and then goes through the laborious visa application process.
Claire is exactly the kind of citizen UK is crying out for. She is a Masters graduate, with a Distinction
from Oxford Brookes University. She will have no trouble at all in gaining work over the income
threshold when she returns to the UK, having already received several interview requests for jobs
paying over 18,600/
She really wants to work here, and feels her skills and education are being wasted in Fiji, where she is
not able to work or volunteer as a spouse for her first three years there.
Claires parents have offered to sponsor Claire and her husband, offering them money and free
accommodation to live in. However, even third-party support has been disallowed.
Claire and her husband first met in 2008, at which point they had been together for two years already.
Claire visited him regularly. Her husband has been employed ever since he left school, would not
accept social security benefits and wishes to fully contribute to the UK economy. However, the
thought of more time apart makes Claire despair this time it would be as a married couple. The
stress is also beginning to take its toll.,
Like many British citizens, Claire is shocked to find that the rules for British citizens to be able to live
in their own homes with their family, are so severe.
She had no idea that as someone in a genuine relationship; someone who just happened to fall in love
with a man from another country, the road home would be filled with barriers
Page | 173
Financial requirements
v24.07
Clint
I have started to blame myself for not earning 18,600. Not many
security guards do though.
Clint is a British citizen from St. Ives, Cambridgeshire. His wife of nearly three years, and five month
old baby, who is eligible for British citizenship, are in the Philippines. Clints family would holiday
in the Philippines for a few weeks every year so it wasnt a surprise when Clint fell in love there.
As a security guard, Clint earns around 14,000 a year. This is less than the 18,600 the government
has mandated he must earn if he wants to live with his wife.
Clint wishes to live in the UK with his family. He needs to be here for his parents his dad is a
British pensioner and his mum, also from the Philippines came to England in October 1984. She has
worked her whole life as Clint is certain his wife will as well. This is not a family that expects
handouts or is afraid of hard work.
He wishes to live here with his family because it is his right to do so. He wishes for his daughter to
have the same quality upbringing and standard of life he was afforded, and one which all British
children are entitled to.
They do not need to depend on benefits. As an only child, Clints parents have made it clear that their
family home will pass to Clint, in which to raise his own family.
Clint has started to blame himself for not earning 18,600. Even though its not his fault. He is
earning what others in his profession are paid.
This is a family considering exercising their treaty rights elsewhere in the EU just to be together as a
family. So Clint is saving up in order to move countries just to have his wife and daughter back with
him.
Page | 174
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 175
Financial requirements
v24.07
Damar
I served in the British army, defended British lives and the British
way of life, and now am kept apart from my own wife and child..
Damar is a Hong Kong-born British national, a former Gurkha soldier and now an IT professional and
another victim of this governments new immigration rules impacting on families.
Damar lives in Stroud, Hampshire and his initial plan was to move to UK with his wife and 10-year-old
daughter, both Filipino nationals, earlier this summer. The said law, however, prevents this, forcing him
to be apart from his family. A man who served in the British army, defending British lives and the
British way of life, is now being prevented from having a life with his own wife and child.
Damar and his family decided to build a future in Britain in response to the IT skills shortage and to
provide his daughter with a better education. Damar has a science degree majoring in computing and
networking (BScCN) and a Master of Science in Information Technology (MScIT). With over 12 years
of IT work experience, and 9 years of exemplary military service before that in the Brigade of Gurkhas,
part of the British Army, he is confident that he would be a net contributor to the economy and
community.
Damar is, and has always been, an asset not a burden, to UK. Its clear this unacceptably harsh law will
prevent British citizens, including some who have served in the British army, from settling in the UK.
The pain of separation from his wife and daughter is indescribable and brings to the fore the ignorance
of the Home Secretary someone who does not, or chooses not to, understand the impact of the rules
she has imposed and devastation being wreaked. The enforced separation has taken its toll on the
physical and psychological health of Damars family, with insomnia and depression taking a toll on
their health.
This government, despite a manifesto claim, is neither family-friendly nor one with morals or common
sense.
Damar is aware of British publics frustration with immigration abuse and sham marriages, but the
Government has chosen to punish poorer and rural British citizens instead of genuinely targeting
problem areas. All are shocked that this government places financial conditions on love, family and
human rights.
Damar is forced to maintain living expenses in UK and Hong Kong, two equally expensive places. To
sponsor his wife and daughter in the UK, he has to nd a job with a salary of at least 22,400 per annum.
The Government is claiming the law is fair, pro-family, and beneficial to the British economy, reduces
immigrant numbers by hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands, and upholds the principles of human
rights. A complete farce. If preventing certain EU citizens British citizens with non-EU spouses
from living together will reduce immigrant numbers to the level claimed, its wrong in principle and in
its estimate of 'success'.
Damars desire to live here doesnt involve sponging on welfare benefits. Its to work and provide his
family with a better quality of life in the country he risked his life to defend.
This law is an attack on human rights (including a fundamental right to family life), and the UKs
reputation as an advocate of human rights and open and fair democracy is fast being eroded. It has
closed its door to its own citizens; it has, however, provided enough ground to be challenged in court,
which it will be, and thus more taxpayers money will be frittered away.
How do such rules safeguard taxpayers and the British economy, as the Government has claimed?
Page | 176
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 177
Financial requirements
v24.07
David has also had the opportunity to speak about his situation at the APPG on Migration meeting in
Parliament on 10th February 2013, as arranged by Migrants Rights Network.
David is not a public speaker. He doesnt like it; he doesnt profess to be an expert at it. However, he
is a firm believer that if you dont stand up for what you believe in, then its not right to ask others to
stand up on your behalf.
When David shared his story he was overwhelmed with the support her received. He was advised by
many present that Dee should apply for Leave to Enter even though they don't meet the minimum
income requirement, and that theyd win an appeal anyway.
In March 2013, Dee took her application to Toronto to have her Biometrics done. They told her there
that she'd have to come back in May because she'd put August as her date of travel, and couldn't apply
more than three months before that date.
Dee went back two months later (as requested) to find that the last two pages of her paperwork was
missing (it had been there at the first appointment but mysteriously disappeared this time round).
For David it was really hard to receive a phone call from his wife 3,500 miles away, crying her eyes
out, knowing there was little he could do to help. After speaking with her husband, Dee decided to
make one last stop at the office as it was closing before catching her bus back home and happily the
Consulate had found the missing pages and faxed them across. RESULT!!!!
Dee was told it would take about ten weeks to process, and so the couple waited again, in anticipation
of their reunion. They allowed themselves to forget that just when it looks like there's light at the end
of the tunnel, the Home Office just builds more tunnel.
A High Court decision in the MM & Ors vs. Secretary of State case deemed that the income rules were
disproportionate and unjustified, leading to the Home Office pausing all applications where the income
requirement would be the only reason for refusal.
By late August, Dees application had been with the British embassy for fourteen weeks already.
According to the embassys own estimate this would mean it was already a month overdue in the
decision being made. However, the MM case, followed by the Home Office not only pausing
applications such as theirs, but also now appealing the High Court decision leaves this family mired in
uncertainty. How much longer will it take? David estimates another year.
What is worse however is the Home Office has Dees passport. If she asks for it back, her application
gets withdrawn and the family loses the application fee. This means that Dee is likely to miss the
wedding of her son, James, who is getting married in Manila to his fiance, a citizen of the Philippines.
David and Dee have no intention of giving up. Their love is strong enough to cope with anything Home
Office throws at them. The issue of course remains, that they shouldnt have to be cope with life apart.
Update:
1) Dee did ask for her passport back which meant her application was withdrawn. Before going to her
sons wedding, Dee visited the UK, however she was refused entry and held in a detention centre for
a very distressing two days before being sent back to Canada.
2) Subsequently, David and Dee exercised their free movement rights and were reunited in Malta,
where they lived and worked, making a lot of friends.
3) After several months, the couple were able to return to the UK under EEA regulations, reuniting the
couple with Davids kids in Wales. Dee is hoping to soon be the proud holder of a UK Resident
Card. However the couple continue to help others caught in the Home Office family immigration
web who also wish to exercise their free movemen rights, by sharing their knowledge and experience
of Malta.
Page | 178
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 179
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 180
Financial requirements
v24.07
This is despite Dee earning an annual salary of 16,300 - above the living wage; indeed, her family
income would be even higher if Ozan were with her, working, supporting and providing for Dee and
his stepson. Pictures show the incredible artistic talent which would not go unrewarded in the UK. Of
course, this would also mean Dee and her son would be less likely to ever be dependent on the state.
The government claims that the measures introduced reduce the benefits burden on the taxpayer. Dee's
example disproves that; a family together, with two earners, is far less likely to have to claim benefits now or at any time in the future - than a partner who is effectively forced to be a single mother,
supporting a family by herself).
Since having their baby daughter, Dee has had to lower her hours at work due to childcare and says if
her husband was in the UK, her tax credits claim would be lower as she could share childcare with her
husband and Ozan would be working and earning good money too.
There is however zero room in the rules for any discretion or use of common sense, despite the fact that
median incomes vary considerably across the country; many people even on lower incomes prefer to
live frugally just as many despite being on higher incomes are in debt.
The point remains that forcing a family apart is in fact more likely to push people onto benefits adding
economics to moral and common sense as reasons to make the rules fair.
Dees daughter also a British citizen - cannot be with her own father. Yes she talks to her daddy every
day via a computer screen very similar to the Skype Daddy video at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKrCUaKB4KM
.
Dee's son has a hard time too; he just doesn't understand why he can't be with the man he considers a
father-figure, as family.
Dee has no support except from extended family; she is working to support two children, and dealing
with another upcoming operation, all by herself.
Dee is very angry that her family has been divided through senseless rules and their ridiculous
application. With good reason.
