I'm desperate to get a logical answer about my UK visa refusal. There's not a more respectful person toward visas and the UK Home Office as I am. I've never abused the system, never overstayed my visas, and stayed the exact amount of time I mentioned on each application. After three successful applications to the UK (2013, 2014, 2015), I was refused in 2016. The reason was because of a document that I was never asked me about before, which is the bank statement.

In all my past applications, all I used to provide was just the withdrawal document that show that I have withdrawn £1400 but I never added a bank statement that shows that I've been saving money from my salary. I applied the same way as I'm a genuine visitor.

In 2016, I was refused saying that I didn't show the origin of the £1400. They also mentioned that I was travelling alone and have no friends in the UK. I'm 34 years old and, yes, I don't have friends there, nor do I need to. Such details don't make sense to me.

The final point I don't understand. I am paid 45.000 DA (around £330), so my personal expenses are £50 a month, and I save £140 each month. After 10 months, I have £1400. They mentioned that I'm spending four times my salary. What does this mean? The £1400 is more than enough for a week in London, because my accomodation is always in a hostel at around £100, bus pass for a week is £21.20, and the flight ticket is £250. That would leave me with £1029 which is more than enough for visiting London, shopping; I know my numbers and how much to spend and where to.

If I add the bank statement, will it improve chance of getting a visa?

  • 8
    For UK refusals, we ask that you photograph or scan your refusal notice, block out or hide any sensitive or identifying information, and include it in your question. Our visa experts are most effective if they know exactly the refusal reason(s) listed by the reviewing officials. Sep 9, 2017 at 23:57
  • Unfortunately, the decision making is not a science and it's upto the ECO to interpret your evidence keeping in mind his biases.
    – user58558
    Sep 11, 2017 at 6:25

2 Answers 2


It's right here in RedGrittyBrick's link:


A frequent source of refusals comes under "proportionality". This is a strategy where the applicant intends to deplete his life savings on a visit. "Proportionality" also covers the case where an applicant intends to spent more than about two or three months earnings on a visit, sometimes up to six months. This strategy is doomed from the outset because ECO's believe that genuine visitors do not deplete their financial reserves on a visit and moreover, ECO's believe that genuine visitors do not spend a multiple of their monthly cash intake. There is no hard rule covering proportionality and UKVI does not provide guidance on what is acceptable, so as a general rule of thumb if you plan on spending more than a month or two of your cash intake, you can expect problems and the solution is don't apply. Wait until your personal circumstances are more prosperous.

They simply don't believe -- nor do I -- that

a) you are able to find lodging in London for 100 quid a week - without which your plan falls apart. Does this hostel have age limits? Perhaps they are aware of an age limit you are not. And

b) it is normal and reasonable for a person of your age to dump every last dime of income into traveling to the UK? Sorry. I don't know what's normal in India, but a 34yo in the US who is not putting money back into retirement funds, who doesn't have a 6 month emergency fund, who bottoms his bank account for fun and thinks the money will work out -- that is a signal for poverty, substance abuse, bad habits (gambling etc.), habit-driven terrible financial decisions, or other serious life problems. None of which you want to land in your nation if you're an immigration officer, as that's likely to end in illicit employment or on the dole. So you would need documentation to disprove those things.

Why this time and not previous times? There wasn't a pattern before. And the pattern asks a big question: "Why the only the UK over and over, and not a diversity of tourism destinations around the world?" If you had decided "fine, jerks, I'll take my vacation money to France/Thailand/New Zealand/St Martin/Vegas instead", that would reflect being a bona-fide tourist. Whereas seeking only UK entry is suspicious. In the long run, maybe this is a "test" to see what you do.

  • I respect your answer first there are hostels in the uk that are cheap and super clean for less than £130 if you want to check go on booking.com, I've been many times that's not my first trip, I'm a tourist I don't need to go to Sheraton hotel a hostel is fine for me, second traveling only to the uk isn't wrong and there's no law that said you've to travel only one time or two, I like the uk, I choosed it many times it's because I want to explore it more, now I disagree with you that traveling only there is suspicious my records are clean and the home office aleardy took my biometric data
    – Lamine Am
    Sep 11, 2017 at 16:36
  • @LamineAm I completely understand why you're disagreeing with me. I am probably wrong and you'll have no trouble. US citizens are expected to spend money on those things because the government's social services are fairly weak, unemployment/poverty coverage is poor, and retirement is inadequate, it must be supplemented. Surely that must vary in other countries. Sep 11, 2017 at 17:20
  • Thank you very much for your answers you might be right I'm thinking to apply for Canada and things go we'll I visit canada and then later I'll apply for the UK thank you for your advise anyway
    – Lamine Am
    Sep 12, 2017 at 17:43

Many countries, including the UK, have tightened their procedures, and I would guess you've simply hit that, i.e. previously they accepted "just the withdrawal document", now their rules say that's not enough.

That you're spending 4 times your salary means that £1400 is (more than) 4 times what you make every month. That sounds like quite a huge part of your income to spend on a weeks vacation, and raises some concern that you might have other sources of income, perhaps not so legal, and that again causes concern.

  • Salary is a per year figure in colloquial and as far as I've seen, legal English. The question implies £330 per month, so it makes no sense to say "four times [the] salary".
    – Nij
    Sep 10, 2017 at 10:36
  • @Nij: True (though debatable), nevertheless, apparently spending around two-thirds of your annual disposable income on one-week vacations to the UK for four years running is unusual. Not providing the normal requested supporting documents is likely to undermine the application. Since an image of the refusal letter is not provided, we can't be sure of the exact wording. Sep 10, 2017 at 12:01
  • I'll post a photo of my refusal but again I have been explaining before That the £1400 are simply my saving of 10 months so it make Sense because I'm paid £330 and I take £140 from my salary every month For 10 months so the total is £1400 and I've also explained that my accomodation for a week is £100, bus pass is £21, flight ticket £250 so I'd be left with £1029 which fine to do shopping and visiting in London why it seems so hard to understand yet it's obvious , numbers don't lie
    – Lamine Am
    Sep 10, 2017 at 12:57
  • I've been to the uk many times so I know my numbers, I mean all my previous successful applications were similar and the one I was refused for was like the past ones, so why being refused? will the bank statement answer the home office question about the origin of the funds, and that those £1400 are my savings not four times my salary
    – Lamine Am
    Sep 10, 2017 at 12:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .