137 Pages EEA application form, what for exactly

[Obie]

I have seen the 129 pages EEA Application form. What exactly is this for.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... orm-eea-fm

It looks like it is a means of Frustrating people to pay more postage, and additional legal fees.

Utterly crazy, and unnecessary, and a cynical measure.

[dalebutt]

I suppose applicants could just ignore the form. write a letter of application, with all supporting documents, declaring their conviction status, and append it with a note saying the form is unnecessarily long, we simply do not have time to fill it. These lot do have issues understanding the difference in rights under the Reg and the almost evil incarnate national rules.

[fatimahh]

They then go on stating in page 2

"To save paper, postage and storage costs, we recommend that you only print and send us the:
• front page of the form, and
• sections of the form that you have actually completed (including the payment section)."

This is a joke!!!!

[Obie]

I am in the middle of doing an application for someone and was shell shocked and bewildered to see that it was so overwhelming.

I am minded to simply fill the relevant pages, and ignore sending the nearly 90% irrelevant pages.

Said applicant should fill section 8, 10 , 18 , 19 , 20 and 21.

But the irony is that Section 19 and 20 is missing from the form.

It is a shame that even they cannot get the form right, nevermind a poor applicant.

Extended family member have 102 pages form to fill.


Registration Certificate is 52.

UK should really be kicked out of the UK. This is an utter shambles, and deliberately trampling upon EU law and its policy.

[kunleswags]

Obie u are damn right.it's a damn violation of EU law and the British governments high handedness knows no bounds.the most annoying part of that form is the part which requires the EU citizens and their family members to disclose the public funds they are claiming but exempts family members of British citizens from filling that section.is that not itself a violation of EU law and does it not amount to discrimination which is forbidden under EU law?.

Anyway I contacted the European commission representatives in UK to complain about the form and they requested I should forward my complaints to this email address Which is Jeffrey.lamb@ec.europa.eu.

So I urge everyone on this forum to send their complaints about the form to that email address so that it can be addressed and taken off.

[Obie]

The form Is mad. Asking if people are in receipt of benefit.

Asking for divorce petitions to be provided.

It is crazy.

[UKBA HUNTER]

Almost the fee for all UK route applications has been raising £400 which is to disturb while earning from applicant. But on the other hand when they cannot do so in EU route applications then they increase its pages instead of fee. They really clowns and jokers

[osbrandouk]

Hi obie,
my only concern by this new ridiculous EEA application form is actually section 18 of the form. in this section, they asked the applicant for information about any public fund or state benefits they or their eea national sponsor are claiming or have claimed since they have lived in the uk. i have the feeling HO will start refusing application from eea national and their family members who r claiming in-work benefits like tax credits, housing and council tax benefits. i might be wrong but i just have the feeling this could be another strategy from HO to frustrate eea national and their family member in this county.

[Jgorf]

It's is certainly mind bugging to wonder what let to such an extreme and compltely unnecessary approach to era applications. It's not just the release of a bulky new form that is the problem, you are now required to also submit photocopies of all original documents submitted ( see document and evidence section) . This is insane. Did they ever thought of the cost of postage and cost of copying tons of documents that gets requested? ..

Fair enough, it is stated on section 2 (About your application) to print out and complete only those sections relevant to you. However those so called "relevant sections" are full of repeated questions phrased in different wagys.

It needs proper reading of the section guidelines to understand requirement , though I must admit that a good number are worded very poorly.

This new approach I think will just frustrate an average person and may even frustrate the very learned people.

I think the aim is just to make the process more difficult for people.

[Jgorf]

The form Is mad. Asking if people are in receipt of benefit.

Asking for divorce petitions to be provided.

It is crazy.

They are barking mad. Divorce petition does not need to be provided. The court issues a confirmation stating the date petition was submitted to court. That is what people should submit to prove 3 year of marriage prior to divorce. I hope proper thought went into these requirements

[Obie]

Section 2 does not say to print only the section relevant to you.

It ask for photograph of Sponsor and sponsor include former EEA family member.

Difficult to see how a divorced EEA national will freely give their photograph.

[UKBA HUNTER]

Too many questions about child and grandchild. And new sections to disclose expenses and accommodation. Language and integration with EU country, these unnecessary questions all seems like loopholes to cause delay in processing and applicants will definitely do a lot mistakes in filling form. I think fee is also to £65 from April.

[Obie]

It will appear that I may be slightly wrong.

The form appears to stipulate that applicant should only print the front of the application, and portions relevant to their individual case, in order to save postage, time and storage.

So things are not as bad as it seems after all.

