potential work problems

i have no choice

"...teaching has become a profession which is incompatable with a normal life".

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/e...ng-the-classroom-after-one-year-10147043.html

I am sorry that you have no other choice. Apart from the Singh route.

i looked into the singh route--cant apply to me--i'm retired--on state pension. i cant exercise my right to go and wash cars in eastern europe.

Andy there is plenty of not very well paid work in Spain and Portugal teaching English school starts in End Aug/Sep a member on my Portugal SS group is doing that now and has there FP to return with there husband and kids to the uk

Now that sounds useful - a potential future option. Cheers.

You obviously discount supply teaching as unacceptable to the UKVI. I cant see why it should be?

I don't discount it - I discount it in my case. Because, technically, I am on a zero hours contract.

They would look at earnings over the last so many years as well. I've never hit the magic 18,600 since I worked full time.

If you look at examples online, you can see how other people have been rejected, even when earning over £18,600. Their track record is poor, and I do not trust them, based upon what I have read. The alternatives are better, and the UK system is overpriced, slow and stacked against 47% of the population. Why prop it up?

Now in London, well, there would be greater pay, and I am sure I would get over that number. But then, they would turn round and in all likelihood concentrate on the transient nature of the job, and so on. And no offence to London peeps, but I would just about afford to live in a matchbox there.

Hi Andy. Can you present some of the examples where they have been refused yet attained the 18600?

What about the self employed painter and decorater, for example. He has his own business. He knows what he has earned in his first six months, say £9300, for example, but can he give a cast iron guarantee that he will bring in the same the following 6 months....

Just a thought.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...angle-British-father-doesn-t-earn-enough.html

I have seen quite a few more, but weeks ago, and I'm sorry but I don't have time now to find them. There was one about a woman who earned over 19,000 but owned her own business, they turned her down flat on that. They can be found.

Also, read this:

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/home-office-refuses-surinder-singh-case-because-applicant-knows-law/

Is this not proof of the intent of the immigration system? Do you think these people can be trusted? I rest my case.

Can he prove that he has earned above the magic number for the past four, five years?

With a track record, yes he has a chance. But otherwise, no.

However, this is just me speculating, and based upon my limited understanding of something which seems rather wrong to me.

According to the first article he provided insufficient information in his application. I can't read the second it says the link is blocked. There is no requirement to prove the past four or five years, just the last 6 months as John stated. It may well be their intent but if you meet the requirements then all should be fine. Obviously if you can't then that's a different story. People are inappropriately refused on occasions but they fight the case if they know they are in the right. People on here have done just that and had their application overturned.

I dont think 5 years worth is required. Just a years worth max. For a spousal route visa.

Ok, so some people fight, that takes time, the process costs a lot of money for all of this, it rides roughshod over British people's rights, and maybe their partners or children are deported in the process. Sorry, noone should have to appeal.

I have read somewhere that someone did have to prove past income, and I'm sure more than one person had to show supporting documents to the case. I have no link to prove this, so believe me or not. If they ask for it, I am sure that you must provide it to satisfy them.


And you use that magic word 'should'. Should is an interesting word - it guarantees nothing but a gamble.

I think it's one of them that if it works for someone, they think it's great, and if someone is let down by it, they think it's unfair. But you can't say the system the way it stands is fair, you can't say it's value for money, and the rest of Europe knows it.

5 isn't required unless they ask for it, no. But they can, and they have.

I am not saying you are wrong. I just havent heard of that.

Its all based on the regulations, immigration law. So the UKVI cannot make the rules up as they go along. Otherwise, as Halohalo says, they will end up losing a court case.

Indeed if they break their own rules they end up losing their refusal case.

Self education is a wonderful thing

...the eventual court case, you forgot to say. It doesn't happen immediately. Which might only come about if the hard-done to party actually fights for years and years and years. And then what of an appeal. And what of the go-slow approach taken. I am sure that UKVI are not scared of a court case - the law supports them, even when they violate the European law they are signed up to. If you look at the challenges in the high courts last year towards the British system, and the ludicrous reply the panel of judges gave...well, it's obvious what the story is.

It's not a case of breaking rules, or making them up as they go along. It's a case of how they wish to interpret them at a given time...that is, if they work the same way as pretty much all institutions work. Next you'll tell me the police work the same way...no, let's skip that. Anyway, we shall agree to disagree, and I'm glad that clearly you haven't seen just what can be done by a government agency, and what can be justified.

And what of this if it doesn't suggest that they are 'making it up as they go along'?

/https://eumovement.wordpress.com/20...g-of-eea-family-permit-visas-still-a-problem/

I'll get off my soapbox if you smell the coffee

'Night.

Andy. Please dont take it from me. Speak to the forum owner, Kuya, when he is about and he will explain how it worked for him. Yes, fighting in the courts is undesirable, agreed, buy the UKVI dont want that anymore than you or I do, so they do seek to avoid it. Its just that they make mistakes and thats when the court cases come about.

I have sought to help. No more or less than that. I have observed many many applications and their outcomes, including refusals, over the last 4 years and there is something like a 95% success rate on spousal route / fiance route visas, primarily because as long as the applicant complies with immigration law then the UKVI have no choice but to accept them.

Having said that, do the Singh route if you can, it will save you a few bob and be far easier.

Other than that I can advise you no more.