Looks like the new performance visas are causing some more problems...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8195284.stm

The rumour is,  and it is only a rumour,  that Glasgow City Council 
legal department forgot to register the council as a sponsor so the 
letter of invitation and visa sponsorship wasn't valid...

But it also looks as if the UK Border Agency are living up to their 
forgiving and flexible reputation...

-- 
William Black

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing.
If you can fake that, you've got it made.

In message <h63ak0$s1$1@news.eternal-september.org>, William Black 
 writes
>Looks like the new performance visas are causing some more problems...
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8195284.stm
>
>The rumour is,  and it is only a rumour,  that Glasgow City Council 
>legal department forgot to register the council as a sponsor so the 
>letter of invitation and visa sponsorship wasn't valid...

I don't know about the rest of the delegation but as far as the 
musicians go, any licenced sponsor for a tier 5 application 
(entertainment and sports) could get a certificate of sponsorship for 
the band members. There's no possibility of them being turned down if a 
licensed sponsor approves them. Of course they still have to get 'entry 
clearance' from the British Embassy in their own country if they are 
from a country which requires its citizens to have visas to travel to 
Britain - even for holidays - but with a Certificate of Sponsorship that 
should be more or less automatic.

It sounds to me as though they hadn't gone through the process.
>
>But it also looks as if the UK Border Agency are living up to their 
>forgiving and flexible reputation...

The folks who issue the certificates or sponsorship and who look after 
licensing sponsors are not the same department as the folks on the 
immigration desks at the airport.

I just brought in 12 Zulus from South Africa who need entry clearance in 
Pretoria and that wasn't a problem.

Jacey
-- 
Jacey Bedford

Jacey Bedford wrote:

> The folks who issue the certificates or sponsorship and who look after 
> licensing sponsors are not the same department as the folks on the 
> immigration desks at the airport.

I know.

I also know that the people on the desks at the airport have now lost 
the right to stop people entering if they don't like the look of them, 
but the paperwork MUST be in order.

-- 
William Black

The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing.
If you can fake that, you've got it made.

In message <h66f6p$17a$2@news.eternal-september.org>, William Black 
 writes
>Jacey Bedford wrote:
>
>> The folks who issue the certificates or sponsorship and who look 
>>after licensing sponsors are not the same department as the folks on 
>>the immigration desks at the airport.
>
>I know.
>
>I also know that the people on the desks at the airport have now lost 
>the right to stop people entering if they don't like the look of them, 
>but the paperwork MUST be in order.
>

I think there might still be some leeway for refusals at the airport. I 
had to make last minute phone calls for one of my Zulus (coming in with 
a big group) who had all his paperwork in order, but when asked was a 
bit vague on what he was actually going to be doing here. (His English 
wasn't so good, either, which didn't help, because they didn't speak 
Zulu.) I got the impression that despite having his certificate of 
sponsorship and having done entry clearance at the British Embassy in 
Pretoria before departure, there was still some doubt about letting him 
in.

By the time I called the Immigration folks at the airport they'd already 
cleared him for entry, though, so I don't know how real the turn-back 
threat was.

Jacey

-- 
Jacey Bedford

Jacey Bedford wrote:
> In message <h66f6p$17a$2@news.eternal-september.org>, William Black 
>  writes
>> Jacey Bedford wrote:
>>
>>> The folks who issue the certificates or sponsorship and who look 
>>> after licensing sponsors are not the same department as the folks on 
>>> the immigration desks at the airport.
>>
>> I know.
>>
>> I also know that the people on the desks at the airport have now lost 
>> the right to stop people entering if they don't like the look of them, 
>> but the paperwork MUST be in order.
>>
> 
> I think there might still be some leeway for refusals at the airport. I 
> had to make last minute phone calls for one of my Zulus (coming in with 
> a big group) who had all his paperwork in order, but when asked was a 
> bit vague on what he was actually going to be doing here. (His English 
> wasn't so good, either, which didn't help, because they didn't speak 
> Zulu.) I got the impression that despite having his certificate of 
> sponsorship and having done entry clearance at the British Embassy in 
> Pretoria before departure, there was still some doubt about letting him in.
> 
> By the time I called the Immigration folks at the airport they'd already 
> cleared him for entry, though, so I don't know how real the turn-back 
> threat was.

The law is quite specific,  and was enacted after the Immigration 
Service was dragged through the courts for being beastly to women coming 
to the UK to marry British nationals.

The agents at the point of entry must have a real material reason to 
refuse entry.

They can no longer say "I didn't like the look of that one so I banged 
him up for more investigation."

They still harass people to no good purpose but they can't refuse entry 
without a very good reason.


-- 
William Black

"Any number under six"

The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat 
single handed with a quarterstaff.

At 20:45:11 on Mon, 17 Aug 2009, William Black 
 wrote in 
<h6cc09$o8s$1@news.eternal-september.org>:

>They can no longer say "I didn't like the look of that one so I banged 
>him up for more investigation."
>
>They still harass people to no good purpose but they can't refuse entry 
>without a very good reason.

<http://www.wepsite.de/constable_savage.htm>
-- 
Molly Mockford
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety - Benjamin Franklin
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.)

In message <h6cc09$o8s$1@news.eternal-september.org>, William Black 
 writes
>Jacey Bedford wrote:
>> In message <h66f6p$17a$2@news.eternal-september.org>, William Black 
>> writes
>>> Jacey Bedford wrote:
>>>
>>>> The folks who issue the certificates or sponsorship and who look 
>>>>after licensing sponsors are not the same department as the folks on 
>>>>the immigration desks at the airport.
>>>
>>> I know.
>>>
>>> I also know that the people on the desks at the airport have now 
>>>lost the right to stop people entering if they don't like the look of 
>>>them,  but the paperwork MUST be in order.
>>>
>>  I think there might still be some leeway for refusals at the 
>>airport. I had to make last minute phone calls for one of my Zulus 
>>(coming in with a big group) who had all his paperwork in order, but 
>>when asked was a bit vague on what he was actually going to be doing 
>>here. (His English wasn't so good, either, which didn't help, because 
>>they didn't speak Zulu.) I got the impression that despite having his 
>>certificate of sponsorship and having done entry clearance at the 
>>British Embassy in Pretoria before departure, there was still some 
>>doubt about letting him in.
>>  By the time I called the Immigration folks at the airport they'd 
>>already  cleared him for entry, though, so I don't know how real the 
>>turn-back  threat was.
>
>The law is quite specific,  and was enacted after the Immigration 
>Service was dragged through the courts for being beastly to women 
>coming to the UK to marry British nationals.
>
>The agents at the point of entry must have a real material reason to 
>refuse entry.
>
>They can no longer say "I didn't like the look of that one so I banged 
>him up for more investigation."
>
>They still harass people to no good purpose but they can't refuse entry 
>without a very good reason.
>
>
Thanks, that's interesting to know.

Jacey
-- 
Jacey Bedford