Page | 181
Financial requirements
v24.07
Ed & Anya
I will exercise my treaty rights in order to live with my wife a
right denied to me by my own government.
Ed is a British citizen from Scotland, married to Anya, from Russia. They met in their early twenties
while studying at Edinburgh University in 2004, when they were both selected for a student-run
charity project helping a community in Manzini, Swaziland, build a soup kitchen. Not unlike many
international couples, their love was kindled in a shared experience of travel and living away from
home which has continued ever since.
They lived together back in Scotland, finding employment near Edinburgh
after graduation in 2007. Before long, a job opportunity for Anya took them
on more overseas adventures to Azerbaijan and then Nigeria. Juggling
individual visa restrictions gave them their first experience of forced
separation and relationship-by-Skype: traumatic, tiring and unsustainable for
more than a short time.
Luckily, Anya's job in microfinance also gave them the chance to save enough
money to fulfil a dream they'd both had since before they even met: a longdistance bicycle ride.
In May 2010 a group of friends and family cycled with Ed and Anya to the boundary of their
hometown in Scotland, waving the pair off on a journey that would last over a year. They explored
Scotland's border uplands, west coast and islands, before heading to France. They followed rivers and
canals to Switzerland and pedalled to over 2000 metres of altitude to cross the Alps into Italy. Facing
the expiry of a Schengen visa, they took a cargo ship to Turkey, which marked the beginning of an
Eastern world of hospitality, history, food and natural beauty unlike anywhere else.
Their route along the Mediterranean coast took them into then-peaceful Syria and on to Lebanon, and
then back into Syria, where they overwintered in a desert monastery near Damascus, working in return
for food, board, and the nourishment of community. In early 2011 they set off across the Syrian
desert, crossing back into Turkey just before the start of protests in Syria. Reaching the Black Sea,
they steered right and continued into Georgia and Azerbaijan, finally ending their journey at the
Caspian Sea in June 2011.
With her last UK visa long expired, Anya had to return to Russia; unable to get a Russian visa away
from home, Ed returned to Scotland. Ironically, it was only by staying on the road through 11
different countries that the two managed to avoid separation for so long. But now they had no choice.
They decided to make Russia their home for a while; Ed wanted to learn the language, and Anya
wanted to be near her family. Already trained as an EFL teacher, in winter 2011 Ed landed a great job
in Moscow which also gave him time to study Russian and pursue other work opportunities although
he now is a self-employed copy editor now. Anya worked at the British Embassy before leaving it to
write for an English-language newspaper and take some distance-learning courses from SOAS in
London. After the constant uncertainties of the bicycle tour, settled life in the big city held appeal for a while.
Russian bureaucracy is infamously slow and labyrinthine, but the pair knew there would be benefits if
they got married: Ed could apply for temporary residency in Russia and so no longer be tied to any
particular employer. They also naturally assumed that being married would make returning to the UK
pretty straightforward when the time came. After all, if you're married, you're family - right?
So the process of gaining temporary residency started with Ed and Anya's wedding in August 2012.
Page | 182
Financial requirements
v24.07
The day itself was pure fun. The newlyweds rode bicycles from the registry office to the reception and
danced the night away to ragtime and swing, surrounded by their new families. But despite a
materially comfortable life and supportive family nearby, life in Moscow started to take its toll. It
seemed a metropolis worn down by social inequality, ingrained distrust, and an entrenched car culture.
Anya and Ed missed their friends and family back in the UK, and longed to live a more outdoor life
again.
While looking at the procedure for returning to the UK, they heard about Theresa May's new family
immigration rules, which effectively prohibit them from returning directly. How does the state have
the right to do this? Isn't it a citizen's right to marry whomever they choose and live in their own
country?
Ed finally gained temporary residency in Russia in July 2013. But by this time, he and Anya realised
their best option was to take the Surinder Singh route, probably via Ireland, in autumn or winter 2013.
Exercising treaty rights is something they can do as they dont have careers in the UK which would be
disrupted, and no children to have to look after.
They are looking forward to the adventure of the next half year, while remaining anxious to get it over
with; they worry that the route will rapidly become more difficult, with more applications being
rejected by the UKBA on spurious grounds in order to force appeals and test the law.
However, Ed remains positive and feels lucky to be able to exercise rights afforded to him by the EU
rights to a family life denied to him by his own government.
Page | 183
Financial requirements
v24.07
Elwyn
I am ashamed to be British but I will keep fighting these rules.
Elwyn is a 55 year old British man. He has two children and four grandchildren. He owns his own
home in south Wales and is employed as a minister of a Christian church in the town. After nursing
his first wife for eleven years, the last five, 24/7 sadly she passed away in 2012.
In 2013 Elwyn married a Ukrainian national who he had known for many years as she worked as
secretary to a church he visited in Ukraine regularly. They looked into making their settlement visa
application straight away. However, Elwyn was confused by the information on the UKBA website.
He sought clarification from the passport office and British Embassy in Kiev on at least six occasions,
by phone and email. However the only thing that was forthcoming was that they were unable to
provide advice, and Elwyns pleas that he was asking for clarification not advice fell on deaf ears.
So the couple did what they thought was correct thinking Elwyn
could seek clarification when he was submitting the application in
person, before handing over nearly 1000 as the application fee.
All the documents had been translated and apostilled at an
additional cost of 500. Elwyn however wasnt allowed into the
office and only his wife was able to go in and get the paperwork
submitted. While it was being looked over, she asked if it was all
right and was told that it would be submitted once the application fee was paid.
Three months later they received an email to say all the documents were on their way back and that
the passport was ready to be picked up. They had been refused, because although they had submitted
his wifes diploma, along with her straight A grades as a graduate of Kiev university as an English
teacher, they had not submitted the Cambridge English Test certificate.
Elwyn is now living in Ukraine, managing with regular trips back and forward to UK. His father is 85
years old and seriously ill, having been diagnosed with prostate cancer. Elwyns fathers dearest
wish was to spend some time with Elwyn and his new daughter-in-law.
So while getting the extensive requirements and paperwork together for another settlement visa
application, they decided to apply for a visitor visa so Elwyns wife could come and spend most of
September with her new father in law. She sat the Cambridge exam and they still await the results of
that. But this was not needed for the visitor visa.
Elwyn applied with all the necessary paperwork and the 90 fee at the Kiev office. He submitted a
letter of support and itinerary for the time up to Christmas, when they were due to be in Africa on
humanitarian work for six weeks from October. It was clear that this was just a visit.
However, the visit visa was also refused. This time on grounds that theyd been less than truthful as
it was obvious their intentions were not to return to Ukraine. Elwyn has residency in Ukraine; they
own their own apartment there and he has changed work roles so that he can remain employed whilst
living in Ukraine until they are eventually in a position to be granted a settlement visa.
He finds it amazing that a civil servant would call a minister of the church untruthful! So Elwyn is
unable to take his wife to see my 85 year old sick father, or his 62 year old severely disabled sister or
his still grieving daughters and four grandchildren. Elwyn is now ashamed to admit he is British. He
is adamant though that he will continue raising awareness of the issues he has faced, its now a
personal crusade for justice.
Page | 184
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 185
Financial requirements
v24.07
Emma
I am in despair. My family has been kept apart for many years,
despite playing by the rules...which the government keeps changing.
Emma is a British citizen. She met her now husband in Indonesia in 2001. She returned in 2002 and
they stayed together before Emma came back to the UK. They kept in touch via post and email over the
next seven months, before Emma returned to Indonesia to marry her husband.
Her husband applied for a UK visa, allowing him to move here with his new wife, following which the
couple moved here, and had a daughter and son. Both Emma and her husband worked in the UK, without
claiming a penny in benefits. This was in 2002.
In 2007, the family decided to try living in Indonesia. They set up their own business there. However,
some time later, they decided to return to the UK, where Emma felt that she could find better work.
However, they were in for a shock. Emmas husbands returning residence visa was refused as hed
been outside UK for over two months in a two-year period. The British Embassy in Jakarta advised the
couple to apply for a returning visitor visa as they were still within the rules. But they were in for
another shock! This visa was refused, wasting time and money. They were subsequently advised to
apply for a spouse visa costing 800. This too was refused, on grounds of Emma (the sponsor) not
having a job in the UK.
The immigration officer advised them in the refusal letter that if Emma were to return to the UK and
make provisions for her husband to return get a job, and a house adequate for family life in the UK
she would be able to make a successful visa application for her husband. Emma returned to the UK with
her two children, arranged accommodation, settled the kids into school and started job hunting. This
meant, unfortunately, that she was juggling childcare and associated costs, effectively as a single
mother, making it incredibly difficult to secure full-time employment, despite securing job interviews!
It was ironic, because if her husband was allowed to be with her, the familys child care problems would
cease to exist, as the couple could have organised their time to work and care for their little family
without having to claim any benefits.
In fact, Emma did everything in her power to avoid becoming a burden on the State. She set herself up
as an entrepreneur with her own freelance business, working from home. In desperation, she wrote to
her local MP explaining the situation, expecting some help from a person paid to represent his
constituents. The MPs reply was unhelpful, expressing his sympathy for their situation and stating that
even another MP had had his wifes visa refused entry to the UK difficult for everyone!
Emma then wrote to the Prime Minister, receiving a standard letter expressing his sympathy, and
enclosing the immigration rules! As if she didnt already know them!
She was featured on the front page of the local newspaper which had initially contacted her about a
mural she had produced for the school, but were subsequently more interested in her family situation.
People stopped Emma in the street asking her how she was coping. Like many members of the general
public, they couldnt believe her story But you are married! and they could not believe how, at
this stage, she had been apart from her husband and the kids from their father for three long years.
