Migrants

[Violet1956]

Am I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

[RogerC]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 4:52 PMAm I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

I guess it sort of meanders around the topic here and there and, as anticipated, our resident tangential brain (being the OP I'm surprised he decided to divert his own topic though) injects some irrelevance in order to vent his spleen and off we go......as most always.  So disappointed?  Not really.  Expected?  Yes.

[antony1969]

John52 - 2017-11-28 4:35 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-11-28 2:10 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 2:03 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-11-28 12:36 PM

most of us are very happy

Are you still speanking on behalf of 'your country' *-)

And if 'most of us' want all the Royal Hangers on, why don't they want an election *-)

 

Election .... What election are you raving on at now ???

 

There isn't one, thats the point.

I have the same rights as you in 'your country' and you certainly aren't speaking on my behalf.

 

I asked what election not about your rights ... I'll ask again what election ???

[Bulletguy]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

 

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AM

 

Is it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

 

hi John,

On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.?

How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?

cheers

derek

 

Its explained in the web link I posted

 

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)

 

Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-)

 

On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.

 

Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!

 

There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!

 

I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.

 

Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

[Bulletguy]

antony1969 - 2017-11-28 2:05 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 12:48 PM

 

antony1969 - 2017-11-28 9:53 AM

 

He's not done bad for a ginger ... She's a very tasty lady ... On behalf of my country I offer our congratulations to them xxx

What attracted her to this billionaire?

... I've liked Harry ever since I saw him in his Nazi uniform but he's stepped up another level

picking that cracker,

Well you would wouldn't you so no surprises there. *-)

[RogerC]

In your case as just another 'Joe Public' Bullet it is incumbent on the authorities to administer the required 'hoop jumping' process. However as this issue relates to one of the Royals and his fiancée,  both clearly much better known than 'any' Joe Public, I would suspect all background checks that are required will already have been done. Seeing as a lot of their 'pre engagement' lives were lived in the public eye...the press.....there's clearly not much of an issue over how long their relationship has been going on for or if it is genuine.  

So as far as you and your lady's hoop jumping is concerned that is part of the price one pays for 'not' living ones life very much under public scrutiny.  Would you swap places?  I certainly wouldn't.

[Violet1956]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 5:30 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

 

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AM

 

Is it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

 

hi John,

On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.?

How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?

cheers

derek

 

Its explained in the web link I posted

 

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)

 

Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-)

 

On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.

 

Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!

 

There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!

 

I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.

 

Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

The sad fact is Bullet that people like you and your former wife were caused to suffer the consequences of a system that applies an understandable level of cynicism to every application, borne out of the known sophisticated trickery that many employ in order to obtain legal status in the UK when they do not qualify for it. Would that you could have been saved from the stress and inconvenience you suffered. I don't underestimate how stressful the situation was for you, nevertheless I believe that bulk of your ire should be directed towards the chancers who made it so difficult for you to achieve what was your lawful right not the system itself.

[Brian Kirby]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 4:52 PM

 

Am I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

I think it all depends on how you define discussion, Veronica. For those involved, it seems this is discussion, probably vigorous discussion, but possibly just laddish banter. It's deja vue, all over again. :-D

[Violet1956]

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-28 6:36 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 4:52 PM

 

Am I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

I think it all depends on how you define discussion, Veronica. For those involved, it seems this is discussion, probably vigorous discussion, but possibly just laddish banter. It's deja vue, all over again. :-D

 

Nowt wrong with laddish banter I suppose. I just can't relate to it sometimes.Not sure whether it is a gender thing or something altogether different.

[antony1969]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 6:43 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-28 6:36 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 4:52 PM

 

Am I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

I think it all depends on how you define discussion, Veronica. For those involved, it seems this is discussion, probably vigorous discussion, but possibly just laddish banter. It's deja vue, all over again. :-D

 

Nowt wrong with laddish banter I suppose. I just can't relate to it sometimes.Not sure whether it is a gender thing or something altogether different.

 

Your assuming we are male Veronica ... In these gender neutral days thats a definite no-no

[Bulletguy]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 6:21 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 5:30 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

 

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AM

 

Is it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

 

hi John,

On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.?

How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?

cheers

derek

 

Its explained in the web link I posted

 

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)

 

Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-)

 

On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.

 

Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!

 

There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!

 

I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.

 

Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

The sad fact is Bullet that people like you and your former wife were caused to suffer the consequences of a system that applies an understandable level of cynicism to every application, borne out of the known sophisticated trickery that many employ in order to obtain legal status in the UK when they do not qualify for it. Would that you could have been saved from the stress and inconvenience you suffered. I don't underestimate how stressful the situation was for you, nevertheless I believe that bulk of your ire should be directed towards the chancers who made it so difficult for you to achieve what was your lawful right not the system itself.