[takfarinas]

Hi
I am going to fill this Form for my friend, i would like to ask some questions please?
1) My friend is an overstayer in partner relation with a British Citizen. is it the right form ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... _01-15.pdf
2)if is the case, could anyone tell me which sections should i fill for him, because it's seems really long, i dont think that my printer got enough ink on it right now. xd

Thanks

[mkhan2525]

The long application form is covered in this article amongst other things highlighting the way in which this government creates a hostile environment for migrants.

http://www.migrantsrights.org.uk/blog/2 ... nt-which-n

[chaoclive]

The form Is mad. Asking if people are in receipt of benefit.

Asking for divorce petitions to be provided.

It is crazy.

This is something I thought was really weird. Apparently benefits like working tax credits, for example, won't affect the rights of a person working in the UK!

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... pter12.pdf seems to suggest that only self-sufficient people receiving benefits would be affected.

I get a small amount of working tax credits and thought that this would be ok! Starting to think that this may not be the case now... There must be some reason why they are asking for this info.

[rosebead]

The long form is confusing and daunting. It's nothing more than an attempt to frighten off EU migrants from asserting their free movement rights and to make them feel unwelcome.

[Obie]

I incorporate some degree of intimidation .

Seeking to scare EU migrant and family members.

It is so complex to the point that it may be advising for people to seek legal advise, especially those on benefit or seperate from their EEA partner.

It also requires petition of divorce.

This is an attempt on clamping on people who seek to rely on retention.

By asking them for the petition or copy of it, they are seeking to use it as a basis of refusal.

[Jgorf]

Form D9H(notice of issue of DIvorce Petition) which a court issued to a petitioner upon reciept of divorce petition clearly states the date divorce petition was submitted to court.

This form will suffice in place of the D8 form if you have it. HO ask for divorce petition as proof that marriage lasted 3 years before commencement of divorce proceedings. So if I disagree that divorce petition must be submitted. (read that section and see why it's being asked for at the first place)

So I see no reason why D8 form should be submitted if you have the official confirmation from court stating date divorce petition was submitted.

Let's not read the requirements on this new form the other way round.

In my opinion , what they have done is the be very clear on the documents they require to avoid rejecting applications.

The only main difference I have spotted is the section asking to declare public funds. not sure what they can achieve with of I'm being honest . They wouldn't reject an application of someone that is exercising treaty rights and receiving benefits they are entitled to. The truth is , if they want to know benefits received, the payslips and tax forms that gets submitted contains NI numbers. And those info can be pulled up by HMRC. If HO needs it. So it's basically asking everything on paper.

I just think everyone needs to sit back and read the form properly . It's not as bad. I actually find the documents requrment section more detailed now than before. a lot of people have had their applications rejected cos HO wants some documents that they actually didn't bother putting down as a requirement

[maxmelion]

Form D9H(notice of issue of DIvorce Petition) which a court issued to a petitioner upon reciept of divorce petition clearly states the date divorce petition was submitted to court.

This form will suffice in place of the D8 form if you have it. HO ask for divorce petition as proof that marriage lasted 3 years before commencement of divorce proceedings. So if I disagree that divorce petition must be submitted. (read that section and see why it's being asked for at the first place)

So I see no reason why D8 form should be submitted if you have the official confirmation from court stating date divorce petition was submitted.

WHERE CAN I FIND D8 AS IAM THE RESPONDANT
Can i order it ? I dont want the petition of divorce beacause the background of divorce was soo bad
and i contacred with her lawyer asking why u put down such a bad back ground for reason of divorce he answered bcos we need to put stronge reason to make court agree for divorce
So cant send tht petition with this shock reasons
My married lasted 6 years so how bloody they doubt tht the divorce was take a place before 3 years . No divorce process take over 2 years . How i can prove the date of divorce
starting and im the respondant?


Let's not read the requirements on this new form the other way round.

In my opinion , what they have done is the be very clear on the documents they require to avoid rejecting applications.

The only main difference I have spotted is the section asking to declare public funds. not sure what they can achieve with of I'm being honest . They wouldn't reject an application of someone that is exercising treaty rights and receiving benefits they are entitled to. The truth is , if they want to know benefits received, the payslips and tax forms that gets submitted contains NI numbers. And those info can be pulled up by HMRC. If HO needs it. So it's basically asking everything on paper.

I just think everyone needs to sit back and read the form properly . It's not as bad. I actually find the documents requrment section more detailed now than before. a lot of people have had their applications rejected cos HO wants some documents that they actually didn't bother putting down as a requirement

[Directive/2004/38/EC]

The new form is pretty shocking. I am tempted to do an alternative form specialized solely on the married family members of EEA citizens, and maybe children. Should be able to get it down to a page or two.