Emmas husband came into some money in April 2012 and applied yet again for a visa, only for it to
be refused yet again this time on the grounds he hadnt done his English test. They were aware he
had to do this test in due course, but the Embassy in Jakarta had informed him he could do it in the UK.
They lost another 820. Yet more time and more money lost..yet more heartbreak.
Page | 186
Financial requirements
v24.07
Emma contacted a lawyer who told her the couple couldnt appeal as its now a requirement to pass an
approved English test pre-visa application. Despite being incorrectly informed by a British Embassy cut
no ice so hard-working Brits are forced to donate money to UKBA because of incompetence of UK
government employees.
Emmas husband did his English test on July 20th. As of the end of September, they are still waiting for
the result. More time has passed, more money has been lost. And, brutally, the government has changed
the immigration rules yet again .
Now, Emma has to be earning 18,600 on top of whatever her husband earns if the family is to be
reunited. The rule changes were announced in June, and introduced in July hardly enough time to
prepare.
As of today, Emma is in despair. The family has been kept apart for many years, despite playing by the
rules. What hope is there for them?
The government has behaved appallingly. One part of the government (the Embassy) incorrectly advised
Emma on the rules. Yet they are prepared to take her money for each application, in a manner which
would make a lowlife street conman proud.
Another part of the government (the UKBA) introduces rules so arcane that, within a matter of weeks,
they would have made Kafka proud indeed, rules so complex that even MPs getting paid 100,000
have difficulty grasping the key concepts and locating all the hidden annexes.
The new rules were introduced by means of secondary legislation meaning the House of Commons
didnt even get to debate them, and doubtless many politicians remain unaware of all the intricate
Machiavellian details!
What an utterly shameful situation.
Page | 187
Financial requirements
v24.07
Gillian
Mother, mother-in-law and grandmother.
Gillian is a British citizen from Scotland. She is mother to four British sons and mother-in-law to four
daughters-in-law, all from the USA.
Gillian has had to fight long and hard in order for her son, Kevin, to be able to live with Jamie, his
wife, and their two small children.
Gillian herself returned to UK from USA once she had retired, in 2006. Her third son, Kevin followed
in 2008 with his wife Jamie and their daughter Eowyn. They moved into a house in the same village
and the little girl went to the local school. All was going well. Jamie was working managing a local
farm shop and ice-cream parlour and Kevin went back to university to get his IT degree.
Jamie gave birth to a son in August 2011. In March 2012 she received news that her dad was seriously
ill in California and needed major heart surgery. Jamie was settled here under the old two-year visa
program at the time and had been here for four years. She was due to apply for indefinite leave to
remain in April 2012 but did not have the money needed for that as well as having money for the
airfare for herself and the two kids to fly to California to be with her dad. Naturally she chose to see
her dad.
Jamies father died in September 2012 and the familys attention turned to Jamie returning to the UK.
Unfortunately, by this time the rules and changed and they found that because Kevin had been at
university and not working full time, he did not have the six months worth of pay slips and bank
statements needed to even apply for Jamies visa.
Kevin immediately abandoned his degree and got a job as a security guard working 60-65 hours a
week to make the minimum amount of 18,600 needed to get her home. His daughter already had
indefinite leave based upon Kevins citizenship and his son was born in the UK so neither of them
needed visa clearance. However, because his wife was caught up in this mess the children were also
prevented from coming home.
It took a further six months to get the necessary paperwork together to apply. All told, they had been
apart for a full year. His son, who had only been six months old when they left only knew his dad as a
face on the computer.
Jamie had no job in the US and they moved around staying with various friends and relatives for the
entire year they were there. The little girls education has been severely compromised as she has
moved from school to school during the years they have been nomads in the USA and it is going to
take her several months if not years to catch up.
The happy part of this story is that, with the help of their local MP, some local press coverage and
some much deserved luck, Jamie and the two children were able to return to Scotland on 27th March
2013.
The family has found the immigration rules to be punitive in the extreme, as they punish British
citizens. It is clear to this family that the rules are purely down to a numbers game being played by
people without conscience and should be struck down.
The family was forced to pay a huge price for Jamie doing what any daughter would do. Kevin, in
giving up his studies to reunite his family, has paid the price of a more secure future for them all.
Page | 188
Financial requirements
v24.07
Hayley
Why is the income threshold such that nearly half of the British
population would not be able to meet it?
Hayley is a British citizen who in April 2011 went to start the summer season working in Tunisia as an
entertainer where she first met her now husband.
From when they first met, all through the summer, they were inseparable and spent every day in and out
of work together. When in winter she had to return to the UK, they were both heartbroken. Hayley soon
booked two separate trips to ensure they would spend time in person together over the winter as well,
and not just through a computer screen on Skype.
She travelled back to Tunisia in January 2012; met all his family, and then again in March 2011 to
celebrate her birthday with the man she loved.
Returning to Tunisia for the second season in summer 2012, Hayley felt like they had never been apart.
At the end of the season she decided that she wanted to end her career as an entertainer, get married and
find a stable job in the UK.
She returned to the UK, once again booking trips back to Tunisia for January and April 2013. While
apart, theyd share jokes every day, keep each other company, share their days with each other, albeit
through Skype.
In June 2013 they got married and what an amazing wedding day it was! All the preparing and sorting
out a wedding a thousand miles apart from each other was so stressful but paid off as it really was the
best day of their lives. Like any other couple they are looking forward to building and planning future
together as husband and wife.
Unfortunately due to the current 18,600 income requirement that allows no third party support, nor
evidence to show Hayley can support her husband without earning the magical 18,600 they still having
to live apart. It hurts. Most newly-weds are beside each other but instead this couple has to look at
each other through a computer screen hundreds of miles away.
Hayley is convinced that while she doesnt earn 18,600 she can support her husband without any aid
from the state. She works full time, lives in a large family owned property and all her family work. The
income threshold is unjustified, unrealistic, irrelevant and therefore needs to change.
Hayley is firm in her belief that the requirements should not be such that around 50% of the British
population would never be able to meet.
Page | 189
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 190
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 191
Financial requirements
v24.07
Jas
He is the man I am going to marry and its the government keeping
us apart.
Jas is a British citizen, born and raised in the UK. She is currently in the second year of her pharmacy
degree.
She first visited India at the agre of three, and then every two years since, getting to know her heritage
and family in India. It is here she found the love of her life. Though they spent time together as kids,
she only really remembers him from when she was 9 and he, 13. A gorgeous boy who told her he
liked her very much. Jas was too young to understand what this all meant, but a few years later, she
did. Leaving India then, meant leaving him, and all she could do was cry.
As a teenager, when they met again, at first it was awkward but the chemistry that had been there from
the start, the attraction and the sense of comfort they got from each other, didn't take long to return.
This is when Jas started to fall in love and the pair vowed to not grow apart because of the distance.
They stayed in touch over the phone and email, speaking for hours.
When her boyfriend got into a motorcycle accident, Jas realised how hard a long distance relationship
was when you couldnt be there for each other to share the good and bad times. So she let herself drift
apart from him. However, love knows no boundaries, and now at the age of 19 Jas cant deny her
feelings.
She is determined that this is the man she will marry. However she wants to first finish her degree in
order to further her career, and also maximise her chances of earning 18,600 so she can sponsor him.
If she is not allowed to be here in the UK, Jas will emigrate. However, UK then loses out on the
positive impact she could make here. As more and more like Jas decide to leave our shores, it will be
to the detriment of our nation.
Page | 192
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 193
Financial requirements
v24.07
Jenny
Jenny is a British citizen living in Australia for the past nine years. She lives there with her Australian
husband and three-year old daughter.
She was 20 when she met her husband and never thought returning home one day would be a
problem.
Although her daughter qualifies for British citizenship, Jenny would still have to move to the UK
alone, and find a job paying a large salary before her husband was allowed to live here.
This is completely unrealistic for Jenny, who is a stay-at-home mum. She cant leave her daughter
with her husband in Australia, nor can she bring her daughter to the UK without her husband, as that
would mean working full time in a job flexible enough to cope with the demands brought about by
enforced single parenthood.
Jenny does not wish to take her daughter away from everything that is familiar, and separate a child
from her father, just to then entrust her to strangers in day care.
Page | 194
Financial requirements
v24.07
In June 2012, Warren was granted a holiday visa, so they both could visit UK and attend Jessicas
father's wedding. While here, they looked at properties and assessed the employment market. They did
return to South Africa after the visit - Warren is a law abiding citizen and adhered to the expiry dates of
his visas. Then discovered the immigration rules had changed virtually overnight and they could no
longer move back to the UK unless Jessica, and Jessica alone, was earning over 18,600.
Jessica is 21 years old. She is living in a country which is known for not being particularly safe. There
is no minimum wage like in the UK..how is she expected to earn over 18,600? Even as an IT Manager
for once of the largest ISPs in SA, she earns 6,000 p.a. Warren earns 12,000 p.a.
Indeed, Warren could easily get jobs paying over 25,000 in the UK as he is a specialised voice engineer.
There is no way Jessica can earn 18,600 living in South Africa.
This young couple feels trapped and are experiencing a lot of anxiety and tension because of rules
designed to keep British citizens with non-EEA family out of the UK.
Jessica lives in hope that the rules will change and her little family will be welcomed in the UK.
Page | 195
Financial requirements
v24.07
Joel
My parents are much older than my wife's and we wanted to be
closer to them, so my wife, our son and I could see more of them and
help them out in their old age. Not too much to ask, is it?
British citizen, Joel, lives in Forest of Dean (in Gloucestershire) and his MP is Mark Harper, Minister
for Immigration.
Joels wife is from the USA. Theyve been married for five years, with a four-year-old son, also British.
As Joels parents are much older than his wifes they decided to relocate from US to UK to be closer to
Joels parents, spend time them with them, allow a bond to develop between their son and his
grandparents and afford his parents the respect they deserve by looking after them in their old age.
