Immigrationboards.com

I am desperately seeking advice.I arrived in UK in December 2006 on 2years visa.a month before visa expired I claimed asylum and was granted 5 years refugee in February 2008. I got ILR in June 2013. My ILR did not have any letter to explain restrictions as the 5 years refugee visa did. It was simply written settlement visa.I then phoned the home office to see if I was free to travel to country of origin.the advisor I spoke to told me that i was free to travel as I had no restriction on my ILR.I therefore travelled to country of origin to visitmy ill father for 3 weeks. In August 2015 I applied for citizenship. 2 weeks ago I got a refusal letter saying that i I failed on grounds of having travelled to country of birth in December 2013 despite being on ILR granted under protection route. The letter said if i apply again before 2026 the apllicatjon will be refused.I am angry because this was not my fault. The reason I went ahead to travel is because I was told by a home officer advisor that my visa had no restrictions. Moreover when I arrived at the airport on my way from country of origin,tho officer asked how I had attained my ILR and I told her that it was through refuge. She went to the office with my ILR permit card and came back after a while and said that wasnt the case. She said their records show that i was granted under longstay.now they are accusing me of breaching immigration law yet I follwed their advice. Please anyone help do I have any grounds to ask for reconsideration? Thank you

Most unfortunate.
No right of appeal in naturalisation cases.

Reconsideration is generally to deal with administrative or procedural errors in processing your application.

The HO helpline is known to be unreliable and advisors are not held accountable for their advice, see:
https://www.freemovement.org.uk/immigra ... pectation/

Takeaway: do not rely on the helpline.

It's a longshot (& it may take some time) but you could request a SAR from UKVI to see what is actually in your record.
Good luck.

rachiem wrote:the advisor I spoke to told me that i was free to travel as I had no restriction on my ILR.

The advisor was correct; there was no restriction on the ILR with regards to traveling to your country of birth.

But what you did do was demonstrate that the reason for seeking asylum did not exist and that could be construed as deception.

You can not appeal in naturalisation cases. But if you reapply, you should state very clearly why you traveled to your country of origin and prove that there was no deception in your original asylum application.

Remember that even citizenship can be revoked if it is acquired by deception.

The SAR with the Home Office suggested by Noajthan would be a good place to start understanding what the Home Office have on file for you.

I would also be wary of fighting the BC refusal for deception. If deception is proved in your original application for asylum, ILR can also be revoked. IMHO better to wait until 2026 before re-applying.

Rachiem feel bad for you.

You can't prove phone conversation with Home office advisor who advice you,
before visit your own country, And
You didn't receive written permission from immigration officer. You are holding refugee ILR, yes there is no restriction. But if you ask written permission letter from home office, you will safe.
If you declare on application, you did visit your own country, in good character ground (10 years) you can apply 2023.

rachiem wrote:I am desperately seeking advice.I arrived in UK in December 2006 on 2years visa.a month before visa expired I claimed asylum and was granted 5 years refugee in February 2008. I got ILR in June 2013. My ILR did not have any letter to explain restrictions as the 5 years refugee visa did. It was simply written settlement visa.I then phoned the home office to see if I was free to travel to country of origin.the advisor I spoke to told me that i was free to travel as I had no restriction on my ILR.I therefore travelled to country of origin to visitmy ill father for 3 weeks. In August 2015 I applied for citizenship. 2 weeks ago I got a refusal letter saying that i I failed on grounds of having travelled to country of birth in December 2013 despite being on ILR granted under protection route. The letter said if i apply again before 2026 the apllicatjon will be refused.I am angry because this was not my fault. The reason I went ahead to travel is because I was told by a home officer advisor that my visa had no restrictions. Moreover when I arrived at the airport on my way from country of origin,tho officer asked how I had attained my ILR and I told her that it was through refuge. She went to the office with my ILR permit card and came back after a while and said that wasnt the case. She said their records show that i was granted under longstay.now they are accusing me of breaching immigration law yet I follwed their advice. Please anyone help do I have any grounds to ask for reconsideration? Thank you

Thank you very much every one for your kind advice.I appreciate that very much.it looks like I am just going to have to wait for another 10 long painful years.That's if they even grant me the citizenship then.

