Post
by k_ahad » Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:19 pm
Thank You Marc, Atif and Zamaha...
Zamaha
My whole application and AR was done through a solicitor, hence I am unable to share the entire AR. Though for guidance here is the main Argument. Also every AR would be different as it has to relate the reasons provided in the refusal letter. In case anyone comes across similar situation please don't use the following information. It's intended to give an idea what worked in my case. Hope you all won't have to go through this ordeal.
" The caseworker applied the rules incorrectly regarding the applicant's investment into ………..Company Name . We are most certain that the caseworker has completely overlooked the evidence provided, which consisted of:
- Company bank Accounts (Details here …………………………) showing a transaction on Date …………………… for ……………….. to account number ……………….
- Personal Bank Account of the applicant (account number…………..) with a highlighted incoming payment of …………….. on 10 February 2014 from account n. ……………
- A letter from Barclays confirming that the applicant is the sole signatory and account holder of account no……………….
- The investment by way of director’s loan has, therefore, been shown in the appropriate manner and in accordance with the rules.
2. The caseworker refused the application by saying that the investment does not fall under the definition of “readily identifiable transactions” in its simplest sense is because he or she did not look at the supporting evidence. No other explanation can be found at this point given the supporting documents submitted with the application. We note that the refusal letter states that business bank statements have been provided, but fails to mention that personal statements were provided as well, and they have been mentioned in both the body of the representations as well as the index at the end of the same.
3. We request the Secretary of State to consider the facts and provide clarity regarding the matter and apply the rules correctly"
