Home Office Looking For 175,000 UK Visa Overstayers Refused Leave To Remain

Cynthia Barker writes...The Home Office is still searching for more than 175,000 people who have overstayed visas and have no right to remain in the UK, and they have no idea whether or no they have left, according to a report by the National Audit Office.

The visa overstayers have been refused temporary or permanent leave to remain, however,  the Home Office does not know where they are as there is no in-out counting system in place at UK borders..

As Home Office staff struggle to clear thousands of outstanding cases every week, new overstayer files fill up their in-trays at the same rate.

The new figures are published n a National Audit Office report, which highlights £350m of taxpayers money blown away on a failed IT scheme.

‘Refusal pool’ still growing at 3354 per week

The so-called "migration refusal pool", or migrants and students whose temporary or permanent leave to remain application has been refused by the Home Office but current whereabouts  unknown, forms a large proportion of the 301,000 immigration case backlog.

The refusal pool was created in 2008 and was only revealed publicly 2012 when it was discovered by the chief inspector of immigration, John Vine. In 2012 the refusal pool stood at 174,000 cases, which means it has almost doubled in 2 years.

A private contractor, Capita, was hired carry out an audit of 150,000 cases to identify any errors in the records, check if people had left the country and try to contact them if they had not. 

Despite thousands of Home Office staff being made redundant, Capita was kept on following its initial audit and by the end of 2013 had worked its way through 248,000 migration refusal pool cases.

Capita claim that 47,300 refused migrants had left the UK voluntarily, but 50,000 could not be contacted because their details were missing or had not been entered into the system correctly!

Shockingly, 121,000 overstayers could not be contacted because their addresses turned out to be false or out of date, said the report. The Home Office said this group also includes duplicated records and people discovered to have been granted leave to remain via a different route or who are involved in a judicial review or visa appeal.

A migrant would hardly give a false address when applying (along with all their documents and passports) for a visa extension or further leave to remain!

Cases have been sent to the ‘Immigration Enforcement Directorate’ – yet another new government agency set up last year when the Border Agency was split in two - for investigation.

Old refusal pool cases fell by 80,000 in 2013-14, but these were offset by new visa refusal cases. There are currently 3,354 cases flooding into the system every week and 3,673 flowing out.

National Audit Office said investigators' efforts had been hampered by the quality of the data available to them on the department's out-of-date casework database and paper-based records.

"Poor controls in the Casework Information Database increases the risk that staff fail to input the minimum standard information required," said the report.

"Transferring data manually - from paper to IT systems - increases the risk of errors and there is no single source of reliable information."

In 2010 the Home Office commissioned a new, £350m immigration casework system but it failed to work properly and was shut down last August.

That’s a lot of computers and software down the drain? If I lost £350 million pounds I think I would be fired and if I was a bank like the trader Nick Leeson, I’d be jailed!

Here we go again, as another new IT system has been commissioned, this time at an expected cost £209m, the NAO report says.

Who are these companies making hundreds of millions (or billions in the case of HMRC) on useless IT systems?

The taxpayer will also pay to keep the old system, which regularly "freezes" and is incapable of linking with other government systems, running until the new one comes on stream in 2016/17.

Amyas Morse, head of the NAO, said: "The Home Office has started making significant changes since the agency was broken up and has made progress in some areas.

"We would have expected greater progress by now though in tackling the problems we identified in 2012 in areas such as specific backlogs and IT.

"Among our recommendations is that the department prioritise outstanding backlogs and act to prevent the cases that it classifies as unworkable building up into backlogs."

No s**t Sherlock: “prioritise outstanding backlogs and act to prevent the cases that it classifies as unworkable building up into backlogs." They must be really intelligent!

Immigration and Security Minister James Brokenshire said the NAO report showed the government's decision to split the border agency into two directorates and bring it back under direct Home Office control was "the right one".

"I'm pleased the NAO has found that our changes are already delivering improvements, including cutting immigration application times by 25% and embedding a culture that is more focused on improving performance in the future.

