Immigrationboards.com

Hi all,

My spouse is EEA national ( not from A8 or A3 Countries) in UK for 10 years.
Can she apply EEA3 choosing any five years.???
she was not out side UK more than six months in any year.


Regards.[/b]

slough_Boy wrote:Hi all,

My spouse is EEA national ( not from A8 or A3 Countries) in UK for 10 years.
Can she apply EEA3 choosing any five years.???
she was not out side UK more than six months in any year.


Regards.[/b]

Mate your questions are quite difficult to understand, make it more clear and simple.

well, I find the question very simple, and the answer is simple as well: yes

Any five year period will do; it does not need to be five calendar years, but for example a five year period starting on 7 September 2006 and ending on 6 September 2011 is perfectly fine.
However, to keep things simple I would normally choose the five year period that ends on or around the date of application, unless there are compelling reasons for choosing a different period.

I don't see what your list of visas has to do with it, and in any case all non-UK visas are totally irrelevant for applications under the EEA Regulations.

Just a small (but important) addition: the 5 years need to be continuous.

Also if five year period was a long time ago, you would need not to have been absent for more than two. Therefore, for simplicity I would use the most recent if possible.

Thank you very much to all.

Can anyone give any reference from anywhere that show we can apply any continues five years.????

the list of my visas is not a part of my POST it is my signature part
once again tnx to all who answered.
==================================================================================================

See Regulation 15. It doesn't state which 5 years. Just continuous 5 years.

PR under EEA regulations is obtained automatically. What you apply for using EEA3 is confirmation that you have obtained it. The HO doesn't say when you have obtained it. They Just confirm that you still have the status now so all that you need is to show is that you have obtained it in the past (and not lost it by being outside the UK for more than 2 years).

Jambo wrote:See Regulation 15. It doesn't state which 5 years. Just continuous 5 years.

PR under EEA regulations is obtained automatically. What you apply for using EEA3 is confirmation that you have obtained it. The HO doesn't say when you have obtained it. They Just confirm that you still have the status now so all that you need is to show is that you have obtained it in the past (and not lost it by being outside the UK for more than 2 years).

Thank you very much Jumbo for you reply.
we have lost two years P60's , just have two Pay slips and a letter from HMRC confirming employment history. (employer does not issue letter confirming employment)))and bank statement where salaries have paid.
is that letter from HMRC and bank statement enough to prove employment???[/b]
[/b]

slough_Boy wrote:

Jambo wrote:See Regulation 15. It doesn't state which 5 years. Just continuous 5 years.

PR under EEA regulations is obtained automatically. What you apply for using EEA3 is confirmation that you have obtained it. The HO doesn't say when you have obtained it. They Just confirm that you still have the status now so all that you need is to show is that you have obtained it in the past (and not lost it by being outside the UK for more than 2 years).

Thank you very much Jumbo for you reply.
we have lost two years P60's , just have two Pay slips and a letter from HMRC confirming employment history. (employer does not issue letter confirming employment)))and bank statement where salaries have paid.
is that letter from HMRC and bank statement enough to prove employment???[/b]
[/b]

Should be enough.

Jambo wrote:

slough_Boy wrote:

Jambo wrote:See Regulation 15. It doesn't state which 5 years. Just continuous 5 years.

PR under EEA regulations is obtained automatically. What you apply for using EEA3 is confirmation that you have obtained it. The HO doesn't say when you have obtained it. They Just confirm that you still have the status now so all that you need is to show is that you have obtained it in the past (and not lost it by being outside the UK for more than 2 years).

Thank you very much Jumbo for you reply.
we have lost two years P60's , just have two Pay slips and a letter from HMRC confirming employment history. (employer does not issue letter confirming employment)))and bank statement where salaries have paid.
is that letter from HMRC and bank statement enough to prove employment???[/b]
[/b]

Should be enough.

It sounds like it's enough to me as well. Why on earth would an employer not issue a letter confirming employment? I would have said this is a pretty common request from employees for all kinds of reasons.

EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:

Jambo wrote:

slough_Boy wrote:

Jambo wrote:See Regulation 15. It doesn't state which 5 years. Just continuous 5 years.

PR under EEA regulations is obtained automatically. What you apply for using EEA3 is confirmation that you have obtained it. The HO doesn't say when you have obtained it. They Just confirm that you still have the status now so all that you need is to show is that you have obtained it in the past (and not lost it by being outside the UK for more than 2 years).

Thank you very much Jumbo for you reply.
we have lost two years P60's , just have two Pay slips and a letter from HMRC confirming employment history. (employer does not issue letter confirming employment)))and bank statement where salaries have paid.
is that letter from HMRC and bank statement enough to prove employment???[/b]
[/b]

Should be enough.

It sounds like it's enough to me as well. Why on earth would an employer not issue a letter confirming employment? I would have said this is a pretty common request from employees for all kinds of reasons.

[/quoteyes, it is really very strange for me as well, that ex employer do not issue any letter regarding employment , they said we do not issue such letters but if home office need such letter HO should directly contact us.

I can understand that an ex-employer might be more difficult than a current one.

EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:Also if five year period was a long time ago, you would need not to have been absent for more than two. Therefore, for simplicity I would use the most recent if possible.

i want to apply eea3 from 02/2005 to 02/2010.
from 02/ 2010 to till now how can we prove presence in UK.???

I would not get too hung up on that if I were you. You could make a statement in a covering letter - example, I provide evidence for the following years and I declare that I have not been absent for more than two years since.

Another tack would be to provide evidence that you were still in the country post 2010 - bills for example. The more important criteria is to have your five years continuous residence exercising treaty rights (working) well documented.

EUsmileWEallsmile wrote:I would not get too hung up on that if I were you. You could make a statement in a covering letter - example, I provide evidence for the following years and I declare that I have not been absent for more than two years since.

TNX FOR UR REPLY.
one more question.
time spending in JSA income based 05/07 to 10/07.
we just have Letter from Job centre Plus confirming JSA dates.
we do not have any evidence of looking for work.

is that letter enough to show as Job seeker???

That can complicates matters I'm afraid. In general, if one works for more than a year and are made redundant, the status of worker is not lost if one registers as a job-seeker. Again, you would need evidence.

While it should not debar you from PR, it would be much simpler if you could show five-years continuous employment.

Having read the information you sent me (I won't repeat it), it appears that your spouse has a very strong case for PR.

If I were you, I would write a covering letter concentrating on the five-continuous treaty rights you've picked, but also state what she did for the time before and after the sample period. You can state that the five years picked were done so because you had the evidence for that period to hand. I would think that's more than reasonable.