All these are noble intentions the government should encourage. Instead, Joel and his family are being
penalised.
Ironically, Joel used to work for UK government departments in various locations in the world as an
Entry Clearance Officer. So he had sound working knowledge of the immigration rules, having
processed thousands of visa applications himself.
However, not having worked in immigration for over two years, it was only when they came to look
into making an application for his wife that Joel discovered how drastically the rules had changed.
Previously you had to demonstrate you could 'adequately' maintain and accommodate your spouse. It
was a common sense decision that the Entry Clearance officer could make themselves. Third-party
support (i.e. from parents, etc.) was perfectly acceptable; there was no statutory minimum income for
the sponsor to earn (although it was very loosely based on the level of income support amount for a
couple over 18, i.e. 111.45 a week). Also taken into account was the applicant's ability to find
employment in the UK and ALL savings were admissible, not just those over 16,000.
The new rules take all powers of discretion away from the Entry Clearance Officer. If you don't meet
the rules, you get refused. Simple as that.
Joel does not believe, in his extensive UK public sector service and immigration experience, that these
rules are lawful, or understood by politicians themselves.
Joel has had excellent jobs in the past, while his American wife has a post-graduate degree, an MBA in
Finance, has worked as an investment banker and is currently working for the US government i.e. she
is extremely well qualified and not someone who is going to switch countries to claim meagre welfare
benefits. Clearly, her chances of getting a job in the UK, with these qualifications, are very good, and
indeed she is exactly the kind of candidate we should be seeking to attract. But that's no longer taken
into account.
So, Joel has moved here with their son, and is living with his parents in Gloucestershire. Meanwhile,
his wife is on her own in Washington DC. Joel is desperately trying to find a job that will make the
required 18,600 a year. That's not a realistic amount to find easily in this area, so he is looking for work
in London. But then he faces the problem of who will look after his son and elderly parents.
If his wife were here, then the duties of looking after their child and his parents would be shared. The
burden would be halved, and the family would not be torn apart.
The ludicrous nature of this situation and the rule changes mean that, in theory, Joel could earn the
required amount but probably end up spending a huge proportion of that on living in London and paying
for care for his family. Yet he could find a job paying around 15,000 a year, live with his parents, wife
and child and not have the carer expenses to pay for. And his wife could find gainful employment.
Page | 196
Financial requirements
v24.07
Edward subsequently visited the rest of Joshs family in Somerset and Wales. He was
welcomed into the fold immediately and like Joshs mum, all felt grateful to the man who had
rescued Josh, seeing that with Edward, Josh was the happiest he had ever been.
Josh and Edward were in love and couldnt bear to spend a day apart. They met each others
friends, even Edwards ones from India, on Skype, became a large part of each others lives.
Josh met Edwards family as well, and was similarly welcomed into their ranks, particularly
getting on with Edwards brother. Neither partner could have asked for things to have
worked out better in terms of being able to fit our lives together so well.
June 2014 saw Edward submitting his dissertation and the couple moved out of their student
accommodation and into Joshs mums home, living also with the mums partner and Joshs
younger brother. Getting to spend that time together as a real family made both realise they
didn't want this to end.
The couple made arrangements to settle down together in their own place and started looking
for jobs in order to support themselves and build a life together. They exchanged promise
rings on their one year anniversary and committed to a life together.
Edward was made two job offers, both in his field of expertise but neither could provide
sponsorship. The alternative was for Edward to apply to remain as Joshs partner.
Plans for their civil partnership were accelerated with the couple opting for a small and
intimate family gathering. The service at the registry office was followed by a celebration
party with family and close friends. It was very small and very personal, and perfect.
The couple researched on ways to legalise Edwards stay in the UK beyond the validity of his
Page | 197
Financial requirements
v24.07
student visa, also looking into options for Josh to move to India. However given Indian laws,
found that would not be viable in the long-term.
Edward left the country as per the terms of his
visa. Josh meanwhile is working really hard to
earn money and find a suitable job paying over
18,600. The couple feels trapped because of the
financial requirements which are proving very
hard to satisfy and mystified when theyll be able
to see each other again.
It is beyond their understanding why Edward,
with a Masters degree from a UK university and
as the partner of a British citizen cannot stay in
the UK. He would be a huge asset to the country,
would have no recourse to public funds, would
contribute by way of taxes and NI contributions
and Josh, a British citizen, would be able to live
with his husband.
Page | 198
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 199
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 200
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 201
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 202
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 203
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 204
Financial requirements
v24.07
It is not feasible for Laura to move to Egypt to be with her husband Mohamed. She has a degree and a
good job with great prospects here in the UK. Were she to be forced to move to Egypt, everything she
has ever worked towards would be taken away. Laura does not speak fluent Arabic, meaning it would
be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to find a job, especially in the science field.
Laura wants to start a family in the near future. She has cysts on her ovaries, so fears kids may not be
an option were she to wait very long. Concerns of poor education and conditions for her future children,
things other British citizens have a right to, also make moving to Egypt undesirable.
Laura would never wish for her worst enemy to be in the situation she is in now; she feels like she is
being told that she doesnt have the right to love who she wants, or to start a family when she wants to.
She is being discriminated against for not having a well enough paid job and her life has been put on
hold because of these changes.
Laura is on anti-depressants to combat her depression and at times, suicidal thoughts as a result of her
frustration at finding that each time she thinks they have satisfied the criteria the goal posts have been
moved yet again.
How many people will have to sacrifice their life before this government realises the devastating impact
of these rules on British families?
Page | 205
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 206
Financial requirements
v24.07
The expiry date on Beckys visa came and went; their lawyer told them that Becky would have three
months following the expiry to leave UK before being deemed by UKBA to be an overstayer. His wife,
best friend and soul-mate was now, to all intents-and-purposes, a tourist in his own country.
They spent what was to be their last Christmas together in Scotland (and possibly the foreseeable future).
Their friends and Beckys family were incredibly supportive, as well as shocked, dismayed, angry and
incredulous at what had befallen us and what was to come. They received dinner invitations; delicious
food, selfless generosity, great company (and not a little malt whisky) provided a momentary cushion
against the looming reality of our enforced separation. Beckys flavoured chocolate fudge was
consumed in excessive quantity.
Once this festive period had passed (in, if Im quite honest, a somewhat anaesthetised haze) their
separation day February 24th 2013 looked - four days after our first wedding anniversary.
Beckys flight was booked: Departure from Glasgow Airport at 1pm with layovers in Reykjavk and
Denver. We booked a night in a nearby hotel to negate a needless rush with baggage across Central
Scotland, to break up the journey and spend last precious hours together. The tears were never far away.
Truth be told theyve flowed almost constantly since last years sudden thump of realisation that this
day would eventually have to be faced.
Less last sight of Becky was of her passing through airport security, placing personal items into the
containers provided. He hoped to catch her eye one final time but she didnt look back. Becky later told
me that she couldnt do it. If I had Les then I would have scrambled back over the barriers towards
you. Im sorry sweetie. Of course he understood. How could he not?
And so to today. Becky is lodged temporarily with her parents in Washington. They speak on Skype,
exchange emails and comments on Facebook. But its never the same. She cant afford to visit, and
besides, could we go through the trauma of separation all over again? Because thats what it would be
like, so thank goodness for the world-wide-web, despite its obvious limitations in conducting a full and
meaningful marriage.
The couple have decided their only real prospect of being reunited is to initiate the US immigration
process for Les to move there. Something they had considered much earlier, as there the income
requirement is much more reasonable, at 125% of the poverty level. However, Les has a daughter who
lives in the UK, and moving overseas would damage any prospects of a relationship between father and
daughter.
Becky may be American but her heart is in Scotland. She was settled here, she had found her place in
the World and she had much to offer this country by way of talents and skills. Les in turn has no desire
to move to the States, leaving his home and moving further away from his daughter.
Les is filled with anger and resentment that two people so obviously made for each other could be treated
so inhumanely and that too by his own country He is embarrassed and ashamed and does not feel
British.
But, for all that, there will be pain, because I know, when this happens, he will most likely never see
again his little girl who turned 7 this year. Maybe she will demand answers as to why her father isnt
here. While Les is now resigned to leaving UK, he knows he will be leaving behind a treasure - a
beautiful person by the name of Holly Rowan Hudson who will never be far from his thoughts. Less
message to Holly is that despite his being forced to leave because of rules designed to break up families,
while he may be leaving Holly, she will never leave him.
Page | 207
Financial requirements
v24.07
Lisa
It is ludicrous and unlawful to put a price on anybodys marriage
and love. We are human and deserve to be together with our loved
ones.
Lisa is a British citizen married to a man from Morocco. She has children with her ex-spouse who is
British. He has put in place a Prohibited Steps Order whereby she cannot take her kids out of the UK.
As Lisa does not earn 18,600, her husband does not qualify for a spouse visa.
She is strongly opposed to these immigration rules and wants some justice she should not have to
choose between her husband and her children.
Lisa has to keep travelling back and forth to Morocco as a Prohibited Steps Order prevents her from
taking her kids from the UK. So now she is left with no choice but to live two lives and split up her
family.
Lisa demands that Theresa May be made to explain to innocent people here how she justifies such
extreme measures and insists that she will campaign until our basic rights as British citizens are given
back to us.
Lisas only family are her kids and husband her parents and brother passed away. What will happen
to Lisa 20 years down the line when her kids are living their own lives? The pressure on and guilt felt
by Lisas kids knowing their mother had to sacrifice her marriage for them will be insurmountable.
Lisa will have given up her youth and her marriage to the man she loves in order to be a good mother;
or she will have to give up being a good mother in order to be a good wife.