"As we said when we took the decision to split up UKBA, transforming our broken immigration system will take time, but our changes are building a system that is fair to British citizens and legitimate migrants and tough on those who abuse the system and flout the law."

The UK Border Agency was formed after Home Office was broken up by the then Labour Home Secretary John Reid, who said it was “not fit for purpose”.

Human Rights article 8 claims and appeals

The truth is that no agency can cope with the number of illegal immigrants and visa overstayers, which could amount to over 1 million people.

It costs around £10,000 to arrest, detain and deport an illegal overstayer. If they lodge an appeal, the costs could escalate to hundreds of thousands of pounds, if not millions as in the case of terror suspect Abu Qatada – who entered the UK illegally and stayed for over 10 years at the taxpayer expense.

Removing or deporting 1 million overstayers will cost at least 10 billion and take years, by which time many will have a right to stay in the UK – because they have been here for so long, have a human rights ‘article 8’ family life claim.

Many will have married, have a partner or children who could be British citizens by the time border officers knock at their door or raid the local Chinese takeaway.

As an immigration adviser in a level 3 firm, we deal with many such appeals and human rights cases every day, as more and more migrants come forward for immigration advice. In fact my phone has not stopped ringing with overstayers requesting a consultation with our appeal specialists!

Many have a legitimate right to remain in the UK, but are still refused leave to remain by the Home Office leaving them no options but to lodge an appeal at the First Tier Tribunal.

If you need advice on any immigration matter, including overstaying your visa, EU or UK immigration law, or want to appeal against a refusal, call Cynthia Barker on 07850 307687 or 0208 731 5972 or email her your details to immigration@londonccs.com. Cynthia Barker is a qualified OISC Registered Immigration Adviser, with 15 years experience in immigration matters, with a team of Level 3 Immigration Law Practitioners, Concept Care Solutions, Middlesex House, 29-45 High Street, Edgware, HA8 7UU.

New Immigration Act Will Tighten Screws On Illegal Immigrants And Cut Human Rights Appeals

Cynthia Barker writes...Just getting ready for a live interview with a Manila radio station which wants to know how the new Immigration Act will affect Filipinos in the UK.

For the vast majority of Filipino British residents who are here legally, for instance the many thousands of nurses and care assistants who work in the NHS, the new laws will have little effect - except perhaps those who want to marry or enter into a Civil Partnership.

However, the new Act, which received the 'Royal Assent' on 14th May, will make life tougher for illegal immigrants and visa overstayers in the UK, the Home Office hopes.

New laws will force landlords to check the immigration status of tenants and banks to check a database for immigration offenders before opening an account.

The million plus illegal immigrants said to be in Britain will also find it more difficult to obtain a driving licence, as links between the Home Office and other government departments are strengthened.

What next? Perhaps we will have to show our passport before we get on a bus or train? Or those previously dropped plans to introduce mandatory ID cards for everyone will make a comeback?

How about getting Tescos to scan your passport along with your Clubcard to stop visa overstayers eating?

The government also wants to clamp down on 'medical tourism' and abuse of the NHS by making temporary visa applicants, such as students make a contribution to the UK health service.

There is one government department which doesn't seem to mind whether or not you are legally in the UK: HM Revenue and Customs! HMRC will take your tax, no questions asked, even if you are working in the UK illegally. However, the employer could be fined £10,000 for employing an illegal worker.

Even us immigration advisers will be subject to stricter controls as the OISC regulator is given new powers to clamp down on advisers who submit 'no hope' further leave to remain applications to the Home Office, which according to the government clog up the system and waste public money.

The Home Office hopes the new Act will reduce Human Rights appeals and Article 8 'right to a family life' claims allowing foreign criminals to remain in the UK. Overstayers will be deported first and have to lodge their appeal in their own country. Immigration detainees will be prevented from lodging endless bail hearings once they have been refused.