Not so much 'ire' Veronica, more a case of utter bewilderment at how state officialdom cocks up and fails to inform correctly. The police episode was farcical....like something out of a comedy sketch! They told us to go away and forget about it as no such legal requirement existed. I remember suggesting perhaps they should tell Immigration that and they said words to effect of, "what for, they should know their job". I had to agree they had a point!

 

As i said, it certainly showed me how easy it is for an entirely innocent person to get caught out by the bureaucratic maze. But Miss Markle will have her way smoothly paved into the UK. No budget airline arrival mixing it with the 'prollies' battling to get through Customs. Red carpet to VIP suite accompanied by gun toting bodyguards the minute her Lear jet lands! Passport? Visa?? "Buzz off....that's for the little people....do you know who i am?"!! (lol)

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-11-28 6:36 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 4:52 PMAm I alone in my disappointment that this thread has descended into personal attacks rather than a discussion about the issues raised?

I think it all depends on how you define discussion, Veronica. For those involved, it seems this is discussion, probably vigorous discussion, but possibly just laddish banter. It's deja vue, all over again. :-D

'deja vu'....but never mind.  Thanks for the English translation   http://www.picgifs.com/graphics/w/wink/graphics-wink-788472.gif

[RogerC]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 8:41 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 6:21 PM

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 5:30 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AMIs it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

hi John, On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.? How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?cheersderek

Its explained in the web link I posted

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-) On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

The sad fact is Bullet that people like you and your former wife were caused to suffer the consequences of a system that applies an understandable level of cynicism to every application, borne out of the known sophisticated trickery that many employ in order to obtain legal status in the UK when they do not qualify for it. Would that you could have been saved from the stress and inconvenience you suffered. I don't underestimate how stressful the situation was for you, nevertheless I believe that bulk of your ire should be directed towards the chancers who made it so difficult for you to achieve what was your lawful right not the system itself.

Not so much 'ire' Veronica, more a case of utter bewilderment at how state officialdom cocks up and fails to inform correctly. The police episode was farcical....like something out of a comedy sketch! They told us to go away and forget about it as no such legal requirement existed. I remember suggesting perhaps they should tell Immigration that and they said words to effect of, "what for, they should know their job". I had to agree they had a point!As i said, it certainly showed me how easy it is for an entirely innocent person to get caught out by the bureaucratic maze. But Miss Markle will have her way smoothly paved into the UK. No budget airline arrival mixing it with the 'prollies' battling to get through Customs. Red carpet to VIP suite accompanied by gun toting bodyguards the minute her Lear jet lands! Passport? Visa?? "Buzz off....that's for the little people....do you know who i am?"!! (lol)

Could have been you Bullet.  As a colleague of mine said to someone years back when challenged how he was of such high rank at such a young age.  His reply I feel is quite appropriate in this context:

"You could have been as well if you had worked harder at school".

There's always going to be the 'haves' and 'have nots' Bullet.  You, like most of us are(in comparison to the upper echelons of society)and always will be the 'have nots'.  Such is life.

[Bulletguy]

RogerC - 2017-11-28 9:13 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 8:41 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 6:21 PM

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 5:30 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AMIs it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

hi John, On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.? How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?cheersderek

Its explained in the web link I posted

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-) On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

The sad fact is Bullet that people like you and your former wife were caused to suffer the consequences of a system that applies an understandable level of cynicism to every application, borne out of the known sophisticated trickery that many employ in order to obtain legal status in the UK when they do not qualify for it. Would that you could have been saved from the stress and inconvenience you suffered. I don't underestimate how stressful the situation was for you, nevertheless I believe that bulk of your ire should be directed towards the chancers who made it so difficult for you to achieve what was your lawful right not the system itself.

Not so much 'ire' Veronica, more a case of utter bewilderment at how state officialdom cocks up and fails to inform correctly. The police episode was farcical....like something out of a comedy sketch! They told us to go away and forget about it as no such legal requirement existed. I remember suggesting perhaps they should tell Immigration that and they said words to effect of, "what for, they should know their job". I had to agree they had a point!As i said, it certainly showed me how easy it is for an entirely innocent person to get caught out by the bureaucratic maze. But Miss Markle will have her way smoothly paved into the UK. No budget airline arrival mixing it with the 'prollies' battling to get through Customs. Red carpet to VIP suite accompanied by gun toting bodyguards the minute her Lear jet lands! Passport? Visa?? "Buzz off....that's for the little people....do you know who i am?"!! (lol)

Could have been you Bullet. As a colleague of mine said to someone years back when challenged how he was of such high rank at such a young age. His reply I feel is quite appropriate in this context:

"You could have been as well if you had worked harder at school".

Ermm.......no thanks, i'll pass on that. I'm not gay and neither it would seem is Harry so the likelihood of it "could have been me" is non-existent!

 

There's always going to be the 'haves' and 'have nots' Bullet. You, like most of us are(in comparison to the upper echelons of society)and always will be the 'have nots'. Such is life.

I'm aware of that from among my own family, not that the 'haves' aren't good folk, eg i get on way better with my nephew than his mother (my sister) who forever brags about her sons wealth whereas he doesn't.

[StuartO]

Going back to the OP's question/proposition, should Brits be denied the right to bring their spouse into the UK unless they can support them, as if it was a fundamental human right?

 

No one is stopping anyone marrying. The couple can live together as a couple anywhere that will take them - just not in UK on benefits, isn't that what it boils down to?

 

[Violet1956]

StuartO - 2017-11-29 9:33 AMGoing back to the OP's question/proposition, should Brits be denied the right to bring their spouse into the UK unless they can support them, as if it was a fundamental human right?

 

No one is stopping anyone marrying. The couple can live together as a couple anywhere that will take them - just not in UK on benefits, isn't that what it boils down to?

Yes Stuart that's how I see it. There are considerable ramifications if that principle abandoned. Why some people think it is unfair for some people to be denied entry because they cannot prove that they will be wholly supported by their British spouse is a bit of a mystery to me. It’s as if “falling in love” was some kind of trump card that puts a couple’s interests before everyone else’s. I don’t see that there is any justification for that. The rules about the sources of income people can rely on to show that their spouse will not be dependent of public funds may need tweaking but the principle that they should have to demonstrate that there will be no additional drain on public funds holds good. And here’s some more food for thought. British citizenship affords some people a good degree of attractiveness in the international marriage market. Why should people be able to up their “desirability” in that market based on our ability to support their wives or husbands and not their own?I can think of reasons why not, the most obvious being that with the state of the world as it is the tax payer is potentially facing an enormous bill and you can forget there being any progress in providing decent housing for everyone.

[Barryd999]

Really the original question should have been "is it right that you need to be earning over £18500 a year in order to bring your migrant spouse to the UK?" As it happens Prince Harry qualifies on that count I believe so they are not having any laws bent for them. If you think anyone should be allowed to bring in a migrant spouse regardless of income then get the law changed, dont blame them.

 

She isnt exactly skint either. Worth around $5 million dollars.

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

Barryd999 - 2017-11-29 11:47 AM

 

She isnt exactly skint either. Worth around $5 million dollars.

 

 

As migrants go.......I'd put her up at my gaff B-) .........

 

But I suspect the Mrs would object :D ...........

 

 

 

 

[StuartO]

An American feminist?  I think you might end up under the thumb - and maybe so will Prince Harry!

[Bulletguy]

StuartO - 2017-11-29 9:33 AMGoing back to the OP's question/proposition, should Brits be denied the right to bring their spouse into the UK unless they can support them, as if it was a fundamental human right?

 

No one is stopping anyone marrying. The couple can live together as a couple anywhere that will take them - just not in UK on benefits, isn't that what it boils down to?

I'm not sure it's a question that needs asking as the answer is already known. The usual xenophobic tabloid trash fill peoples heads with clap trap which some buy into and fall for. They think johnny foreigner simply walks into UK and signs up for a benefit cheque. Funnily enough none speak from any experience of ever having brought a spouse or fiance into UK but what rags like the Fail tells them is good enough. Have a go at it and see how you go on......it's not as easy as some think.http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/reports/the-minimum-income-requirement-for-non-eea-family-members-in-the-uk-2/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/22/supreme-court-ruling-due-challenge-foreign-spouse-income-limit2/http://www.ukmarriagevisa.com/new-ways-to-meet-the-financial-requirements-as-of-10-august-2017.htmlhttps://www.ein.org.uk/blog/5-things-understand-about-august-2017-changes-immigration-rules-families-income-and-mm-casehttps://fullfact.org/immigration/migration-and-welfare-benefits/https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/benefits-for-non-uk-nationals-do-i-qualify

[antony1969]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-29 5:37 PM

StuartO - 2017-11-29 9:33 AMGoing back to the OP's question/proposition, should Brits be denied the right to bring their spouse into the UK unless they can support them, as if it was a fundamental human right?