What kind of legacy is being left for Lisas family and hundreds like her? All studies show that children
are better off in a two-parent family. Common sense dictates that Lisa making sacrifices for her kids or
for her husband will not yield good results years down the line, for her own sanity or that of her family.
Why is this government putting us in the position where we are essentially faced with a choice that is
no choice at all, knowing that whatever decision is taken will leave lives destroyed, with the
ramifications felt for years to come?
Page | 208
Financial requirements
v24.07
Louise
There are better ways of managing immigration than punishing
British citizens and the people we love.
Louise is a British citizen from Manchester. Her husband is from Kenya.
They met in 2011 on a family holiday there. Their relationship started off as just friends, but by the
time she returned to the UK, she was so much in love with him, she decided to visit him for Valentines
Day. Since then, she has visited him three times a year with her family offering her financial support.
Louise lives at home with her family. They are supporting her while she works in a volunteer and lowincome role. She is also searching for full-time work.
The agony of being separated was tearing them apart but their determination to maintain their long
distance relationship grew more and more, communicating on bbm (everyday) and by talk home calling
cards.
A year later, they formalised their love and commitment to each other by getting married in a religious
ceremony in Kenya. At the time, neither Louise nor her family were aware of the changes to the family
migration rules they were caught out like so many others. Unsurprising given the speed and quietness
with which the rules were brought in...they werent even taken through parliament in the proper manner!
However, upon finding out they remained unwavering in their determination to stay together no matter
what to maintain their union as husband and wife.
The only family Louise has is her mum, step-dad and young brothers. Louises mother-in-law passed
away when her husband was only a child; her father-in-law is an alcoholic.
Love is blind and isnt a conscious decision based on earnings or influence; nor family background or
nationality.
Louise and her family firmly believe that Theresa May's family migration policy is unfair and punitive.
There are better ways of managing migration than punishing British citizens and the people they love.
Page | 209
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 210
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 211
Financial requirements
v24.07
She is on the homeless register and has moved house four times between June and October 2013. She
has used up her savings to travel to Greece, Italy and Albania this year alone, and is planning another
journey but these are not holidays. Theyre to ensure that her son and husband have a fighting
chance to get to know one another, to build a relationship, to spend time together. These early
moments in a childs life do not come around again and they are little for such a short time after all.
Her son has travelled at the age of 4, 8 and now again at 10 months and there is no end in sight. He
has never had a room of his own, never had his pictures on the wall or books on a shelf, everything
has been in and out of suitcases.
The couple is now considering moving to a country where they can be together. Greece? Germany?
Spain? Ireland? Malta? All have been discussed, all are possibilities.
But it wont be easy. All of the babys stuff will have to be left behind the cot thats never been
unpacked, the highchair that she really needs but will have to buy from wherever in the world they end
up in. Her books and kitchen stuff she collected in dreams of creating a home with her husband and
child. She doesnt know what she will do about her sons next set of immunisation.
Lucinda believes the government should make a public health announcement as a matter of urgency
stating:
WARNING:
BRITISH CITIZENS PLANNING TO MEET, BEFRIEND OR HAVE A ROMANTIC
RELATIONSHIP WITH NON-EU CITIZENS ARE EXPOSING THEMSELVES AND ANY
CHILDREN TO SIGNIFICANT LONG-TERM DAMAGE WHICH CAN BE IN SOME
CASES, IRREVERSIBLE.
MARRIAGES TO NON-EU CITIZENS CAN RESULT IN SEVERE EMOTIONAL AND
PHYSICAL DISTRESS FOR ALL INVOLVED.
ANYONE KNOWINGLY TAKING PART IN A RELATIONSHIP WITH A NON-EU
CITIZEN DOES SO AT THEIR OWN RISK.
Page | 212
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 213
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 214
Financial requirements
v24.07
Mark and Mercy met online through friends in 2011. They stayed in touch and April 2013 saw them
getting married in a beautiful ceremony in Senegal.
Mark does not earn 18,600. Not many pensioners do.
Mark does however own two properties outright in Liverpool, which the Home Office does not
consider in assessing Marks financial position for the sponsorship of his wife. Properties which mean
Mark himself has no recourse to public funds.
Page | 215
Financial requirements
v24.07
So they married in February 2012, excited at a future together. Max returned to Ukraine to prepare for
the visa. Megan remained in south Wales and embarked on a new career as a carer, taking her NVQs
and climbing onto a promising career ladder. A role which the government is crying out for more people
to take on, and one Megan enjoyed immensely, in spite of, or perhaps because of, the long hours and
hard study it requires. In this, Megan felt like she has found her calling and thrived.
She rented a small flat and decorated it, expecting it to be their starter marital home. Not once did they
consider the option of any government handouts. Being together is their dream, their responsibility.
They are just a young couple in love.
So when they were hit with the July 2012 rules, it felt like their lives had been torn apart. As a carer,
Megan earned enough to support them both if needed, though Max would work as well, well able to
cover their expenses living in a small Welsh village. However, determined to be with Max, Megan gave
up her dream job in favour of a job in the insurance industry, paying 18,000 - a role she detested yet
one she was sad to lose due to her employer having legal issues.
Since then, Megan has been in two car crashes, suffering from anxiety and depression. A direct result
of the stress, pain and heart ache she has had to endure because of the immigration rules. Ironically,
rather than reduce the burden on the taxpayer, Megans medicines have required government funding
an expense which would not have been incurred in the first place if the rules had been fair.
Megan loves her husband. He is her world, her heart, her everything. All she wants is for them to be
together. They have so much support from their family and a strong youthful passion to succeed. They
dont want handouts.. They just want to be together.
Love is not and should not be a privilege for the rich.
Page | 216
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 217
Financial requirements
v24.07
Michael (Malaysia)
UK trained my wife to PhD level and now dont want her expertise
in the UK workforce!
Michael is a British citizen who met his Malaysian wife in Glasgow where she was studying for her
PhD.
They got married in February of 2011 after a year of trying to get the permission to marry from the
government.
They didnt apply for a spouse visa straight away as his wifes student visa was due to expire at the end
of March 2011 anyway, and she was successful in being offered a job in Switzerland.
So the couple moved from Glasgow to Switzerland in March 2011where they have lived ever since.
Michael has been working there too, in a combination of agency and self-employment, for over three
months. His wife has been working in the same company for the full duration of their stay on a
permanent contract.
The couple is now concerned. If for whatever reason, Michaels wife were to lose her job, she would
also lose her right to live in Switzerland, leaving Malaysia as the only option open to them if they were
to continue to be together.
However, as their marriage is not legitimate under Muslim law, it would not be recognised in Malaysia
and they are likely to face problems living together there.
This is a couple who dont need to be in the UK right now. But they can see their future threatened by
UKs immigration rules, were their situation to change in the future.
They find it bizarre the situation UK has gotten itself into. It is happy training Michaels wife to PhD
level, and now doesnt want her expertise in the workforce.
Page | 218
Financial requirements
v24.07
Michael (Singapore)
I have been impacted by the abolishing of the PSW and the
financial thresholds.
Michael is a British citizen who met his girlfriend while they were students at Warwick University. As
Michaels girlfriend is from Singapore, he has been impacted by two changes to the immigration rules:
the abolition of the Tier-1 post study work visa (PSW) and the 18,600 financial requirement.
The couples original plan was for her to stay in the UK on her PSW for two years something which
the UK government lured foreign students into the UK with, only to then abolish it, not only for future
international students, but those already in the UK with the expectation of being able to obtain two years
UK work experience following a successful UK qualification.
So his girlfriend returned to Singapore and Michael followed her for the summer of 2012, returning
home for his final year at university. They have been apart for over a year now, having only seen each
other for two weeks at Christmas.
Though the couple will try and meet as often as possible, its not easy as students to fund it. Michaels
Masters course is expensive and his girlfriend will also be focusing on a law course in Singapore.
The couple has discussed marriage but Michael is 21 and his girlfriend 22, so they dont really want
to get married yet. However, even as a married couple they would not be allowed to be together due to
the 18,600 requirement.
Michael could apply for a high-paying graduate job which would pay over this threshold, however his
dream is to pursue a career in journalism, which would require another year of study. A much longed
for dream he doesnt want to give up to earn money they dont need.
These rules have led to a lot of unnecessary stress in his final year at university; he was even prescribed
anti-anxiety medication.
Despite this, Michael achieved good grades, but every day is an uphill struggle and he can feel his
productivity is not at its peak.
Things are not much better for his girlfriend who has had to have counselling in Singapore with her law
internship also showing signs of this.
Page | 219
Financial requirements
v24.07
Muhammad
My health or my wife?
Muhammad is British citizen whose wife is from Morocco. He is also a lifelong patient of severe
atopic eczema which has made life difficult in many areas, including finding suitable employment due
to the complexities of this condition. However, he does have a job, albeit one which does not pay
over 18,600.
Muhammad met his wife in Morocco in early 2012. She is a decent caring woman who understands
his illness. Their friendship blossomed and soon after they decided to marry.
Unfortunately just two weeks after the marriage, Muhammad discovered UKs immigration rules had
changed and now required an income of over 18,600 or a huge amount of savings in cash.
Due to the nature of his illness, Muhammad cannot work in dusty or highly stressful environments as
they exacerbate the condition which has severely limited his earning capacity. It is very unlikely
Muhammad will ever work in a job paying over 18,600.
Muhammads skin condition requires medication every three hours which can cause problems during
working and finding an employer who is understanding enough to allow Muhammad the required
breaks.
So he has been living in severe depression for about a year now, separated from his wife.
Although Muhammad does visit his wife often culturally she would be ostracised if her husband
stayed away from her for too long.
Muhammad has tried to move to Morocco to live with his wife but unfortunately the Morrocan
climate isnt friendly to his severe skin condition and he has experienced severe flare ups on visits
there.