If you need advice on any immigration matter, including overstaying your visa, EU or UK immigration law, or want to appeal against a refusal, call Cynthia Barker on 07850 307687 or 0208 731 5972 or email her your details to immigration@londonccs.com. Cynthia Barker is a qualified OISC Registered Immigration Adviser, with 15 years experience in immigration matters, with a team of Level 3 Immigration Law Practitioners, Concept Care Solutions, Middlesex House, 29-45 High Street, Edgware, HA8 7UU.

Human Rights Appeal Saves Baby Killer From Deportation

Cynthia Barker writes...This week I read that a foreign nurse who force-fed her baby to death has successfully appealed against her deportation on 'Article 8' grounds that it would breach her right to a family life.

The Daily Mail reported that the Ghanaian woman won her appeal to stay in Britain under human rights laws which puts the rights of her children (family life) before the Home Office right to deport a convicted foreign criminal.

The 33-year-old former nurse had been jailed for causing the baby’s death, yet has now been granted anonymity by the Judge.

The Home Office said the ruling was ‘disappointing’ and are considering appealing against the decision in the higher Court of Appeal.

Here’s her story. After serving her three-year prison sentence, she was released in April last year to look after her three surviving children.

The Home Secretary Theresa May has made several attempts to remove the woman, who can be referred to only as GHA.

This case, the latest in a long line of successful appeals by convicted foreign criminals, will raise protests about the use of the European Convention on Human Rights to avoid deportation.

The African nurse came to the UK on a student visa in 2000 and remained in the UK. During her trial it was revealed that she used a small milk jug to tip baby rice African corn porridge and chicken soup into her child’s mouth.

Conservative MP and Lawyer Dominic Raab called for the reining-in of human rights laws, and said: ‘Many people will look at this case, a mother jailed for force-feeding her baby and feel it reflects the warped nature of our human rights laws today.

‘The argument is that she is being separated from her kids but not only was she separated from them in prison but there were also care proceedings brought against her. 

'The children have also spent periods of time in Ghana so the arguments for not deporting her fall away. It shows how the judges have expanded and shifted the goalposts from human rights in a way that is pretty arbitrary and perverse.

‘It does not reflect anything written into the ECHR and certainly not anything Parliament has agreed to.

‘Article 8 is being used by convicted, jailed criminals to stay in this country. This isn’t the only case. I actually think the article can be a threat to family life, in particular vulnerable children and partners.’

"Crazy" human rights laws

Raab pointed out that around 90 per cent of successful deportation appeals, up to 400 appeal cases each year,  are using ‘Article 8’: ‘Article 8 is the single biggest problem for deporting a serious foreign criminal and this is something that has only really developed in the last seven years. What will it be like in another seven? It could be almost impossible to deport someone.’

Another MP Peter Bone described the use of human rights law to protect the nurse ‘crazy’. He added: ‘The ECHR was never intended to protect people who carry out terrible crimes from being sent back to their own country.’ 

The three-year sentence handed to GHA at the trial in 2011 meant that under Home Office rules she should have been up for automatic deportation. 

However, attempts to deport her following her release from prison were rejected after she appealed and won her case at a lower immigration tribunal in February.

When the Home Office lodged an appeal to overturn the decision at the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber last month, the earlier decision was upheld. 

Unbelievably, a social services report deemed her children were under ‘no significant risk of harm’ form the child killer and described the family as a ‘close, committed unit with strong cultural and religious beliefs’. Her partner was granted custody of the three children following care proceedings in 2010 and the family has lived in a three-bed London home since GHA’s release. 

The Mail added that in her trial it emerged that GHA, who had already applied for indefinite leave to remain (ILR) in the UK when her child died, had paid ‘little attention’ to social services who had been involved with the family.

It added: ‘Through the recently passed Immigration Act, we are making it easier to remove people from the UK and harder for individuals to prolong their stay with spurious appeals, by cutting the number of appeal rights from 17 to four.

‘It will also ensure that judges deal with Article 8 claims in the right way — making clear the right to a family life is not regarded as absolute and unqualified.’ Source: Daily Mail.

