Skip to main content
replaced http://travel.stackexchange.com/ with https://travel.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

added 123 characters in body
Source Link
JonathanReez
  • 81.7k
  • 87
  • 388
  • 749

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Repaired the unintended link formatting
Source Link
Jan
  • 16.1k
  • 4
  • 48
  • 88

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows 1[1] who, 2[2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows 1 who, 2 what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

Applicants who fear that their bank statements may betray a weak financial position will sometimes resort to a 'parking' strategy. This strategy involves having a relative or other trusted party placing a large sum of money in the applicant's account temporarily so that the applicant's bank statements look better. It's a popular strategy, but when it fails, the application is refused and the applicant's credibility is damaged.

It is the applicant's responsibility to show that funds available for the visit are his and available to him for the visit. This is stated in Paragraph 41 of the rules (see update below).

In your case it looks like the ECO decided you wanted to appear more prosperous than you are, so you found someone to park money in your account. Moreover, he was unable to use a previous history to help determine if you are a reliable and compliant person.

Irregular bank transactions need to be carefully documented with paperwork that shows [1] who, [2] what, [3] how, [4] when, and most importantly [5] why. If you recently sold a house for example, they would want to see the complete transaction history, up to and possibly including the bank statement of the counterpart.

The only remedy available is to make a fresh application. You need to prepare the application knowing that your credibility has been damaged and they will apply more scrutiny and caution when they make their decision.

Update

Owing to a rule change in 2015, the rule is now stated in Appendix V Paragraph 4.2 subparagraph e

must have sufficient funds to cover all reasonable costs in relation to their visit without working or accessing public funds. This includes the cost of the return or onward journey, any costs relating to dependants, and the cost of planned activities such as private medical treatment.

The ways that an applicant can meet the rules and provide the appropriate evidence is given in Visitor: supporting documents guide

Related article: My application was refused due to 'lack of evidence of funds', are there hidden requirements for UK visa applications?

added 27 characters in body
Source Link
Gayot Fow
  • 85.5k
  • 26
  • 229
  • 407
Loading
added 5 characters in body
Source Link
Gayot Fow
  • 85.5k
  • 26
  • 229
  • 407
Loading
added 903 characters in body
Source Link
Gayot Fow
  • 85.5k
  • 26
  • 229
  • 407
Loading
Minor formatting.
Source Link
JoErNanO
  • 52.8k
  • 18
  • 166
  • 276
Loading
Source Link
Gayot Fow
  • 85.5k
  • 26
  • 229
  • 407
Loading