[Hubba]

My opinion is that is all for setting up applicants for failure. By requesting this amount of info on the application, they are:

a) Building themselves a nice body of evidence for rejecting cases;
b) Making it easier to spot application inconsistencies;

Instead of having correspondence back and forth with the applicant requesting info and calling up for interviews, they want all data (or the lack of) exposed on the initial application.

The new form can potentially speed up case processing, given that they either will have all the info they need to approve an application or whatever info they need to reject it outright.

Of course, they made this on detriment of the applicant's convenience, but although it's not nice of them to do such thing, is not lawless either.

[Directive/2004/38/EC]

My opinion is that is all for setting up applicants for failure. By requesting this amount of info on the application, they are:

a) Building themselves a nice body of evidence for rejecting cases;
b) Making it easier to spot application inconsistencies;

Instead of having correspondence back and forth with the applicant requesting info and calling up for interviews, they want all data (or the lack of) exposed on the initial application.

The new form can potentially speed up case processing, given that they either will have all the info they need to approve an application or whatever info they need to reject it outright.

Of course, they made this on detriment of the applicant's convenience, but although it's not nice of them to do such thing, is not lawless either.

You are making incorrect statements. They can not lawfully require all this information.

[Obie]

My opinion is that is all for setting up applicants for failure. By requesting this amount of info on the application, they are:

a) Building themselves a nice body of evidence for rejecting cases;
b) Making it easier to spot application inconsistencies;

Instead of having correspondence back and forth with the applicant requesting info and calling up for interviews, they want all data (or the lack of) exposed on the initial application.

The new form can potentially speed up case processing, given that they either will have all the info they need to approve an application or whatever info they need to reject it outright.

Of course, they made this on detriment of the applicant's convenience, but although it's not nice of them to do such thing, is not lawless either.

I disagree Hubba.

It is wholly lawless.

The information they are requesting is wholly inconsistent with EU law.

For a Residence Card to be issued a spouse need to provide the following.

1. Evidence of their relationship to the EU Citizen.

2. Evidence that there is an Eu citizen

3. Evidence that the EU Citizen is residing in the

4. Evidence that the requirement in Article 7 is met by the EU citizen.

You can certainly establish this fact by a 2 page application form.

No need to find out when they met the EU Citizen, when they started living together, their income, their outgoings, whether they live together, when they last lived together, whether the EU citizen have children with the person, what benefits they claim.

It is utterly crazy, and wholly inconsistent with EU law.

I have one applicant went for interview today, was asked how he entered the UK, in contravention of EU law.

[Hubba]

My opinion is that is all for setting up applicants for failure. By requesting this amount of info on the application, they are:

a) Building themselves a nice body of evidence for rejecting cases;
b) Making it easier to spot application inconsistencies;

Instead of having correspondence back and forth with the applicant requesting info and calling up for interviews, they want all data (or the lack of) exposed on the initial application.

The new form can potentially speed up case processing, given that they either will have all the info they need to approve an application or whatever info they need to reject it outright.

Of course, they made this on detriment of the applicant's convenience, but although it's not nice of them to do such thing, is not lawless either.

I disagree Hubba.

It is wholly lawless.

The information they are requesting is wholly inconsistent with EU law.

For a Residence Card to be issued a spouse need to provide the following.

1. Evidence of their relationship to the EU Citizen.

2. Evidence that there is an Eu citizen

3. Evidence that the EU Citizen is residing in the

4. Evidence that the requirement in Article 7 is met by the EU citizen.

You can certainly establish this fact by a 2 page application form.

No need to find out when they met the EU Citizen, when they started living together, their income, their outgoings, whether they live together, when they last lived together, whether the EU citizen have children with the person, what benefits they claim.

It is utterly crazy, and wholly inconsistent with EU law.

I have one applicant went for interview today, was asked how he entered the UK, in contravention of EU law.

I stand corrected, then, although one could claim that all this information (when they met the EU Citizen, when they started living together, their income, their outgoings, whether they live together, when they last lived together, whether the EU citizen have children with the person) can be used to verify that such a marriage relationship is not just for immigration purposes. If such kind of verification is illegal, the UK has been doing it wrong for a very long time then, given that proof of relationship is requested on several processes. Hell, they conduct interviews in order to assess and validate such data. According to them, all on the spirit of Article 45 of Directive 2004/38.

Benefits wise, they are legally entitled (or so I believe) to verify that the applicant has not become a burden to the state before granting residence cards/certificates. I believe articles 10 and 16 of Directive 2004/38 grant them this right. I do agree that they don't specify on the form that no applicant is obliged to fill out such data and this may be dodgy, but we don't know of any application being rejected due to this section not being filled up.

Then again, guys, this was only my opinion. I don't work with this, just like to keep myself informed and see how things go.