Given Muhammad speaks neither Arabic or French, and he has a health condition, he is also unlikely
to find a job there, which means he cant stay there for longer than three months at a time.
Overstaying his visa is not even a consideration with penalties including a jail sentence and monetary
fines.
Muhammad does currently have a job for which he is very grateful for as it allows him to work in an
environment which is suitable to his condition and allows him to earn an amount that would not
require him to claim benefits.
He also has third party support from his parents, but the rules do not allow for that either.
So Muhammad lives in limbo, seeing his wife when he can.
Page | 220
Financial requirements
v24.07
Naila
This government will be remembered as directly and indirectly
attacking the most vulnerable in society.
Naila is a British citizen living in Bradford.
She got married last year on April 29th and had to wait until she turned 21 to apply for a spouse visa.
As she didnt have a job here she moved to Pakistan to live with her husband there, rather than spend
the time immediately after her wedding living apart.
Naila is British. She was unable to adjust to life in Pakistan the culture, expectations and rights of
women are very different to what she is used to. So she returned to the UK.
She is now working full time in a newsagent's, and has been doing so for the past three months, but
then the rules came in requiring her to earn a salary of 18,600 for at least six months.
So now she has wait even longer until she can apply for a visa. Under the new rules her right to live
happily with her husband has been taken away from her. It seems to Naila that now, in order for a British
person to marry someone from outside the UK, you have to be as rich as the government.
Nailas husband is hard working; he owns a sports shop in Pakistan and they intend that when he is in
the UK, he will also work very hard here to support Naila. There is no way he will just sit back and do
nothing he would not qualify for benefits so thats not an issue either.
Naila has been married for nearly 16 months and still has not been able to apply for her husbands visa.
The new rules for Naila and others in her position are unrealistic and unachievable. They are just causing
pain, misery and heartbreak across our country.
Page | 221
Financial requirements
v24.07
Nick
What a sorry state of affairs when loyal citizens are forced to
emigrate just to be with their partners and family.
Nick is a British citizen who can trace his familys roots in the UK back to the 16th century. However,
he is considering emigrating just because his partner happens to be from Thailand.
He is currently supporting two households one in the UK and the other his partners in Thailand.
Their lives are being torn apart by UKs immigration rules in circumstances which are not sustainable.
So Nick is now selling everything he has, in order to raise funds for the move to France, where he will
be able to be with his partner.
This is going to mean Nick abandons the business he has worked so hard to build up over the last five
years. He will no longer be paying taxes into the British system. It means he will be forced to leave
the country of his birth, his family, his home.
Nick sees this as a sorry state of affairs, when loyal citizens are forced to emigrate just to be with their
partners and families.
Page | 222
Financial requirements
v24.07
Paul
My life now is just about work, work, work ... and when I have time
off, I am too fatigued to do anything but sleep.
Paul, a British citizen, married his partner in May 2012, in the Philippines. She is Filipino and the
decision to marry was based on the assumption that having met the visa requirements they would be
able to make a life together in the UK.
Suddenly though the rules changed, leaving Paul and his wife devastated.
The massive increase in the amount Paul had to earn before he could sponsor his wife has made it
impossible for them to be together.
He works full time in retail and doesnt claim a single penny in benefits. Recently, he changed the
branch of the store he worked in to reduce travelling costs, and is taking on as much overtime as possible,
including working night shifts. Despite this, however, he cannot meet the income criteria.
His life now is just about work, work, work ... and when he has time off, he is too fatigued to do anything
but sleep and cope with the relapse of the depression he has suffered from, on and off, for many years.
Paul is not asking for handouts, he just wants to be able to live with his wife in the UK.
Pauls wife is not entitled to any benefits, so the message being put across in the media by Theresa May
that the presence of non-EU spouses would be a drain on the benefits system is intended blatantly to
mislead the British public, as their rights are chipped away.
Paul does not have a fancy accountant. He has paid his taxes diligently for years. It is Paul and others
like him who have contributed to the system, and yet he is being told he cannot be with his wife as they
are a threat to the system.
MPs get a huge salary, they can claim all manner of household expenses ranging from food and their
TV licence, to interest on their mortgage and rent payments (blatant abuse of expense policies) and yet
they have the nerve to put restrictions on the lives of ordinary British citizens, and accuse us of being a
threat to the British economy?
Page | 223
Financial requirements
v24.07
Paul &Connie
No one should be punished for something as harmless as loving
someone from outside their borders.
Paul is a British citizen living in Nottingham. He met his wife, Connie from California, USA when he
was pursuing postgraduate studies in response to the economic crash when jobs were scarce.
Now this couple is 6000 miles apart only because of UKs
immigration rules.
Paul is in education and neither he nor Connie come from
rich families. They feel the 18,600 is an arbitrary barrier
serving to punish the poor. Paul is firm in his belief that this
threshold has been erected under false pretence, the notion
that immigration is somehow responsible for the myriad
economic and social woes besetting the people of the UK is
actually a xenophobic smokescreen to confuse the public.
The couple has strived and struggled for the last three years, stuck apart, only seeing each other for a
scant few weeks but they know their story is far from the worst. Families have been thrown asunder,
punished for loving each other across petty political borders we uphold.
Paul and his wife have both suffered from depression, each of them undergoing therapy, just trying to
survive apart without any certainty of when they will be able to be together.
Recently though they received some good news. Connie has been successful in obtaining a well-paid
job despite the current economic conditions. So Paul is considering relocating to USA, although this
means being away from his family and friends.
No one should be punished for something as harmless as loving someone from outside their borders.
Page | 224
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 225
Financial requirements
v24.07
Update: Amanda returned to USA in January 2013, and they are working on getting a visa for Phil to
move to the USA to live. Its likely it will be another year or so before this couple can live together
however. Amanda underwent surgery in March 2013, and Phil was luckily able to be with her then to
help her through that. It does however raise the issue that if the situation had been reversed, Amanda
would have been unlikely to be there for Phil.
Page | 226
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 227
Financial requirements
v24.07
At present theyre applying for Ahmeds family visit visa so at least he can come and visit Rachel
while she is at university.
Rachel considered putting off her studies to go down the Surinder Singh route, but that would pose an
unnecessary financial burden without much of a time saving on her completed her degree and going
straight into employment.
She has however postponed her decision to do a Masters!
Political instability in Egypt aside, Rachel needs to be in the UK. Her dad passed away, and she is the
only child and grandchild. While the government claim she can exercise her right to a family life with
her husband elsewhere, what about her mum and grandmas right to a family life especially when her
grandma is not able to travel?
It seems to this couple that in their aim to bring down net migration, not only is the government keeping
foreigners out of the country, but trying to encourage British citizens to leave too.
Rachel and Ahmed married in March 2013. After spending an amazing nine months in Egypt, it's been
hard readjusting to life back in the UK without her husband. She barely feels like a newly-wed!
She considered staying back in Egypt for the summer, but
thought it would be best to come back and work and try to
earn as much money as possible to put aside for the future.
Ahmed is doing the same in Egypt.
It really is demoralising to know that despite the no recourse
to public funds, the couple may not be able to start to build
their lives together until at least a year from now.
It has put pressure on Rachel to find a job immediately after
she graduates, which in the current climate of internships and focus on the importance of gaining
experience (i.e. an acceptable form of unpaid employment) it is difficult for her to remain optimistic but it's all they can do in the face of these new rules.
Page | 228
Financial requirements
v24.07
Ravi
As a self-employed person, the rules are even more onerousand
time apart from my wife even longer.
Ravi is a British citizen. He married his wife in early 2013, in Mauritius. Like many Brits, Ravi as it
turns out, somewhat naively assumed that being a British citizen himself, having his wife with him
would be a mere formality.
For Ravi, the financial requirement of 18,600 is the stumbling block. He is self-employed and his
financial records for the 2012-13 tax year in their current form are unlikely to satisfy UKBA. Allowing
for solicitor and application fees in the thousands of pounds, he is of the opinion applying is not a risk
worth taking, given the higher than average likelihood of refusal for those who are self-employed.
Ravi is aware he could wait until after submitting the 2013-14 tax year accounts, making sure these
would meet with UKBA approval, but that means waiting till April 2014 before he can even apply, plus
the UKBA processing time which by all accounts just seems to get longer, and longer.
He is considering taking on a salaried/wage paying job paying in excess of the minimum requirement,
collating 6 months of payslips and applying then. However, allowing for the time to find a job and then
again the application time as well, its also a long time to be apart from his wife.
So he has several routes open to him. Another route he is considering is Surinder Singh. He has a
birthday later in the year and hopes he can have his wife with him then so this resort of self-exile is the
most appealing to minimise time apart, inconvenience and cost. A route to self-exile is the only route
the government has not been able to close.
Page | 229
Financial requirements
v24.07
Rhys &Natacha
All we want is the opportunity to live together; we are a family,
even if it is just the two of us.
Rhys is a British citizen, and Natacha, Canadian; together they are common law partners. They met
whilst Natacha was studying in England as part of her undergraduate university degree; now they are
both in Canada, Rhys is working there. Four years later, they are trying to figure out a way they can
stay together in the UK to be close to Rhyss family, who are desperate to have them move back here.
Rhys has a Bachelors degree in Fine Arts and is working full time in
Canada, whilst Natacha is completing a Masters degree in Sociology
from Queens University.
Of the two of them, Natacha has the greater earning potential; however,
under the new rules, Rhys must be earning 18,600 for at least six months
before his wife can join him, regardless of the fact that Natacha might
earn much more. Indeed, Natacha was accepted by the University of
Birmingham with a full fees bursary worth $20,000. If a leading British
university sees Natacha as someone worth paying to have her in the UK,
why does the British government see her as a burden?