rachiem wrote:Thank you very much every one for your kind advice.I appreciate that very much.it looks like I am just going to have to wait for another 10 long painful years.That's if they even grant me the citizenship then.

if they give u a 10 years ban , is that mean u didn't declare some thing in your application ? u should admit in your application that u been in your home country you my get less panachement

Foufou I believe OP did declare that absence in the application hence the Home Office deciding that this means they have achieved asylum and ILR by deception (because they got it claiming they can't return to their home country) since they were obviously able to go to their home country and return safely after all. (Although does this mean someone getting ILR because their country is at war is never allowed back without losing ILR even if the war has ended?!)

Noetic wrote: (Although does this mean someone getting ILR because their country is at war is never allowed back without losing ILR even if the war has ended?!)

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... m-strategy

Those recognised as refugees will face stronger “safe return reviews”, so they can be sent back when there is an improvement in their home country instead of being offered the right to settle in Britain.

In the article linked to in PetalTop's post above, two other paragraphs are also worth noting.

• Reviewing the international legal definitions of asylum and refugee status to ensure that a student who overstays their visa or a foreign criminal facing deportation cannot claim asylum.
  
  Limiting refugees who get to Britain after travelling through a safe country first to only get a minimum stay of protection and no automatic right to settle in the UK if they cannot be returned to that safe country. This lesser form of refugee protection will also be used for those who successfully claim asylum after overstaying a British visa.
  
  Those recognised as refugees will face stronger “safe return reviews”, so they can be sent back when there is an improvement in their home country instead of being offered the right to settle in Britain.

So the path that the OP took to get to ILR (student > asylum) is itself going to be closed.

And asylum seekers who transit through a safe country (i.e. almost all of them) will not be entitled to settle in the UK and will only be allowed to stay in the UK while the safe country they transited through doesn't take them back.

So, essentially, it seems that refugees will be on FLR for 10 years and get ILR only through the long residence route (assuming that that is allowed).

secret.simon wrote:So the path that the OP took to get to ILR (student > asylum) is itself going to be closed.

And asylum seekers who transit through a safe country (i.e. almost all of them) will not be entitled to settle in the UK and will only be allowed to stay in the UK while the safe country they transited through doesn't take them back.

So, essentially, it seems that refugees will be on FLR for 10 years and get ILR only through the long residence route (assuming that that is allowed).

You could say...

And this the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN. This the interpretation of the thing:
MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it.
TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.
PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.

You put it more elegantly that I could ever have.

secret.simon wrote: So the path that the OP took to get to ILR (student > asylum) is itself going to be closed.

So if you're here as a student you better hope war doesn't break out in your home country while you're here...

Noetic wrote:So if you're here as a student you better hope war doesn't break out in your home country while you're here...

Broadly, yes.

Then again, it could be that the Home Office would start looking at the issues in the home country to see if there is any implications that the applicant could overstay and may potentially use that to deny student visas.

Abusing the system may give you some advantages right now, but it messes it up for both current genuine users of the system and for future users. That is true of all systems, not just the immigration system.

Noetic wrote: So if you're here as a student you better hope war doesn't break out in your home country while you're here...

If war broke out while you were in the UK as a student then it seems they would still offer you temporary stay until you could return home.

Those recognised as refugees will face stronger “safe return reviews”, so they can be sent back when there is an improvement in their home country instead of being offered the right to settle in Britain.



A simon says ('scuse the pun) I assume this would also mean more rigorous tests for those wanting a student visa, to see if they really are genuine students who will study and then leave.

It would also end those who abuse the student visa, who come to the UK with the aim of getting British citizenship by claiming asylum.

Home Office ministers have confirmed that work is under way on new British strategy to cut the numbers claiming asylum in Britain and providing only temporary protection to all but the ”most deserving” refugees.



This is good news for the vunerable children/those with young families, stuck in camps in war torn areas. Many more will be flown directly from these camps and allowed to settle in the Britian.

May is proposing that greater numbers of the most vulnerable refugees will only be resettled in Britain if that is matched by a cut in those who claim asylum after reaching Britain under their own steam.