Immigrationboards.com

I am a Swiss National and my wife is a non-EEA National who recently received her confirmation of Permanent residence stamp in her passport.

As this required obtaining 5 years worth of "evidence of me exercising my treaty rights", would I be correct in saying that after 12 months (Sep 2013) my wife could apply for BC based purely on the permanent residence stamp in her passport (along with other requirements) and not need to again provide 5 years of evidence as in EEA4?

Once she has obtained BC will she no longer be entitled to bring family into the UK (parents) as she is no longer considered "non-EEA/Swiss family member of an EEA/Swiss National"?

I don't plan on obtaining BC so will simply continue exercising my right to permanent residence in the UK as a Swiss National (I got my confirmation 2 months back after submitting EEA3).

Thanks

damianpfister wrote:As this required obtaining 5 years worth of "evidence of me exercising my treaty rights", would I be correct in saying that after 12 months (Sep 2013) my wife could apply for BC based purely on the permanent residence stamp in her passport (along with other requirements) and not need to again provide 5 years of evidence as in EEA4?

Correct. She can ignore section 2.4-2.6 in the form. This is for cases where the applicant has no PR Confirmation (as this is optional) or has it for less than 1 year (but after 6 years of residence).

Once she has obtained BC will she no longer be entitled to bring family into the UK (parents) as she is no longer considered "non-EEA/Swiss family member of an EEA/Swiss National"?

she can always use the UK immigration route for British citizens. You might also be able to use the EEA route but this is less clear how the HO would react. Recent changes in the EEA regulations are preventing British citizens for using the EEA route (with some exception) but I don't think that would stand in our case. You are not British and your wife becoming British doesn't change her status of a family member of a Swiss national.

I don't plan on obtaining BC so will simply continue exercising my right to permanent residence in the UK as a Swiss National (I got my confirmation 2 months back after submitting EEA3).

I presume you understand that exercise rights as a PR basically means you don't need to do anything apart from not leaving the UK for more than 2 consecutive years.

Jambo wrote:she can always use the UK immigration route for British citizens

I know someone who struggles with this decision, and I also noticed that something related popped up in a different thread recently. All things considered: If someone qualifies for BC, but plans to bring non-EEA family members into the UK, would the UK immigration route be a better choice or the EEA2/4-route? In other words, if someone would want to bring his/her future spouse (for example) to the UK at a later point, would taking up BC be a mistake?

Gyfrinachgar wrote:If someone qualifies for BC, but plans to bring non-EEA family members into the UK, would the UK immigration route be a better choice or the EEA2/4-route? In other words, if someone would want to bring his/her future spouse (for example) to the UK at a later point, would taking up BC be a mistake?

I would agree that for EEA nationals becoming British is less attractive now (and in any case this, as you know, is more an emotional decision than anything else). For Family members of EEA national, then BC has its advantages and surely in the OP case, it is not a clear cut that the EEA route will be closed.

Hi Jambo

I noticed in section 1.31 - 1.43 of the application form questions are asked about your spouse, which according to the AN Guide is

"1.31 – 1.36 To help us determine your eligibility for naturalisation we need to know a little about your partner, if you have one. On this part of the form we use the term “partner” to mean your husband, wife or civil partner. If your partner is not a British citizen and would like to apply, they will need to make their own application on a separate form. We cannot treat your form as an application for your partner to be naturalised as a British citizen"

I am curious why this is necessary, if my wife will be applying on her own merit (now that she has confirmed permanent residence). Surely it wouldn't be necessary to again show she is married to me (Marriage certificate, dual statements, etc) as there is no longer a need to prove "treaty rights"?

On a different topic - if she decided to apply for jobseekers allowance (she has recently stopped working temporarily), would this affect her BC application later on?

Thanks
Damian

This section is mainly for cases of marriage to British citizen. You in this case have no weight on her application. She just needs to provide the personal information requested in the questions. There is no need to provide any evidence (treaty rights, marriage certificate) again.

As PR holder, your wife is entitled to claim JSA (if she meets the jobcentre requirements). Claiming benefits don't affect naturalisation applications.

Perfect - thanks for clarifying that for me

In terms of proof, what does someone with a PR has to provide for naturalisation?

See two periods of 5 years.

I am latching on to this thread as it is in a way similar to my case:

My husband is Swiss, holds confirmation of PR and will be applying for BC via NCS this Friday.

I, non-EEA, will be applying for PR confirmation (under EU law) in 2 weeks.

Once my husband naturalises and I obtain PR confirmation, when I am applying to naturalise as a BC, would I fall under the 3 year residency rule - for spouses married to a BC or the 5 year residency rule?

When showing proof of residency - whether 3 or 5 years, I imagine that the docs can either be solely mine - like my P60s - or joint docs like: our tenancy agreements, utility bills and so on?

Plum70 wrote:I am latching on to this thread as it is in a way similar to my case:

My husband is Swiss, holds confirmation of PR and will be applying for BC via NCS this Friday.

I, non-EEA, will be applying for PR confirmation (under EU law) in 2 weeks.

Once my husband naturalises and I obtain PR confirmation, when I am applying to naturalise as a BC, would I fall under the 3 year residency rule - for spouses married to a BC or the 5 year residency rule?

When showing proof of residency - whether 3 or 5 years, I imagine that the docs can either be solely mine - like my P60s - or joint docs like: our tenancy agreements, utility bills and so on?