It strikes them as bizarre that Natachas earnings in the UK, and hence
her taxes, are completely discounted, as is any help from their family. If
the aim of the policy is to reduce the burden on the state, why not let Natachas earnings be counted
too? Why not let them show they wont be a burden on the state?
Why not have requirements such as mandating private healthcare cover from migrants? This would
boost the healthcare system and UK companies, whilst reducing the reliance on the NHS. Their view is
that if the issue is about migrants being a burden on the system, then restrictions should be placed on
work permits, rather than on British citizens wishing to live with their family.
Rhys and Natacha are pleading with this government to understand and appreciate the difficulties these
new rules are producing. All they want is the opportunity to live permanently together; they are a family,
even if it is just the two of them.
Page | 230
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 231
Financial requirements
v24.07
Rob (Indonesia)
They rejected the spouse application because of a technicality,
knowing I would not meet the income criteria under the new rules, in
yet another attempt to extort more money.
Rob is a professional British musician, with a first class degree in music. He has taught music and
performed at concerts. Rob has an eight-year-old son and lives in a detached house in Huddersfield. He
worked hard for everything he has without help from the state. However, Rob is not rich.
Rob fell in love with an Indonesian woman, and married her. They believe they are each others soul
mate. They made vows to each other, with God as their witness, to be together, for richer and poorer.
Rob is a standard Brit, never having needed to worry about the UK immigration system. In battling for
a spouse visa application, however, he realised how bureaucratic the process is, and indeed how unfair
and weighted towards the rich it is, given the application fees.
Rob and his wife applied for a spouse visa on June 26th, weeks before what he terms the ethnic
cleansing type rules came in. They submitted accounts for three years (he is self-employed not rich
but better off than many), bank statements, originals and copies, everything as requested ... no stone
was left unturned.
For over two months, the message from the Embassy was
Application under process at the British Embassy, and then,
in early September, they received an email asking her to take
a SELT English test. The message in the email indicated that
if she did not submit this within seven days her visa would be
rejected. Despite the short notice, the managed it and this was
submitted
on
time
as
well.
About a month later, they received a message saying the
application was ready for collection; however, it was refused
because of the English test. This struck Rob as bizarre as his wifes English is fantastic. Delving further
into it, the authorities said she had passed the reading, writing and listening requirements but had not
submitted the speaking part.
Although they put in an appeal, called a lawyer and asked what to do, they were advised that the appeal
would probably be rejected; and applying for a new visa would fall under the new rules requiring
submission of another 900 fee.
Rob was bemused - the authorities could have said, ..your application is ok, but you need to do the
speaking test, we'll give you another week. Instead they rejected the application due to a technicality,
knowing Rob would be unlikely to meet the income criteria, in an attempt to extort more money.
Robs uncle fought in Burma in WW2, fighting the Japanese for the UK. He himself has worked hard
and paid his taxes. His great uncle was just a name tag when he came back from France in WW1. His
great grandfather died from the repercussions of WWI, also fighting for the UK.
Is this the UK that his family went to war for?
Rob now very much has to come to terms with the fact that he will need to sell his house in the UK and
relocate himself and his son to Indonesia. Another plus towards the immigration target but another loss
for Britain, our economy and our people.
Page | 232
Financial requirements
v24.07
Rob (USA)
Although not affected yet, I fear I wont be allowed to be with my
girlfriend. I cant leave my three daughters in the UK
Rob is a British citizen living in Torquay, Devon. Although he is yet to be affected by the new
immigration rules, he anticipates it being an issue for him and his girlfriend, from Oklahoma, USA. It
is an issue that is already affecting Robs ex-wife.
Theyve only been going out a few months, but are considering their future in the event the relationship,
as they anticipate it to be, becomes more serious. However it hasnt been plain sailing to date either.
Already they have had their brush with UKBA, who refused Robs girlfriend entry for the three months
visit they had planned; instead they only got three days together - sadly something for which they
consider themselves lucky, despite the disappointment.
Rob is a single dad with three daughters, two of who live with him full-time and another he sees a couple
of nights a week and every other weekend. He works for a charity, a noble employer and earns below
the 18,600 threshold required for the sponsorship of a visa in the event he were to marry his girlfriend.
He is lucky in the respect that he has a family locally who help out with childcare. It allows him to save
up for him and his girlfriend to meet each other again.
Rob has considered asking for a pay rise, but is hesitant only because he has been working for his
employer less than a year. The pay rise he would need to earn the magic 18,600 is 75 pence an hour.
Less than 1.
Rob is aware that his ex-wife is in an even worse situation. She is self-employed, earns very little and
is currently claiming benefits. Her partner also lives in the USA (in Maryland) but being in the financial
sector, has the potential for earning a comfortable income to support them both.
The daughter who lives with them both is aged 7 and has learning disabilities and speech problems. She
is a happy little girl but sometimes finds it hard to communicate and is at the sort of level of a much
younger child. She adores both Robs girlfriend and her mums partner Rob tells her that both her
mummy's partner and his girlfriend are living in America for now but hopefully will be able to move
over soon.
At the moment Rob and his girlfriend have good and bad days; they keep in touch via Skype and e-mail
and when they can, speak for hours. Robs girlfriend doesnt have the same ties to America which Rob
has here; they are not in a long distance relationship by choice.
Page | 233
Financial requirements
v24.07
Rudi
Splitting up my family is not an option.
Rudi is a British citizen. As her husband is Jamaican, Rudi is finding the path to return home is paved
with thorns.
Rudi is currently living in Jamaica with her husband as
immigration rules dont allow her to live with him in UK.
However, since receiving the news that they are expecting a baby,
Rudi despite all the happiness, joy and love she is feeling, is
also very stressed.
She really wants their baby to be born and raised in the way she
has been, in the UK. To offer it the best that she can.
Looking into the current rules though, she is finding it impossible
that shell ever be able to return home. Living in Jamaica she
doesnt have a job in the UK. Finding a job here from another country makes it hard enough to get an
interview at the best of times, but when youre pregnant its nigh impossible.
Rudi is facing a horrible choice. She doesnt want her baby to stay in Jamaica while she job-hunts and
then works in the UK. Nor does she want to end up being a single parent for months on end while she
works in the UK with her baby to look after, and her husband in Jamaica.
Rudis parents have offered to support them financially. They have also offered them accommodation
in their huge house. Yet this family is being faced with a choice of exile or separation.
Rudi however is adamant. Splitting up the family is not an option, nor should it be one that family is
forced to make.
Page | 234
Financial requirements
v24.07
Ruth
We live a simple life, yet I am being kicked out of my own country
Ruth is a British citizen who earlier in 2012, married a citizen of Australia. Ruth and her husband are
both volunteers with a Christian charity in the UK and neither of them individually earns 18,600.
They live a basic lifestyle and dont feel the need to earn a high salary for material possessions, which
they neither need, nor want. They have no reason to claim benefits, given what they have themselves,
and the additional support they receive from the church and their family.
Theyre married, and they dont want to be apart. They work as volunteers is there any better way to
be contributing to your community? So Ruth feels like she is being kicked out of her own country.
A couple who isnt crazy about the latest gadgets, or having the best house, or designer goods. A couple
who because of these rules have endured endless upset, stress, sleepless nights and fear, for what the
future will bring. A couple who because of these rules is being forced out of a country they contribute
to, selflessly.
Update: BritCits is sad to report that Ruth and her husband have decided to give up their fight to remain
in her home country. They are planning to move to Australia and are in the process of completing the
Australian visa application for Ruth. Australia will welcome with open arms a couple dedicated to
helping others in their community, rather than chasing after money.
Page | 235
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 236
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 237
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 238
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 239
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 240
Financial requirements
v24.07
Sierra
The message we are getting from the UK government is that we are
not rich enough to love.
Sierra is a British citizen married to a citizen of the USA, and they are aged 21 and 25. They got married
after two years together, in the UK, and then the world of immigration horror opened up to them.
They believed that, being married, they would not be kept apart whilst arranging her husbands work
visa. They were wrong.
Sierras husband became an overstayer on 2 July this year. They learnt that they would have to spend
1,500 on application forms, and on a lawyer's fees, to help them through this maze, applying for his
Discretionary Leave to Remain.
As a legal secretary, Sierra earns 12,500 a year, with her savings having been spent flying back and
forth between the USA and the UK, and for the visa process.
Sierra has never claimed benefits.
As her husband is an overstayer, any potential application is likely to be declined. What however is this
couple supposed to do? They saved up 1,500 for the application only now to be told, No, its not good
enough, youre not rich enough to be in love.
They are however lucky to have family members who have always been willing to help, monetarily, but
now the rules even disallow co-sponsorship. They have nowhere to turn!
Sierra is terrified that she is going to get a knock on the door in the middle of the night and be forced to
spend months or even years apart until she is able to earn 18,600, or whatever the new higher income
threshold might be.
She feels desperate and that she is being punished for being in love, for daring to get married whilst
being young and poor, despite not being on benefits.
These new laws put a price on love and they are disgusting; they are inhuman and carry no respect for
the sanctity of marriage.
Theresa May should be thoroughly ashamed of herself for abusing her power and misrepresenting
British citizens.
Page | 241
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 242
Financial requirements
v24.07
Steven
Steven is a British citizen. His partner is from Australia, where they are currently living together.
Steven wishes to move back to the UK as his father was very ill last year, and his grandparents are
very elderly. He wishes to spend more time with them, as now they need him more, in their old age.
Steven is currently in the UK trying to find work to get a visa for his partner. However, he is
struggling to find anything paying above 18,600.
He is aware that in order to live in the UK to be here for his family, he will have to live apart from his
partner for a year or so. Else, live in permanent exile.
This is not the way a country should treat its own citizens.
Page | 243
Financial requirements
v24.07
Suzanne
UK puts a price tag on love
Suzanne is British, with a fiance from the USA, living in the north-east of England. Theyve been
together for nearly three years and planned to marry this year.