 

No one is stopping anyone marrying. The couple can live together as a couple anywhere that will take them - just not in UK on benefits, isn't that what it boils down to?

I'm not sure it's a question that needs asking as the answer is already known. The usual xenophobic tabloid trash fill peoples heads with clap trap which some buy into and fall for. They think johnny foreigner simply walks into UK and signs up for a benefit cheque. Funnily enough none speak from any experience of ever having brought a spouse or fiance into UK but what rags like the Fail tells them is good enough. Have a go at it and see how you go on......it's not as easy as some think.http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/reports/the-minimum-income-requirement-for-non-eea-family-members-in-the-uk-2/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/22/supreme-court-ruling-due-challenge-foreign-spouse-income-limit2/http://www.ukmarriagevisa.com/new-ways-to-meet-the-financial-requirements-as-of-10-august-2017.htmlhttps://www.ein.org.uk/blog/5-things-understand-about-august-2017-changes-immigration-rules-families-income-and-mm-casehttps://fullfact.org/immigration/migration-and-welfare-benefits/https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/benefits-for-non-uk-nationals-do-i-qualify

I haven't looked Bullet but have you answered how you know I live 4 miles away from Huddersfield ... Sorry I'm sure you will have answered my original question

[Guest pelmetman]

StuartO - 2017-11-29 5:08 PM

 

An American feminist?  I think you might end up under the thumb - and maybe so will Prince Harry!

 

I didn't really mean it ;-) ..........Just like Bullet & Barry (lol) ........

 

 

[RogerC]

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 10:40 PM

RogerC - 2017-11-28 9:13 PM

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 8:41 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 6:21 PM

Bulletguy - 2017-11-28 5:30 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AMIs it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

hi John, On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.? How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?cheersderek

Its explained in the web link I posted

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

John certainly has a valid point over the usual suspects change of attitude with migrants when it involves Miss Markle! Quite funny to see how quickly they will drop their mantra as and when it suits! ;-) On a serious note i can speak from experience on this as my ex-wife is Swiss so a non-EU citizen. Prior to her moving to UK we had to jump through a considerable number of hoops.....it's not that easy. Both of us had to attend the UK Embassy in Geneva where we were interviewed separately. They go into everything.....in my case, employment, length of service, net salary (basic without overtime), monthly expenditure, bank balance and savings accounts. Proof of all had to be provided by original documentation....no photocopies. In addition to that they wanted background detail regards how long we'd known each other etc etc. So it's pretty invasive and personal and lasts around one hour to 90 mins.Once in UK we had to go to the Immigration Office in London for yet more interviews which was a real balls ache.....and they cocked up big time by failing to make us aware my fiancee (as then was) only had a 3 month visa and presumed we knew. We only discovered one week before it ran out and had to get a 'quickie' done pronto at a registry office.Immigration were more concerned in telling us she had to register her status with the local Police yet when we went there...they were totally baffled and said they'd never heard of such nonsense!There are many cases of British wife or husband married to non-EU who find themselves separated for numerous reasons and i remember a recent one involving a Canadian lady refused entry simply because the Border Agency didn't believe their relationship was genuine.......they'd been married over 40 years FGS!!!I think it safe to say that Miss Markle who, as an immigrant (correct term), will not experience anything of the above at all and simply breeze into Blighty, marry her Prince, and maybe (hopefully) live happily ever after.Ahhhhhh (lol)(lol)

The sad fact is Bullet that people like you and your former wife were caused to suffer the consequences of a system that applies an understandable level of cynicism to every application, borne out of the known sophisticated trickery that many employ in order to obtain legal status in the UK when they do not qualify for it. Would that you could have been saved from the stress and inconvenience you suffered. I don't underestimate how stressful the situation was for you, nevertheless I believe that bulk of your ire should be directed towards the chancers who made it so difficult for you to achieve what was your lawful right not the system itself.

Not so much 'ire' Veronica, more a case of utter bewilderment at how state officialdom cocks up and fails to inform correctly. The police episode was farcical....like something out of a comedy sketch! They told us to go away and forget about it as no such legal requirement existed. I remember suggesting perhaps they should tell Immigration that and they said words to effect of, "what for, they should know their job". I had to agree they had a point!As i said, it certainly showed me how easy it is for an entirely innocent person to get caught out by the bureaucratic maze. But Miss Markle will have her way smoothly paved into the UK. No budget airline arrival mixing it with the 'prollies' battling to get through Customs. Red carpet to VIP suite accompanied by gun toting bodyguards the minute her Lear jet lands! Passport? Visa?? "Buzz off....that's for the little people....do you know who i am?"!! (lol)

Could have been you Bullet. As a colleague of mine said to someone years back when challenged how he was of such high rank at such a young age. His reply I feel is quite appropriate in this context:"You could have been as well if you had worked harder at school".

