TIER 1 EXTENSION APPLICANTS PLEASE JOIN HERE

[AAKhan]

Thanks for your reply.

I shall sort this insurance issue ASAP, so that if they enquire, then I should be able to provide them some documents.

[kunleoyewo]

Hi Guys,

Can anyone please advise me on the possibility of converting Director's Loan of £50k to Share Capital? My Accountant has suggested allotting 50,000 Ordinary Shares at £1 each and issuing a Share Certificate to show same.

Please bear in mind that my Extension application is due soon and the justification from him is that Share Capital makes the books look better than Director's Loan.

Any advice on this will be really appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Kunle

[zimba]

Hi Guys,

Can anyone please advise me on the possibility of converting Director's Loan of £50k to Share Capital? My Accountant has suggested allotting 50,000 Ordinary Shares at £1 each and issuing a Share Certificate to show same.

Please bear in mind that my Extension application is due soon and the justification from him is that Share Capital makes the books look better than Director's Loan.

Any advice on this will be really appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Kunle

It is your business and you can do this if you want. HO only requires the evidence of the allocated shares on your annual accounts and the share certificates.

[kunleoyewo]

Hi Guys,

Can anyone please advise me on the possibility of converting Director's Loan of £50k to Share Capital? My Accountant has suggested allotting 50,000 Ordinary Shares at £1 each and issuing a Share Certificate to show same.

Please bear in mind that my Extension application is due soon and the justification from him is that Share Capital makes the books look better than Director's Loan.

Any advice on this will be really appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Kunle

It is your business and you can do this if you want. HO only requires the evidence of the allocated shares on your annual accounts and the share certificates.

Thanks for your prompt response zimba88, very well appreciated. I thought as much too but just needed validation again.

[yyyekj]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

[moongesture]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

in order to get further advise can you clarify that;

Have you applied under 50K or 200K?
Secondly, what exactly the refusal states i.e. under which immigration rule application was refused?

[zimba]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

Have you applied for Administrative Review ?
Given that there are no rights to appeal for anyone getting rejected, it is now very difficult to argue anything at all

[moongesture]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

Have you applied for Administrative Review ?
Given that there are no rights to appeal for anyone getting rejected, it is now very difficult to argue anything at all

Hi Zimba
If I am not wrong the relevant rules for investment (@ table 4 & 5) are different for Initial Application & Extension Application.I am not sure under which ground he/she has been refused. can you suggest...

[zimba]

Hi Zimba
If I am not wrong the relevant rules for investment (@ table 4 & 5) are different for Initial Application & Extension Application.I am not sure under which ground he/she has been refused. can you suggest...

There are no rules that require you to invest during your initial application. You just need to show you have access to the money but the money does not need to be invested (However you can show you already invested the money and get the investment points during initial application)
However for extension you must show that you invested the money fully but that money cannot be paid to a previous owner/shareholder as per immigration rules (paragraph 245D section C), that will not be counted as an investment:

(c) Where paragraphs 245D to 245DF and paragraphs 35 to 53 of Appendix A, refer to money remaining available to the applicant until such time as it is spent for the purposes of his business or businesses:

(i) ‘Available’ means that the funds are:
(1) in the applicant’s own possession,
(2) in the financial accounts of a UK incorporated business of which he is the director, or
(3) available from the third party or parties named in the application under the terms of the declaration(s) referred to in paragraph 41-SD(b) of Appendix A.
(ii) ‘Invested’ or ‘spent’ excludes spending on:
(1) the applicant’s own remuneration,
(2) buying the business from a previous owner, where the money ultimately goes to that previous owner (irrespective of whether it is received or held directly or indirectly by that previous owner) rather than into the business being purchased (This applies regardless of whether the money is channelled through the business en route to the previous owner, for example by means of the applicant or business purchasing ‘goodwill’ or other assets which were previously part of the business.),
(3) investing in businesses, other than those which the applicant is running as self-employed or as a director, and
(4) any spending which is not directly for the purpose of establishing or running the applicant’s own business or businesses.

[kunleoyewo]

Have you used Administrative Review to challenge this in anyway?

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

[kayani2012]

Hello guys
please help me to understand that which documents are need to be applicant sign and dated
such as FPS P11 P45 P60
Do i have to sign wage slip as well
thanks

[zimba]

Hello guys
please help me to understand that which documents are need to be applicant sign and dated
such as FPS P11 P45 P60
Do i have to sign wage slip as well
thanks

All the reports and print outs that you provide are better to be signed (or even stamped) by you as correct.

[yyyekj]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

in order to get further advise can you clarify that;

Have you applied under 50K or 200K?
Secondly, what exactly the refusal states i.e. under which immigration rule application was refused?

I am under the 200k route.

The refusal reason is HO didn't count the share purchase from an existence company as a new investment to assist with the business's growth. So I was awarded 0 point for the " Required investment made in UK business".

[yyyekj]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

Have you applied for Administrative Review ?
Given that there are no rights to appeal for anyone getting rejected, it is now very difficult to argue anything at all

I had the right to apply for AR in 14 days. But I was not confident that I would receive a positive decision under a same group of people...