You can choose if to apply based on own merit or as a spouse of a BC. Spouse of BC is better to apply under.

For naturalisation, the supporting evidence required is minimal. For most cases only a passport is required. In your case you will also need to submit life in the UK test, marriage certificate and proof of partner British citizenship. That's all (no need for P60's etc).

Jambo wrote:You can choose if to apply based on own merit or as a spouse of a BC. Spouse of BC is better to apply under.

For naturalisation, the supporting evidence required is minimal. For most cases only a passport is required. In your case you will also need to submit life in the UK test, marriage certificate and proof of partner British citizenship. That's all (no need for P60's etc).

Thanks Jambo.

If my husband is granted BC then yes, i'll apply as the spouse of a British Citizen as this would mean that I can apply soon after my PR is confirmed.

So in terms of absences from the UK, I would only need to list dates for 3 years from when i'm applying?

If it is that straight forward then all I need to work on is passing the Life in the UK test and deciding on suitable referees.

Thanks again

Plum70 wrote: So in terms of absences from the UK, I would only need to list dates for 3 years from when i'm applying?

Yes. Easy.

all I need to work on is passing the Life in the UK test

Even easier than the above.

Multiple choice questions can be the devil which is why i'll be making good use of this 6-month window to study hard!

P.S: One other grey area - on my PR form where asked 'the date of first arrival to the UK' I entered Nov. 2006 which is when I re-entered the UK with my WHM visa (while my husband and I were still dating). I previously held a student visa from '04 - '06 and returned to my home country in Sept. '06.

When filling out the AN form, should I enter this same date in '06 where asked: 'date of first arrival to the UK'? OR should I put down the '04 date? I ask because where for PR this might be irrelevant, I do not know how the UKBA interprets this for AN applications.

Thx

The test material is about to change soon (it hasn't been updated since 2007). At the moment it is very easy to pass (a couple of hours with the book are enough). Might be worth doing it now. The pass result is valid forever.

I would put 2004. It seems that a lot of people find this question a tricky one but it doesn't really have any affect on the application even if you get it wrong.

Jambo wrote:The test material is about to change soon (it hasn't been updated since 2007). At the moment it is very easy to pass (a couple of hours with the book are enough). Might be worth doing it now. The pass result is valid forever.

I would put 2004. It seems that a lot of people find this question a tricky one but it doesn't really have any affect on the application even if you get it wrong.

Can't see how I can do the test anytime soon. We're travelling next week and then I submit my application for PR (on Oct. 15th) which would require my passport(s). Worst case scenario, my PR application takes 6 months so i'll have to wait till my docs are back to book and take the test. I understand that I have to book the test with my passport?

In hindsight I should've done this ages ago but...

You can use a UK driving licence as proof of ID for the test.

Jambo wrote:You can use a UK driving licence as proof of ID for the test.

Nope. Only have a passport so it'll have to wait.

Thanks for taking the time to answer all my qs.

Jambo wrote: I would put 2004. It seems that a lot of people find this question a tricky one but it doesn't really have any affect on the application even if you get it wrong.

I interpret this question as the first date of arrival in the UK with the intention to settle.

I neither had any intentions of settling in '04 when I entered as a student nor in '06 when I returned on a WHM visa. I think I will use the 2006 date which is the same date i've entered on my EEA4 form. If the UKBA is not too fussed about this detail then it should be OK either way.

About proving your residence....Since one is granted PR, like myself, I assume that there won't be a need to prove those 5 years again. Will I only need to prove the last year? (say Sept 12-Sept 13)

anp wrote:About proving your residence....Since one is granted PR, like myself, I assume that there won't be a need to prove those 5 years again. Will I only need to prove the last year? (say Sept 12-Sept 13)

You need to prove those years. However, proving residence for naturalisation is normally satisfied by providing the passport.

See similar question - BC after 1 year of PR (EEA4).

Jambo wrote:

anp wrote:About proving your residence....Since one is granted PR, like myself, I assume that there won't be a need to prove those 5 years again. Will I only need to prove the last year? (say Sept 12-Sept 13)

You need to prove those years. However, proving residence for naturalisation is normally satisfied by providing the passport.

See similar question - BC after 1 year of PR (EEA4).

Surely, having a PR should, by itself, prove 5 years of residency. Are there any specific directions from HO regarding that? In principle, I imagine there shouldn't be a need to prove your residency if you have a PR.

anp wrote:Surely, having a PR should, by itself, prove 5 years of residency. Are there any specific directions from HO regarding that? In principle, I imagine there shouldn't be a need to prove your residency if you have a PR.

Have you followed the link to my explanation on a similar question?

BC after 1 year of PR (EEA4) wrote:The residence requirements for PR are different from BC (PR allows upto six months absences per year. BC only 450 days in 5 years). You need to prove you meet the BC requirement.

Ok. So I read around, and it doesn't seem to make any sense. By issuing a PR, UKBA confirms permanent residence. But then again, when applying for naturalisation one must provide proof for all 6 years. AGAIN? Haven't I done that already for the first 5 years?! What's the point?

Can anyone please provide any link or any additional UKBA directive regarding this?!

anp wrote: But then again, when applying for naturalisation one must provide proof for all 6 years. AGAIN?

Provide proof of what?

If you apply 1 year after the PR confirmation issue date, you only need to provide proof of residence for the 5 years before the application and this can be done by providing your passport.