Spouse Visa Application with Priority Service

[SFME]

Hello

We’re in the process of gathering documents to apply for a Spouse Entry Clearance. According to the HO website the projected processing time for such applications in my country is 8% at 15 days, 29% at 30 days and 100% at 60 days. I really want to utilise the TLS Priority Service, however on their website they say it’s not advised to use the service if the applicant has a previous visa refusal, which I have! 2 actually, both of them were to visit my husband in the UK while he was sick in the hospital 2 years ago and both were refused on the basis of the ECO not believing I was a genuine visitor that will leave when expected and had no strong ties to my home country.
1. Is it really a waste of money if I buy the service?
2. Will it make things run faster if I submit both refusal letters with my application bundle?
3. Kind of irrelevant but I read somewhere on the internet that whenever the applicant is a medical professional/carer and the UK sponsor has a disability, that should be scrutinised by the ECO as it makes the relationship less genuine. In my situation, my husband and I have a 5 year relationship (4 of which is marriage) and we have plenty of evidence to prove that. He has a physical disability as a result of a sudden brain condition(reason why I applied for visit visas) that happened 2 years ago, and I am a qualified doctor but when we married he was perfectly healthy and fit. Will that be an issue? To what extent that is true?

Any input will be appreciated.

[Edwardo]

It sounds to me like you have answered your own question with the quote saying it is advised you do not use priority if a previous application was refused.

You do have to be careful with the target figures, although the figures you quote are extremely healthy. I know many applicants in Asia who paid priority and had to wait 60 days anyhow.

The thing with priority is it has no guarantees or refunds for slow processing. On top of that, you have been refused twice before and you quote being told officially to refrain from using priority.

On balance - not least with those processing time figures - I would not send priority.

Just a view

[SFME]

It sounds to me like you have answered your own question with the quote saying it is advised you do not use priority if a previous application was refused.

You do have to be careful with the target figures, although the figures you quote are extremely healthy. I know many applicants in Asia who paid priority and had to wait 60 days anyhow.

The thing with priority is it has no guarantees or refunds for slow processing. On top of that, you have been refused twice before and you quote being told officially to refrain from using priority.

On balance - not least with those processing time figures - I would not send priority.

Just a view

Thank you Edwardo for your view
I’m actually applying from Africa where my prospective application will be processed at the Pretoria British High Commission.

[SFME]

I just re-checked the TLS Contact website and it specifically says:
“and if your application is not straightforward, it may not be possible to meet this timescale. If this is the case, your application will still be put at the front of the queue at every stage of the decision-making process, and UKVI will aim to process your application within global customer service standards.”
Does it mean we can have any chance of getting a faster response despite the not straightforward situation?

[nsxx]

yes potentially, but it looks like you have two things working against you 1. past refusals 2. possibility of being a not straightforward case.

we recently submitted from africa and due to a past refusal we decided not to spend money on priority as it could potentially be a waste of money from an already expensive process. but if you can afford to the decision is up to you.

[Londoner007]

You can still use priority service as your previous refusals were for visit visas and not settlement visa.

Up to you.

[SFME]

Thank you Londoner007 and nsxx for the replies!

I really hope to get some insight on my third question as I couldn’t find anything similar..

[Londoner007]

3. Never heard of such a thing. People tend to presume / say alot of things. Unless it's from a reliable source such as UKVI, I wouldn't even listen to here-says.

InshaAllah goes well for you both.

[SFME]

3. Never heard of such a thing. People tend to presume / say alot of things. Unless it's from a reliable source such as UKVI, I wouldn't even listen to here-says.

InshaAllah goes well for you both.

Thank you Londoner007 for your response and kind wishes. Unfortunately, this is actually stated in the UKVI guidance notes on recognizing genuine and subsisting relationships in Leave applications. It’s quite useful but I was rather shocked to find that such a situation would be scrutinized I was hoping to hear a similar experience that went well for the applicant and their partner just to get some relief.. I’ll provide the link below

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... -FM2.1.pdf

[Londoner007]

That guide mentions nothing about being scrutinized for being a disabled sponsor????

[SFME]

That guide mentions nothing about being scrutinized for being a disabled sponsor????

Well it is there.

“3.2 Factors which may be associated with a relationship which is not genuine and subsisting
The factors which may prompt additional scrutiny of an application include those listed below. Some factors may also, where specifically stated, lead to a refusal of an application without additional scrutiny but again, before deciding, caseworkers must continue to look at the circumstances as a whole:
(xvii) The applicant is a qualified medical practitioner or professional, or has worked as a nurse or carer, and the partner has a mental or physical impairment which currently requires medical assistance or personal care in their own accommodation.”

I understand that the application will be evaluated as a whole but I would get worried knowing there is chance of it being scrutinised because of something that does not make any sense (to me at least).

[Londoner007]

Just so you know almost all application from Asian and Africa are somewhat scrutinised anyway.
It makes sense to scrutinise disabled applicants to be honest to make sure it is a genuine relationship and not one to use just to benefit for the sake of emigration.

I wouldn't worry, if you meet the requirements then they cant deny you a visa.

[SFME]

Just so you know almost all application from Asian and Africa are somewhat scrutinised anyway.
It makes sense to scrutinise disabled applicants to be honest to make sure it is a genuine relationship and not one to use just to benefit for the sake of emigration.

I wouldn't worry, if you meet the requirements then they cant deny you a visa.

Thank you for replying.
However, if you took a closer look you would find out that it’s NOT when the applicant is disabled where the application receives scrutiny, it’s when the applicant is actually a medical professional and the UK sponsor has a disability. That is why it makes no sense!

[Londoner007]

Like I already said all applications get scrutinized somewhat. And an application from Somalia will definately be scrutinised anyway than say USA.