[yyyekj]

Hi, I am new here. I hope I could find this forum 2 months ago.My Tier1(e) extension was refused last month. Because HO didn't count the money as investment funds which I paid to buy shares from a previous shareholder of an existence company.

My question is I was first grants this visa in October 2012 and made the share purchase investment in early of 2013. At that time there was no point stated in the policy that buying shares from a shareholder was not a investment.When the HO policy was updated, I had operated my company for 1 and half years already.

Does anyone have the same situation as myself? Or is it fair to consider my case to use the new policy?

Have you applied for Administrative Review ?
Given that there are no rights to appeal for anyone getting rejected, it is now very difficult to argue anything at all

Hi Zimba
If I am not wrong the relevant rules for investment (@ table 4 & 5) are different for Initial Application & Extension Application.I am not sure under which ground he/she has been refused. can you suggest...

Hi that's my point! There was no point mentioned in the Tier1(E) Guidance when I was applied for this visa and when I made the share purchase investment, that the migrant shouldn't buy shares from previous shareholder of an existence company. Even you look at the current Guidance, they only put this restriction in the "Initial application" section. So I assumed the new restriction for investment fund only apply to the new applicants not for those extensions.

[yyyekj]

Hi Zimba
If I am not wrong the relevant rules for investment (@ table 4 & 5) are different for Initial Application & Extension Application.I am not sure under which ground he/she has been refused. can you suggest...

There are no rules that require you to invest during your initial application. You just need to show you have access to the money but the money does not need to be invested (However you can show you already invested the money and get the investment points during initial application)
However for extension you must show that you invested the money fully but that money cannot be paid to a previous owner/shareholder as per immigration rules (paragraph 245D section C), that will not be counted as an investment:

(c) Where paragraphs 245D to 245DF and paragraphs 35 to 53 of Appendix A, refer to money remaining available to the applicant until such time as it is spent for the purposes of his business or businesses:

(i) ‘Available’ means that the funds are:
(1) in the applicant’s own possession,
(2) in the financial accounts of a UK incorporated business of which he is the director, or
(3) available from the third party or parties named in the application under the terms of the declaration(s) referred to in paragraph 41-SD(b) of Appendix A.
(ii) ‘Invested’ or ‘spent’ excludes spending on:
(1) the applicant’s own remuneration,
(2) buying the business from a previous owner, where the money ultimately goes to that previous owner (irrespective of whether it is received or held directly or indirectly by that previous owner) rather than into the business being purchased (This applies regardless of whether the money is channelled through the business en route to the previous owner, for example by means of the applicant or business purchasing ‘goodwill’ or other assets which were previously part of the business.),
(3) investing in businesses, other than those which the applicant is running as self-employed or as a director, and
(4) any spending which is not directly for the purpose of establishing or running the applicant’s own business or businesses.

Hi I understand this is the current immigration rule for Tier 1 (E). But when this rule was changed to exclude the "buying the business from a previous owner" in 2014, I had already made the purchase and operated my company for 1 and half years...

[zimba]

Hi that's my point! There was no point mentioned in the Tier1(E) Guidance when I was applied for this visa and when I made the share purchase investment, that the migrant shouldn't buy shares from previous shareholder of an existence company. Even you look at the current Guidance, they only put this restriction in the "Initial application" section. So I assumed the new restriction for investment fund only apply to the new applicants not for those extensions.

No. As I pointed out the exact immigration rules, what considers to be 'invested' in a business is excluding the money you paid to any previous owner (whether during initial or extension)
This was cleared up in immigration rules after 6 April 2014 and it makes perfect sense. If you pay a previous owner of a business, you really did not invest in that company as the money never ended up in the business but rather in the pocket of the previous owner.

You should have applied for AR and argued that immigration rules were not clear in 2013 when you made the purchase but I do not think HO would have accepted such argument, given that you technically did not invest anything in the business !! So now if you apply again with the same evidence, I say your chances of getting an extension are pretty slim anyway.

[yyyekj]

Hi that's my point! There was no point mentioned in the Tier1(E) Guidance when I was applied for this visa and when I made the share purchase investment, that the migrant shouldn't buy shares from previous shareholder of an existence company. Even you look at the current Guidance, they only put this restriction in the "Initial application" section. So I assumed the new restriction for investment fund only apply to the new applicants not for those extensions.

No. As I pointed out the exact immigration rules, what considers to be 'invested' in a business is excluding the money you paid to any previous owner (whether during initial or extension)
This was cleared up in immigration rules after 6 April 2014 and it makes perfect sense. If you pay a previous owner of a business, you really did not invest in that company as the money never ended up in the business but rather in the pocket of the previous owner.

You should have applied for AR and argued that immigration rules were not clear in 2013 when you made the purchase but I do not think HO would have accepted such argument, given that you technically did not invest anything in the business !! So now if you apply again with the same evidence, I say your chances of getting an extension are pretty slim anyway.

