Deportation of 92-year-old widow postponed after public outcry | UK news | The Guardian
The guardian always puts its own spin on things but the Home Office does seem to be totally lacking in compassion here.

The Home Office has backed down, they say she can stay while they investigate further.

It does seem cold but, having read the court case, it does appear she entered as a visitor, having sold some property in SA before she left. So it appears her intention was to stay. With the public outcry against her being deported, I expect the Home Office will find some way to let her stay.

She is being allowed to stay.

Yes, she entered as a visitor with every intention of staying, having sold her property in SA.

Deception for sure & had no intention of going back to SA.

On the surface, I would deport her (like they do with so many others that try to sneak in the back door) what has age or health got to do with it.

On the other hand I wonder (given her age) if the old dear has any ancestry ties to the UK or some other European country?

That's pretty much my thoughts, all the way.

I blame the daughter, and under these sorts of circumstances, and assuming the mother doesn't have a bona fide claim to British citizenship, there should be some sort of sanction against the daughter who obviously conspired to help her mother circumvent UK immigration laws.

Put the shoe on the other foot

Take a 92 year old British born Mum that visits her only daughter in SA, overstays the visit because she had no intention of returning to the UK for the reason there was no one or other family to take care of her 'back home'.

South Africa would likely deport the British old dear, as would any other country given the same scenario

I thought the British people prided themselves on being "better than that".

Yeah, well trying to be "better" than other countries has caused many of Britain's problems, meanwhile the rest of world laughs at us.

I agree. It is rather laughable to deport grannies.

The whole situation seems rather calculating given that both the daughter and the mother knew that they carrying out a deliberate deception by applying for a visitor visa when she fully intended to remain in the UK illegally. Normally that would be deportation and a ten year ban. One telephone call to a suitably left-leaning newspaper later and the Home Office is having to cave in to a Twitter mob.

Well, once again, we go back to the rigidity of UK family immigration policy. Under the 2012 rules, in order to bring parents to the UK, they not only have to be in very frail condition with no one in the foreign country to look after them, the country itself has to be a place with virtually no medical or social infrastructure. The rules have been labeled an outright ban by many experts.

I long ago came to the conclusion that, when reading immigration stories online, you rarely get all the facts. And another conclusion I long ago came to is that people are woefully ignorant when it comes to immigration law, especially when it comes to family matters. The confusion is compounded between countries that allow relatively free movement between each country for visiting. I'm not speaking just of British citizens either. It happens with US immigration. People really think that because they are family, they can just 'up sticks' and worry with the paperwork later.

This family might very well have pre-planned Myrtle's move. They might have done it with the intent to get around the new rules. Or they might have done it in ignorance. Either way, it is unfortunate because it looks like Myrtle might have had a legal path to residency all along.

Sticks. Stones. Glass houses. Always humbling to remember in matters of family immigration, I think. At least that is my philosophy.

We used to be.
But then Margaret Thatcher came along.

Britain's last great prime minister.

I tend to agree.

However, I also think that Immigration laws could be adjusted somewhat for H&C situations.