1

Recently I applied UK visit visa twice from Indonesia, and both applications were refused. I understand the reasons for refusal, but what bothers me is that in both refusals, UKVI mistakenly assumed that I am an unemployed.

I am a student. I clearly stated that in both application forms. I also provided a letter from my university confirming my student status and permission for short leave to visit UK.

How can I correct their mistakes? I tried to find information about appealing, but my problem does not fit with the reasons for appeal. Do I have to re-apply only to correct their mistakes? I am thinking about my record in their database, which might influence my credibility for future applications.

Additional information Thanks for all your responses. To be clearer, I applied for UK visa together with my brother, who is unemployed. In my case, UKVI assumed my brother as a student and me as unemployed. In the refusal letter, regarding me, UKVI said that because I am unemployed, so there is no any ties with an institution, they are not convinced that I will return at the end of my planned trip. In my brother's refusal letter, UKVI said that because he is a student of a university (in which I am actually in), he failed to provide a letter of university which says exactly from when until when the university give a permission of leave. So, this is, in my opinion, simply the carelessness of UKVI to confirm the information in the application form, so my brother's and my identities were swapped. In the second refusal, this issue of studentship and employment is repeated again, which unfortunately I forgot to explain in my second application. So, UKVI might not look carefully at the application form and other supporting documents, but consider more on the previous refusal letter. As I stated earlier, I don't mind with the refusal. My concern is how to correct the information about this swapped identity. Do I have to re-apply to correct this? Or is there any other way to do so?

|improve this question

closed as unclear what you're asking by Gagravarr, Rory Alsop, Karlson, Some wandering yeti, JonathanReez♦ Aug 7 '16 at 22:55

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 2
    Those naughty ECO's! Shame on them for making those types of silly mistakes! Please scan your refusal notice(s) and upload them into your question. Look at this link for a sample travel.stackexchange.com/questions/74965/…. Then we can see what's going on and help get you the best answer for your situation. In the absence of scans to put some shape on your two refusals, I'm marking this question as 'unclear'. Please edit. – Gayot Fow Aug 4 '16 at 10:33
  • 3
    @dan1111 One doesn't usually use the word "unemployed" to refer to people who are in an alternative situation. So, for example, children and students usually aren't described as being "unemployed". – David Richerby Aug 4 '16 at 10:52
  • 2
    @DavidRicherby, yes, but still children and students literally are unemployed. Using that word to describe them would be unconventional rather than inaccurate. Given the circumstances, I find it unlikely that UKVI missed the OP's student status; probably the lack of income from employment was a relevant point. In any case, we shall see if further information is provided by the OP. – user35890 Aug 4 '16 at 10:55
  • 2
    @DavidRicherby: A common British alternative term would be NEET - Not Employed, In Education Or Training. This is used to specifically refer to the restricted form of "unemployed" that you have in mind, precisely because of the ambiguity of "unemployed". But I agree, we need the actual refusal. It won't hinge on one word. – MSalters Aug 4 '16 at 16:11
  • 3
    I think you should follow @GayotFow's request and upload your refusal letter – Crazydre Aug 6 '16 at 23:58