-1

This question already has an answer here:

picture 2picture 1

I have done some searching on this forum and found some really good advice. I am attaching a copy of the letter and my thoughts on it. Here's hoping that someone could interpret this visa refusal letter in more detail and perhaps advise on what could be done with a second application to secure an approval.

I am trying to invite a friend to visit the UK for 11-day holiday later this year, but the visitor visa was refused based on 3 points: V4.2(a), (c) and (e).

Taking each in turn: (a) & (c) - reasons given were based on the earnings of the applicant. - UKVI stated "From the financial information provided, I am not satisfied that the proposed trip is proportionate to your income and finances and is therefore credible".

It looks as if the ECO has based the decision of intention to return home after the trip solely on the applicant's earnings with no consideration given to the home ties of the applicant and evidence supplied to demonstrate this, such as their marriage certificate, birth certificates of 3 children, letter from employer stating full time employment status (since 2007, payslips and bank statements to corroborate the employment aspect. Plus details on the application letter that the applicant lives in their own family-owned home. In addition to this, return flights were booked in advance, which demonstrated an intention to leave at the end of the holiday. (Flights were very cheap, so I was not concerned about losing this money).

(e) - UKVI did not believe that applicant could meet the cost of the 11-day trip! (to be honest, I would agree). That is why I happily completed a full financial sponsorship undertaking, providing evidence of my home status, utility bills/correspondence from HMRC, evidence that I am an employed professional and will be taking leave for the proposed 11-day stay, payslips, 12 months of my bank statements showing funds solely available to me way in excess of what would be needed to financially cover an 11 day trip. (> £4,000!), and a regular income, etc to establish no financial messing around in an attempt to deceive. All this plus a full covering letter to summarise the application, my support of it and the evidence provided by myself.

So the visa was refused as the ECO considered that the applicant would try to work in UK! For 11 days? Seriously. I thought the provisions in V4.3 of the Immigration Rules allowed an applicant to be fully sponsored, but it appears this is not the case?

I thought we had put together a very strong application, so I was (and still am) confused as to why a refusal was issued.

I think I have a fairly good grasp of the visa procedures so I don't necessarily need legal advice in that area. I would happily make another application, but I do not see how any subsequent application would be significantly different as circumtances are unlikely to change.

I have written to the Home Office to ask for clarification on what additional evidence would be required to satisfy UKVI, but nothing received back yet (will be very surprised if I do hear anything.)

So if anyone has any gems of wisdom, additional evidence that you think could improve a subsequent application, I would love to hear from you.

Thank you for reading.

marked as duplicate by Henning Makholm, Giorgio, bytebuster, MadHatter, Thorsten S. Jun 30 '18 at 20:50

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 4
    Do you have a question? – CMaster Jun 30 '18 at 12:39
  • 1
    @CMaster. Yes. Basically what could be added to a second application to increase the chances of an approval, having now received this refusal? – Niki Jun 30 '18 at 12:51
  • 3
    They purported length of the visit has no relevance at all to whether it will be attractive for the applicant to seek work in the UK instead of the short visit they claimed to be planning. No matter how many question marks you put after your non-sequitur question. Anyone who wants to immigrate illegally can claim that they're going to be in the country for only 11 days -- but claiming doesn't make it so. – Henning Makholm Jun 30 '18 at 12:53
  • @Henning. I appreciate that it only takes a minute for a person to disappear once in the UK if that is their intention. And I know that booked flights do not prove they will leave either, so how exactly would you demonstrate intention to leave, please? Otherwise it seems to be down to a subjective view on the part of the ECO? – Niki Jun 30 '18 at 12:58
  • I have read the 'possible duplicate' thread to which you refer - I did not see how it offered any indication of tangible evidence that could be submitted to establish intention to return or that a visit is credible, hence my new post. – Niki Jun 30 '18 at 13:02
5

Evidence for what, exactly?

  • Let's take it as a given that you can pay for the trip of the applicant. But being able to pay for the trip is not the only reason why an applicant is asked to provide financial details. They want to gauge if it would be in the self-interest of the applicant to abandon the job in the home country, to overstay and to work in an illegal, low-wage job.
  • Plenty of people try to get into Europe to support their family through remittances, so leaving family behind is not evidence of an intention to leave, either.

So the best situation for an applicant is a stable job that pays more than illegal, unskilled or semi-skilled work in the UK. And yes, there is a bit of judgement call by the ECO in the decision, based among many other things on the experience with other applicants from that part of the world.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.