Free Movement

Updates and commentary on immigration and asylum law

  • Subscribe

  • Search this blog

  • Comments

    Please do not ask for legal advice or advice on your individual case by leaving comments. Any such comments will be deleted and will not receive replies. At the top of the page there is advice available on the law and on finding a lawyer. Other comments are very welcome!
  • Category cloud

  • Category list

  • Blog Stats

    • 364,521 hits
  • Disclaimer

    The information and commentary on the law on this web site is provided free of charge for information purposes only. Every reasonable effort is made to make the information and commentary accurate and up to date at the date each item is published, but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by the author. The information and commentary does not, and is not intended to, amount to legal advice to any person on a specific case or matter. You are strongly advised to obtain specific, personal advice from a lawyer about your case or matter and not to rely on the information or comments on this site.

Maintenance without recourse to public funds

Posted by freemovement on 7 August 2007

I said some time ago that I would do a post on this subject and here it is…

The maintenance requirement is one of the key tests in the immigration rules, and it applies to all categories of immigrant except refugees and their families.

To meet the maintenance rule a person must show that he or she can be adequately maintained without recourse to public funds. ‘Public funds’ is given a very specific meaning by rule 6 of the immigration rules and it is therefore only the benefits that are listed at rule 6 that count as public funds for the purposes of the rules. There are some benefits that might be assumed to be included that actually aren’t, such as education, health care and contributory benefits, such as incapacity allowance. In addition, it is only the claiming of additional benefits that should concern an entry clearance officer. If the UK sponsor is already in receipt of benefits but the immigrant can show independent means such as savings or, probably, an ability and intention to work in the UK, the application should be granted (see rule 6A).

The Home Office and UK Visas give no clear guidance to their caseworkers on what the rules mean by ‘adequate’. Generally, though, the courts will be satisfied that maintenance is adequate if the income of the immigrant will be equivalent to that of a person receiving income support and associated benefits, such as housing benefit, council tax relief and so on. Current and past benefit levels can always be checked at Rightsnet.

One of the main reasons that applications for entry clearance are refused is lack of evidence. Most people don’t expect to be accused of lying and forging documents, but this is actually the starting point for entry clearance officers at the posts with the highest refusal rates, like Dhaka, Islamabad and Accra. If an assertion is made that a person has income, that assertion will need to be proven – in detail. What is the source of the funds? If land or a business, what proof of ownership is available and on top of that what proof is there of rental or business income?

As an aside, entry clearance officers will often require an applicant to disprove a negative – which is impossible, of course. How can you prove that you do not have an intention to remain in the UK? How can you prove that this bank account statement is not forged? How can you prove that this deposit into your account is not borrowed?

If the immigrant will be allowed to work once inside the UK then this can be counted towards adequacy of maintenance. Spouses are allowed to work, for example, but visitors are not. Students are a special case, as they are allowed to work 20 hours per week during term time and full time during vacations, but any such income is not allowed to be considered when assessing whether income is adequate in an immigration sense.

Evidence of ability to get a job will be essential if a person is seeking to rely on their capacity to work once inside the UK. For example, English language skills, a good work history and employer references will all be helpful.

All this, and also pray that the Entry Clearance Officer is in a good mood.

6 Responses to “Maintenance without recourse to public funds”

  1. [...] This is important to those affected, as it means that the normal requirement to show adequate maintenance and accommodation without recourse to public funds is [...]

  2. can u please help thursday i received a determination from the judge after an AIT Tribunal the end of it said I find the Respondant has not satisfied the provisions of Regulation 12 and accordingly his appeals falls to be dismissed my solicitor said this was a typing error and it is a refusal from the judge my husband was offered 2 jobs upon his entry into this country can you tell us if we have any legal rights please

  3. [...] support is financial support offered to a potential immigrant in order to enable them to meet the adequate maintenance without recourse to public funds part of most immigration rules. The person offering the support will often be a close relative or [...]

  4. Bob Webster said

    Thiat is exactly what I did and we are now in the UK together. I took it a stage further and lodged a formal complaint. The matter is now with the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman as I got no satisfactory response to the complaint

  5. freemovement said

    This is plain legally wrong and contrary to their guidance and common sense. Unfortunately, some ECOs are morons with no regard for the lives of the people they are dealing with. The fact that this would be overturned on appeal is little consolation when that will take at least 6 months. One thing that can be worth doing is writing very strongly worded representations to the Entry Clearance Manager and simultaneously lodging an official complaint, and telling the ECM that you are doing so.

  6. Bob Webster said

    There is one problem with relying on the Spouses income in the UK to avoid reliance on Public Funds. The Immigration Officer will require nothing less than a Contract of Employment even though this is not required in the ECG. A letter from an employer offering employment subject to satisfactory interview after arrival will not suffice. The offer has to be unconditional.

    This is stated in our Refusals Reasons for Decision.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>