Judges are often criticized for their human rights appeal judgments, but at the end of the day they are only upholding the law. If her children, who may now be British Citizens, have grown up in the UK it would be difficult to see how a judge could rule that she should be deported under the current Immigration Rules and Human Rights laws.

If you need advice on any immigration matter, EU or UK immigration law, or want to appeal against a refusal, call Cynthia Barker on 07850 307687 or 0208 731 5972 or email her your details to immigration@londonccs.com. Cynthia Barker is a qualified OISC Registered Immigration Adviser, with 15 years experience in immigration matters, with a team of Level 3 Immigration Law Practitioners, Concept Care Solutions, Middlesex House, 29-45 High Street, Edgware, HA8 7UU.

Foreign Criminal Wins Human Rights Appeal To Remain In UK Indefinitely As Immigration Judge Stops Deportation

Cynthia Barker writes...Yet another convicted foreign killer has successfully appealed to win the right to remain in the UK indefinitely on the basis that human rights under Article 8 would be breached if he was deported and separated from his extended family in Britain, Immigration Judges have ruled against the Home Office.

The Immigration Judges also granted the Somali man anonymity and he can only be identified by the initials MAI. The man had been sentenced to a five year stretch in Prison for manslaughter and also has a string of other violent criminal convictions.

At the Upper Tribunal last month, Immigration Judges ruled that MAI’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which preserves the right to "private and family life", would be breached if the Home Office deported him back to Somalia.

His immigration lawyers also claimed he would be attacked in his homeland by relatives of the man he killed, a further breach of human rights laws since his life would be in danger.

Doesn't the victim also have relatives here in the UK? And perhaps he should have thought about the dangers of revenge killing before he took his victims life?

Following a series of convictions including Home Secretary Theresa May attempted to deport MAI in August 2012 on the grounds that it would be “conducive to the public good” because of his violent history.

MAI appealed to the lower tier tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber, which overturned the Home Office deportation order on Article 8 grounds.

MAI said would be the target of a “blood feud” by the family of the FA, who he killed in Cardiff in 1997, who was a member of the Somali Habr Awal tribe.

The Home Office appealed against the lower tier tribunal’s judgment arguing the court had “attributed insufficient weight to the public interest” and that MAI was a “persistent offender”.

At the upper tribunal in April, Judge Nicholas Renton upheld the earlier ruling, blocking MAI deportation from the UK.

The ruling stated:

“The panel found that the appellant had a family life in the UK with his mother, his adult siblings, and his niece, nephew and cousins.

“The appellant also had a private life. The panel concluded that the interference with that family and private life as a consequence of the appellant’s deportation was not proportionate.

“In reaching that decision the panel found compelling and therefore exceptional factors in the appellant’s favour being the fact that excluding the time spent in prison, the appellant had lived in the UK for over 20 years.”

Home Office spokesman said they would appeal against the decision.

A Home Office spokesman said: “We firmly believe foreign nationals who break the law should be deported and we are appealing the tribunal’s decision.

“Under our Immigration Bill, those with no right to be here will not be able to prevent deportation simply by dragging out the appeals process.

“The Bill will reduce 17 rights of appeal to four, and give the full force of law to our policy that foreign criminals should be deported despite their claim to a family life.” 

Whilst this type of human rights judgment in not uncommon, in the case the man is unmarried and has no children. MAI, aged 38, claimed he should not be deported by the Home Office as it would breach his human rights to be separated from his mother, adult siblings, and other family.

I have seen Tier 4 students deported for overstaying their visas even though they had British parents and extended family in the UK. In some cases the students, often from Filipino families, were unwilling to appeal or fight their removal orders from the Home Office.

If you need advice on any immigration matter, including overstaying your visa, EU or UK immigration law, or want to appeal against a refusal, call Cynthia Barker on 07850 307687 or 0208 731 5972 or email her your details to immigration@londonccs.com. Cynthia Barker is a qualified OISC Registered Immigration Adviser, with 15 years experience in immigration matters, with a team of Level 3 Immigration Law Practitioners, Concept Care Solutions, Middlesex House, 29-45 High Street, Edgware, HA8 7UU.