Hi, I think your answer is pretty make sense to me. Even though I feel very unfair that I spent a lot of money which I thought should be counted as my investment funds when I made the initial purchase of shares when the Immigration Rule was unclear at that time.I don't think HO will change their statement in AR. That's why I didn't apply for it.

Actually, I have made further investment during the last 3 years directly into the business( quite a lot), just a couple of 10ks shortfall than 200k. And fortunately, when I received the refusal letter, there were few days left before my Tier 1 visa expired. So I immediately transferred the shortfall amount into the business and asked the accountant to issued a letter to confirm the new investment.Then I submitted a fresh application before my visa expired.

Now I am waiting and figure cross for the result of the new application...

But a new worry raised, will HO question the business hasn't spent all of the investment funds, considering my new funds was only transferred into business in the last day ?

[zimba]

But a new worry raised, will HO question the business hasn't spent all of the investment funds, considering my new funds was only transferred into business in the last day ?

There is no where in the immigration rules that says the money must be all spent. The paragraph above that I quoted cover the definition of 'spent' and 'invest' and tells you what you should NOT spend your money on. Unfortunately this is never been clarified by home office.

[moongesture]

But a new worry raised, will HO question the business hasn't spent all of the investment funds, considering my new funds was only transferred into business in the last day ?

There is no where in the immigration rules that says the money must be all spent. The paragraph above that I quoted cover the definition of 'spent' and 'invest' and tells you what you should NOT spend your money on. Unfortunately this is never been clarified by home office.

Hi,
I believe It is mentioned that money must be invested, as per guidance
"Money deposited in a bank account, even if it is in a UK business bank account, is not
counted as investment in business."

[moongesture]

Hi that's my point! There was no point mentioned in the Tier1(E) Guidance when I was applied for this visa and when I made the share purchase investment, that the migrant shouldn't buy shares from previous shareholder of an existence company. Even you look at the current Guidance, they only put this restriction in the "Initial application" section. So I assumed the new restriction for investment fund only apply to the new applicants not for those extensions.

No. As I pointed out the exact immigration rules, what considers to be 'invested' in a business is excluding the money you paid to any previous owner (whether during initial or extension)
This was cleared up in immigration rules after 6 April 2014 and it makes perfect sense. If you pay a previous owner of a business, you really did not invest in that company as the money never ended up in the business but rather in the pocket of the previous owner.

You should have applied for AR and argued that immigration rules were not clear in 2013 when you made the purchase but I do not think HO would have accepted such argument, given that you technically did not invest anything in the business !! So now if you apply again with the same evidence, I say your chances of getting an extension are pretty slim anyway.

Can you kindly tell me the immigration rule under which they refused your Extension application.

[shahanaz]

hi,
when your appication for tier 1 extension was refused. you said you are gonna go for AR i know they say that new documents can be given. did u any way give new documents that substantiate your claim . you said you made a new application does it mean that you paid all the fees again. can you please clarify

[yyyekj]

hi,
when your appication for tier 1 extension was refused. you said you are gonna go for AR i know they say that new documents can be given. did u any way give new documents that substantiate your claim . you said you made a new application does it mean that you paid all the fees again. can you please clarify

Hi,

I didn't say I would go for AR and I don't think they will consider nee documents in AR.
I went for a fresh application, and I paid full fees again...

[yyyekj]

Hi guys, thanks for discussing my case, and I fell not that a lone in here.
I have new issue need to ask. I have submitted all required documents( most are original ) for my first application which was refused on last month. Then I decided to submitted a new application with some new documents for further investment funds, but I had to ask them to refer most of documents to my previous application because they hadn't returned to me.

But I have just received a package from UKVI today with all submitted documents of my first application returned to me. The date of sending out just one day before I did the biometric enrollment for my new application. Quite confused!!

I don't know what's happened.Should I send these documents back to UKVI? Or have they already checked and made records for all documents and been considered to my new application before sending back to me?

Anyone have the same experiences?

[yyyekj]

Hi that's my point! There was no point mentioned in the Tier1(E) Guidance when I was applied for this visa and when I made the share purchase investment, that the migrant shouldn't buy shares from previous shareholder of an existence company. Even you look at the current Guidance, they only put this restriction in the "Initial application" section. So I assumed the new restriction for investment fund only apply to the new applicants not for those extensions.

No. As I pointed out the exact immigration rules, what considers to be 'invested' in a business is excluding the money you paid to any previous owner (whether during initial or extension)
This was cleared up in immigration rules after 6 April 2014 and it makes perfect sense. If you pay a previous owner of a business, you really did not invest in that company as the money never ended up in the business but rather in the pocket of the previous owner.

You should have applied for AR and argued that immigration rules were not clear in 2013 when you made the purchase but I do not think HO would have accepted such argument, given that you technically did not invest anything in the business !! So now if you apply again with the same evidence, I say your chances of getting an extension are pretty slim anyway.

Can you kindly tell me the immigration rule under which they refused your Extension application.

Sorry I almost slipped your question.
" One the basis of the documents you have provided, however,the Secretary of State is not satisfied that these meet the requirements specified under paragraph 46-SD of Appendix A of the Immigration Rules..." This is what they state in my refusal letter.