UKVI correctly turned down application to stay in the UK because the applicant had not lived here for the required 20 years

Summary 997 |

Mr H complained about UKVI's refusal to grant him permanent residence in the UK and said it breached his human rights.


What happened

Mr H made an application to live permanently in the UK in autumn 2009 because he said he had lived here since arriving from India at the end of 1992 as an asylum seeker. UKVI turned this down. At the end of 2012 Mr H applied again, but UKVI also refused this application. UKVI said that Mr H had not been in the UK for 20 years, the time set out in the legislation, so he did not qualify for permanent residence. Mr H said this breached his human rights but UKVI said its decision would not breach Mr H's human rights because there was nothing preventing him from returning to India, a country in which he had spent half his life.

In autumn 2013 Mr H made a new application. He explained he had arrived as an asylum seeker in 1992, made a claim for asylum either in 1992 or 1994, and UKVI had never made a decision about that asylum application. He said he was single, had no children and enclosed letters from friends and acquaintances showing that he had been living in the UK since his arrival in 1992.

However, the documents UKVI are able to accept as proof of a person's life in the UK only dated back to summer 2001. UKVI refused Mr H's application again because there was no proof he had been in the UK for 20 years.

In autumn 2014 Mr H complained to UKVI about its decision to refuse his application. UKVI considered his complaint and confirmed it had correctly considered his application. It told him that as he was in the UK illegally, he should leave.

What we found

We did not uphold this case. There was no evidence that UKVI had ever received an asylum claim from Mr H in 1992 or 1994 as Mr H claimed. UKVI considered Mr H's later applications properly and its decisions to refuse him permission to stay were correct. UKVI considered whether its decision would breach Mr H's human rights, but based on the information he had provided, its refusal decision did not seem unreasonable.

Organisation

UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI)

Health or Parliamentary
Parliamentary
Organisations we investigated

UK Visas and Immigration

Location

UK

Complainants' concerns ?
Result