Ermm.......no thanks, i'll pass on that. I'm not gay and neither it would seem is Harry so the likelihood of it "could have been me" is non-existent!

There's always going to be the 'haves' and 'have nots' Bullet. You, like most of us are(in comparison to the upper echelons of society)and always will be the 'have nots'. Such is life.

I'm aware of that from among my own family, not that the 'haves' aren't good folk, eg i get on way better with my nephew than his mother (my sister) who forever brags about her sons wealth whereas he doesn't.

I never mentioned you gay were or might be Bullet.  Had you bothered to read my reply properly you would see that it was not myself but Mr 'Off on a tangent' that brought that particular sexual preference to the discussion somewhat earlier in the thread.  All I said is it could have been you enjoying, if that is the right term, the trappings afforded to the higher echelons of society.........

[Bulletguy]

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

 

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AM

 

Is it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

 

hi John,

On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.?

How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?

cheers

derek

 

Its explained in the web link I posted

 

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)

 

Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

Veronica.......something here for both you and John actually which was on this evenings news and relates to what i posted about re. immigration and how families remain split. Naturally Miss Markle is a current example which stirs such people (and thats putting it mildly!).

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/uk-families-affected-by-immigration-laws-campaign

[Violet1956]

Bulletguy - 2017-12-02 10:02 PM

 

Violet1956 - 2017-11-28 2:18 PM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 9:31 AM

 

derek pringle - 2017-11-28 9:29 AM

 

John52 - 2017-11-28 3:46 AM

 

Is it fair that Prince Harry can marry a migrant from outside the EEA, when millions can't?

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/prince-harry-meghan-markle-engagement-marry-not-everyone-can-bring-spouse-a8078926.html

 

hi John,

On what grounds would he be treated differently to anybody else.?

How would the US law interpret this situation,would he be treated differently to other people marrying an american?

cheers

derek

 

Its explained in the web link I posted

 

I think you will find John that his chosen wife will have to conform to the same rules as any other non-national. As an American citizen she can only stay in the UK for six months after her entry as a visitor. If she want's to enter and remain for longer as a spouse she will have to apply for a spouse visa. The law applies to Harry in the same way as it applies to everyone else. Yes it will be little more than a formality but the law is the law. I think it likely that he can afford to pay the visa fee and he just needs to demonstrate that he can afford to keep her. Just a bank statement from one of his accounts with Coutts would show that. ;-)

 

Correction she will have to apply for a Fiancee visa as I presume she is going to marry him here.

Veronica.......something here for both you and John actually which was on this evenings news and relates to what i posted about re. immigration and how families remain split. Naturally Miss Markle is a current example which stirs such people (and thats putting it mildly!).

 

https://www.channel4.com/news/uk-families-affected-by-immigration-laws-campaign

 

Thanks BG.

The first lady in the clip who had to quit Turkey because of the military coup with her daughter may have a good case for her husband to be allowed in as her partner on a discretionary basis outside the rules if it can be shown that they cannot live together in Turkey.

 

In February this year our Supreme Court, whilst upholding the principle of the minimum income requirement was critical of the rules as they are currently drafted and government advice to visa officers on how to consider cases outside the rules for not taking sufficient account of the welfare of children affected by the decision not to admit a spouse. It is worth a read because the issues are explained very well. You can find it on this link

 

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0011-judgment.pdf

 

...warning it's 40 pages long!

 

Seems to me the lady with the Turkish husband should consult a lawyer (and before Dave P chips in I should say that Legal Aid is not available.Some lawyers will act for free in worthy cases because they are not all greedy self-serving troughers as the Daily Mail seems to want us to believe).

 

If I heard what was said on the Channel 4 clip right the second person, a man was successful in getting permission for his wife to join him. In the third case I could not discern any reason why they couldn't live in the spouse's country of origin.

 

The bottom line is there will be cases, depending on the circumstances, where the income requirement should be waived i.e. when it can be shown that the interests of the family, particularly those of children are such that excluding a spouse is not lawful i.e. the exclusion amounts to a disproportionate interference with their family life.

 

As in life there are exceptions to every rule but in general the rule holds good for the reasons the Supreme Court stated. Don't you just love our Supreme Court...they got it right on Article 50 too.

 

;-) Veronica