WEBlue

I fear this is true. From the UKBA website's 'Latest News' section:

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/si...mily-migration

Victor Meldrew

I have just written to Mr Bryant ........ for what it is worth.

rebeccajo

Bumping this because questions are starting to arise in the forum from people who apparently are unaware of the changes.

Deb568

But is the aim citizenship for the foreign spouse? Quite possibly it isn't , especially if they come from a country which doesn't allow dual citizenship and whose citizenship they don't want to give up. The States for example? Might have changed by now.

The aim is to come back to Britain, with your foreign born spouse, be able to claim benefits for that spouse if you need to, and not be restricted by income or asset checks. The spouse would come in on an EEA family permit and get a residence card on arrival. So he/she is now a permanent resident. That is indefinite leave to remain. The British born person can then claim benefits, if needed, for all his/her family.

I wouldn't be so against these restrictions on British citizens returning directly to Britain, if they applied across the board. But why should British citizens be restricted according to their income when every other member of the EEA can waltz over here, foreign spouse in tow, and claim benefits from day one?

Deb568

+1

Deb568

It's not 5 years on an EEA family permit. The family permit merely enables them to enter the country without restrictions. They then apply for a residence card on the day they arrive. The arrive as a permanent resident, with ILR. They get the equivalent of a settlement visa from day one - that's the residence card. And it cannot be unreasonably withheld or delayed by the Home Office, i.e. as per European Commission rules.

To get full access to our benefits system, they don't need to be a citizen.

roaringmouse

US citizens are able to have dual citizenship.
The residence card is to enable the person to re-enter the UK without applying again for a family permit, and to avoid potential inconvenience in showing proof of right to live and work in the UK. It is not compulsory for a family member of an EEA national to obtain a residence card - reference.
The family permit is the equivalent of a settlement visa, yes. However they do not have permanent residence status until they have exercised EEA free movement rights in the UK for a continuous 5 year period. At which point they can, if they choose, apply for naturalisation.
I made no reference to the benefits system.

roaringmouse

Wait until next month and for a while after when people who haven't kept up start to find out their plans may no longer work.

Pollyana

Two threads merged as some info is in one but not the other,
I've adapted the title slightly and made it a sticky thread

just_jenn

So I was just reading this: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/si...mily-migration

and this jumped out at me: introducing a new minimum income threshold of £18,600 for sponsoring the settlement in the UK of a spouse or partner, or fiancé(e) or proposed civil partner of non-European Economic Area (EEA) nationality, with a higher threshold for any children also sponsored; £22,400 for one child and an additional £2,400 for each further child;

Could this be a potential loophole? For example, in my own situation I'm a UK Cit, born to brit parents in the UK so my son was automatically eligible for a passport. I didn't have to sponsor my son for a UK visa (he entered the UK with me on his UK passport), only my husband. DH already has his visa but I'm curious.

englishguygoinghome

Not a loophole but a specficially chosen implementation - they actually give an example and clearl state that BC children are not considered when doing the calculation

Egon

Here's a link some may find useful:

http://www.jcwi.org.uk/policy/united...ed-theresa-may

There's an email address for Labour's Chris Bryant the Shadow immigration Minister. Not sure if he'll reply but I'm contacting him and various Labour addresses to see what their policy is in opposing it or pledging to overturn it.

Egon

Just found this in the government document, it may be useful to some:

i.
Where the sponsor is returning to the UK with the applicant having lived and/or worked abroad, the same financial requirement will have to be met: a minimum gross annual income of £18,600 (or the relevant higher figure where a child or children are also being sponsored). There is no reason why those who have lived and/or worked abroad should get a better deal than sponsors residing, and paying tax, in the UK. However, there will be the flexibility at (j) for sponsors working overseas and returning to work in the UK which enables them some scope to do so without having to leave their partner overseas.

j.
Where the sponsor has been working overseas and is returning to work in the UK, there will be scope for them to count a firm, verifiable job offer or signed contract of employment to start work within three months of their return at a salary at the level required to meet the financial requirement. They must also demonstrate that either they are in employment overseas at the required salary level at the point of application and have been so continuously for at least the previous six months or they have earned the required amount through salaried employment in the 12 months prior to the application.'

ozzieeagle

I dont see any provision for fairly substantial cash amounts in these guidlines. What happens if one has more than the 5 years qualifying period in Cash ?

robin1234

Yes, your savings can substitute in whole or part for lack of annual income. If no income, I think (from memory) you need to show 62,500 pounds in savings. It is all laid out in the document, sorry I can't remember the page number but it is all mentioned earlier in this thread....