At 16,600, Suzanne earns just 2,000 below the required threshold. However, average wages in
northern England are lower than in the rest of the country and 16,600 is considered a very good salary.
The couples only recourse is to try and save up over 20,000 in cash a figure the couple feel
government has plucked out of thin air, to make up for the 2,000 income deficit from the 18,600 per
annum salary requirement. An amount that will take years to save, if ever, evident of how out of touch
politicians are.
Suzanne cannot move to the US because the American government does not recognise same-sex unions.
So, their lives are on hold, and their right to a private life is held in check by two countries with equally
discriminatory laws. UK puts a price tag on love, and America has a gender requirement.
Since they have no idea when they will be able to be together, the separation is slowing chipping away
at their sanity as they struggle to stay on track; relationships are hard enough to maintain at the best of
times.
However, enforced distance results in additional frustrations, distress and depression.
Update: Unfortunately, thanks to the havoc wreaked by the new rules, Suzanne and her fiance broke
up.
The positive change since 2012 was that the United States did overturn the federal law which previously
prevented American citizens from sponsoring same-sex spouses and fiancees, and it's much easier to do
so as well, as third party support is allowed, personal financial circumstances such as cost of living in
the state of residence vs income are considered, and the income level is at a reasonable level such that
anyone with a full time job would satisfy it.
Unfortunately, moving to the United States wasn't an option for Suzanne because both her parents in
the UK are ill. Suzanne felt it was her duty to stay and look after her parents, as there is no other family
nearby to assist. However as Suzanne still doesnt earn 18,600, she couldnt sponsor her fiance
either. If she came here, it would be impossible for her to return to the UK with me, again because of
the financial requirement.
The more relaxed US laws on family reunification would actually for Suzannes parents to also relocate
to the US, so that their daughter could be with her partner; but their health condition prevents such a
move.
The couple were at an impasse with no resolution in sight, and unfortunately, both thought it best to
end things than continue in a long distance relationship with no means visible for their being able to
finally live together. Another family fallen victim to Home Offices family immigration rules.
Page | 244
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 245
Financial requirements
v24.07
The move to Ireland has not been plain sailing. They had trouble sorting out accommodation, dealing
with the different laws there around rentals and letting fees. Pressure to find a job meant effectively
taking the first thing on offer, even where for Tracey this has meant a job engaging in laborious work.
For Tracey, leaving the UK and her elderly parents was especially heart wrenching.
But its a means to an end for a couple who just want to be able to live together.
Though this entire process has been difficult and traumatic the couple persevered; they are grateful
that EU rules allow them to be together even where their own country has tried its best to keep them
apart.
It is ironic that now not only has the UK lost Traceys taxes, and those that Gary would have paid had
he been allowed to work, but also that when they return to the UK they will both qualify for benefits.
Although not so inclined, given their savings have been spent on the move to Ireland, they may well
need to until new jobs are found.
It's very hard for Tracey and Gary not to end up feeling completely cynical and embittered. One can't
help who one falls in love with, and its perfectly reasonable to want to spend your life with them. Its
hard to believe that the UK makes that sometimes seem an impossible wish.
Page | 246
Financial requirements
v24.07
Although he couldn't meet the 18,600 income requirement, not a surprise in his part of the UK, Wayne
owns his four bedroom house outright no mortgage! He doesnt need a lot to live on - unlike someone
with a huge rent or mortgage. He contributes to the economy supplying valuable trade skills as a
handyman, window cleaner and builder. As Wayne proudly told us,Daisy is a college graduate
midwife. She finished top of her class. She was also a sergeant major in her local reservists when she
was at school. That one made me giggle as she is so small bless.", nothing the UK is in desperate need
of midwives.
However Wayne's financial situation, his contribution to the community and Daisy's skills were all
disregarded by the Home Office.
Wayne thus exercised his free movement rights moving to
France where the couple on 3rd October 2013, welcomed their
daughter, Paris into the world. Wayne is confident that if
Daisy had not been able to give birth in Europe, she would
likely have died given the terror attack in Ozamis city,
Mindanao.
Page | 247
Financial requirements
v24.07
Waynes experience of the French people is very positive and the couple is grateful for the help and
support of the local community, feeling accepted when hospital staff expressed a wish that the family
would permanently settle in the lovely town of Saint-Amand-Montrond.
However, with Waynes mum having been diagnosed
with cancer and his teenage daughter in the UK,
Wayne wanted to return home thus fulfilling his own
mums wish to be able to live long enough to welcome
Daisy and the baby into the family.
Its not been plain sailing in the UK though.
Obtaining a NINO for Daisy proved to be a
nightmare and Home Office did not correctly apply
EEA regulations in Daisys Residence Card
application.
With Waynes MP intervening requesting Home Office correctly apply O&B vs Netherlands case law,
the couple hopes that Daisy will now finally be granted with a document to evidence her right to
remain.
Whilst they wait, Daisy proving to be quite an entrepreneur, has set up a cleaning business though she
is still hoping to work either in healthcare for OAPs or utilise her skills and continue to work as a
midwife. Paris is enjoying the love and attention received from the entire family, especially elder
sister.
The couple ensures that Paris, though British is in
touch with her Filipino roots too she is being
raised in a bilingual environment, and the family
as well as immersing themselves in all things
British are involved in the local community in
Devon including attending the local Filipino PreNew Year party. Respect for all. These are the
British values the human values - we should be
practicing.
Page | 248
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 249
Financial requirements
v24.07
Wes is looking for another job that will meet the threshold but has not found one yet. Erica recently
completed her Bachelors degree with a good grade average and would look for work here and pay
taxes - as soon as she was allowed to.
Supporting themselves is therefore not the problem. However, they also have a solid support network
who would be able to evidence third party support, but that of course is no longer allowed.
Wes has never claimed any form of benefits. He just wants to be able to live in the UK in the region
his family has lived in for hundreds of years.
The couple is confident they will satisfy this hurdle, but the time apart is forever lost. Wes sometimes
feel guilty for not being able to earn enough to sponsor his wife, even though he knows its the rules
which are failing them.
Wes, a prize-winning poet (he won Wells Festival of Literatures first prize in 2013 for a poem titled
Catwoman) has written a set of poems about their situation.
The Heart Secretary for the Home Secretary,
Theresa May http://bit.ly/heartsecretary
On the wall of the Heart Office there is an
embroidery
in patriotic colours, faded since 1905
to pink, cream and baby blue. It reads,
I SHOW ME HERE THE EARTH IS.
Its a famous phrase, but broken up;
letters apart that should be together,
together that should be apart.
A few metres in front of the work, at a simple
desk, sits the Heart Secretary.
She is sorting the beating organs that are her
concern, hands stained red with their juices.
Here are two that cling to one another as if
seeking to merge into one,
Teresa
Santa Teresa is stuck through the heart,
in a moment eternally captured in art:
the angel is thrusting his hot golden spear,
right here, and right here, and again again
here.
Bernini has rendered the mystic nuns marvel
in a chapel in Rome in dramatic white
marble
and has captured the rapture in each
downcast lid of
our saint, and the sting shed not wish to be
rid of for Teresa revels in the exquisite pain
as her cherub inflicts it again and again
and she moans and she groans and she gasps
and she sings:
It is love alone that gives worth to all
things.
Page | 250
May
We married on the 18th, in a vineyard in
Nebraska.
Matched cummings to Breton in our vows:
i carry your heart with me (i carry it in
my heart) stood next to My wife whose
wrists are matches
Whose fingers are raffles holding the ace of
hearts In yellow sun and yellow dress
you looked like Disneys Belle made flesh.
And you do. You carry and hold that card from
my deck, my darling.
But this game was written by a joker,
and the hearts are trumped
by diamonds
every trick.
Financial requirements
v24.07
Page | 251
Financial requirements
v24.07
Useful links
Our website: www.BritCits.com
Helpful documents: www.scribd.com/BritCits
Campaigns:
Adult Dependant Relatives working to challenge the Adult Dependant Relative rules in force since 9 July 2012.
Fundraising at www.justgiving.com/BritCits1 Contact us for more information.
Divided Families Campaign working in conjunction with JCWI and Migrants Rights Network.
Movement Against Xeonophobia aimed at countering vicious anti-immigrant discourse of mainstream politics.
Involves a coalition of organisations and prominent individuals to mobilise and inform people on issues around
immigration, particularly around the Immigration Bill, European Elections and the General Election in 2015.
Meetups:
Regular meetings organised by us, members and other groups. These are also scheduled online and members are
urged to register at the following website for details of future events: www.meetup.com/BritCits
Page | 252
v20.01
Index
A
Afghanistan .......................................................... 59
Albania ....................................................... 131, 213
Argentina.................................................... 193, 205
Australia ..................................... 168, 196, 237, 245
B
Bolivia ................................................................. 169
Brazil................................................... 152, 173, 195
C
Canada ......................................... 93, 177, 179, 232
Chile ....................................................... 63, 84, 241
China .............................. 14, 60, 102, 116, 122, 135
Colombia .............................................. 72, 155, 158
Cuba ................................................................... 170
E
Egypt ..... 80, 137, 144, 156, 187, 206, 219, 229, 238
F
Fiji ....................................................................... 175
G
Gabon ................................................................. 133
Guyana ................................................................. 19
H
Hong Kong .................................................... 81, 178
I
India ... 11, 15, 16, 20, 26, 27, 28, 31, 36, 37, 40, 43,
44, 47, 49, 51, 52, 101, 105, 194, 199
Indonesia ...................................... 64, 103, 188, 234
Iran ..................................................................... 159
J
Jamaica ............................................................... 236
Japan .................................... 58, 104, 145, 147, 244
K
Kazakhstan ............................................................. 9
Page | 253
v24.07