FLR - more than 2 1/2 years

[durhamboy]

Has anyone here noticed that when the Home Office grants FLR they give slightly more than 2 1/2 years?

 

When my wife got her initial visa in Thailand in 2013 she was correctly given exactly 2 years 9 months. However, when she did her FLR in 2015 the expiry date was 27 days longer than it should have been. I thought this might have been resolved when she did her next FLR. It wasn't and she was given a further 1 month and 7 days extra. So in total she has been given 2 months and 4 days extra.

 

This makes quite a big difference in our case because she will most probably qualify for ILR when she is 65 - LITUK being too difficult for her. So by my calculations she will require 1 less FLR than if the exact dates had been maintained by the Home Office. This would save us about £2,000.

 

Anyone noticed this anomaly or does anyone know exactly how the Home Office calculates the dates? Does it depend on the date the FLR application is submitted - it shouldn't but it's a bit of a mystery. Maybe we have just been a bit lucky for once!

[durhamboy]

Ok so it would seem no one in the forum is aware of the inner workings of the Home Office on this topic. Fair enough, it is often extremely difficult to fathom how they do things. Quite the worst organisation I have ever come across and they would never survive in the business world.

 

Anyway word of advice to those of you that need to make FLR applications. Check the dates they give you as it could be they give applicants less than 2 1/2 years in some cases. Guess we were lucky and got more than 2 1/2 years.

[rasg]

Everybody "gets more" if they apply for FLR when it is close to the expiry date of the previous visa.

 

My wife's fiancée expired on the 19th September 2016 and she applied and couriered FLR to them on the 17th. FLR wasn't granted for seven weeks. The same applied in April 2019 when her second FLR took just over four weeks under the new digital system.

 

I'm not sure if the time between visas where, technically your wife wouldn't have a visa, is counted towards her full five years of residency, (I don't think it is), and it's the reason why my wife won't be applying for ILR early. I have read of quite a few who have rushed to get ILR "early" and the visa has been refused because the applicant hasn't completed the full five years. In one case by two days. Another where UKVI got it wrong and they had to appeal.

 

In the first case the money was lost. In the second, more money to pay out and the worry that goes with it.

 

Handy that your wife won't need the LITUK test. 

[durhamboy]

Thanks rasg, that is very interesting. I was thinking that it could be that you get more if you apply near the expiry date so you have confirmed that might well be the case.

 

You also raise another interesting issue i.e. does that mean that while the extension is being processed is the applicant technically staying without a visa? On the face of it that would seem to be a moot point except, as you go on to say, that may affect your application for ILR after 5 years. The cases you describe seem very harsh to me but somehow don't surprise me. Just another example of this awful spouse visa system and the ineptitude of the home office.

[rasg]

9 hours ago, durhamboy said:

Just another example of this awful spouse visa system and the ineptitude of the home office.

More to do with following guidelines! They are quite specific. I'm not suggesting that it's a good system, but it's the system we have.

 

I've never understood the rush to apply early, unless it was to beat a price increase.