Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BRP

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BRP

    Hi, I'm a bit confused and hope someone can point me to the right direction.

    I'm married to British citizen and live in UK since 2009, got ILR in 2011/12 and done 'life in the uk test' also passed ESOL long time ago. I want to apply for citizenship later this year.

    My questions are:
    1) do I need BRP card?
    - if I need BRP will cost me £19.20 or £237, which one is it?
    2) do I need to do English test?
    Many Thanks
    Gena
    Last edited by GenaG; 17 May 2017, 14:46.

  • #2
    Welcome Gina
    My wife arrived full time in the UK in 2008 , she never had a BRP and I have no idea about costs, maybe your in the UK on old rules im sure someone will come along with more knowledge on this matter , you have passed LIUK test so that is out of the way , well done , as far as English tests go again someone with better knowledge than myself could answer ATM think people need A2 or above ...
    My wifes route was :
    2008 UK settlement / marriage to UK citizen -> ILR-> LIUK-> UK Citizenship-> UK passport (3 years)

    She applied for a UK passport on the same day as her Citizenship ceremony in London and had to attend a passport interview which I am certain she took in Leicester (I was away at the time)...
    Because of your time in UK you should be able to apply now if you meet the criteria IE proof of English / time spent outside of UK.
    Good Luck
    https://www.gov.uk/english-language/degrees-in-english check this link if applicable ...
    bangkok mags

    Comment


    • #3
      my wife hasnt got one either but im sure when she applys for flr they will be in touch im sure ive seen its around the £20 mark .i know its a long way off but regarding passports and ilr does this just go on a database or in passports ,which thail are only for 5 year so would that be a extra cost every 5 years or would the brp card be valid for 10 years and you renew that .and she could just use that .its just that when ilr is due so will my misses passport just thinking ahead

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GenaG View Post
        Hi, I'm a bit confused and hope someone can point me to the right direction.

        I'm married to British citizen and live in UK since 2009, got ILR in 2011/12 and done 'life in the uk test' also passed ESOL long time ago. I want to apply for citizenship later this year.

        My questions are:
        1) do I need BRP card?
        - if I need BRP will cost me £19.20 or £237, which one is it?
        2) do I need to do English test?
        You really should have gone the whole way back in 2012 and applied for a UK passport. Costs go up every year in big jumps.

        You can use your current passport, or even an expired passport with your ILR visa in to prove that you are allowed to live here in the UK and to travel and you won’t need a language test. You did all that back in 2012 to get ILR.

        What it will no longer do if your ILR visa is in an expired passport is to allow you to prove you have a right to work. You will need a BRP.

        Changing jobs or getting a new job will be a problem without one.

        Take a look here:

        https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...cuments_v5.pdf

        UKVI confirmed a few days ago for somebody that an ILR stamp in an expired passport is no longer proof of the holder's right to work in the UK and an NTL BRP is now required. NTL is short for No time limit.

        I couldn't find the government page quickly. Take a look here:

        https://www.rcn.org.uk/get-help/rcn-...ce-permit-card

        The normal cost of the BRP is £308 and it takes up to six months. The person I have been talking about went to a premium service centre and paid an extra £600 to get it quickly and the letter they give you is sufficient while you wait for the BRP.

        Comment


        • #5
          wow is that the cost for flr if not got one ,didnt click on links as i think youre around about me with misses stopping in uk ie flr coming up or am i right in thinking 20 uk pound for us and then like a renewal driving license every 10 year same price or round about

          Comment


          • #6
            With FLR the fee for the BRP was just under £20 last September with the cost of the visa on top of course...

            I have no idea of the cost of renewal.

            Comment


            • #7
              cool rasg hope it will be like a driving license and you just need to update your s photo as finger prints aint going to change ,then again why pay for a new photo id when finger prints is good enough i wonder what it is

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rasg View Post

                UKVI confirmed a few days ago for somebody that an ILR stamp in an expired passport is no longer proof of the holder's right to work in the UK and an NTL BRP is now required. NTL is short for No time limit.
                I would like to hear a legal opinion on that....Tobias???? If that's true I doubt its legality. Someone entering under the old rules should be treated as such. It is unreasonable and certainly not the norm to change the rules someone entered the UK under. We may only be talking about £20 but what other rules might they change after someone's entered.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Flip View Post
                  I would like to hear a legal opinion on that....Tobias???? If that's true I doubt its legality. Someone entering under the old rules should be treated as such. It is unreasonable and certainly not the norm to change the rules someone entered the UK under. We may only be talking about £20 but what other rules might they change after someone's entered.
                  They do change the rules all the time as they see fit. I have read about exactly the same problem elsewhere a couple of times in the last couple of weeks. If I remember one was on here but not about work. The call to UKVI was three or four days ago and there was a big chance that the woman in question was going to be unable to work for quite sometime if she had used the normal slow application. Her husband paid the £908 as she needed a some sort of license from the local authority to continue working. Not sure which license was needed as it was never mentioned.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rasg View Post
                    They do change the rules all the time as they see fit.
                    Well let's wait to see what Tobias says.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's legal because they have amended 8(d) and 8(e) in List A.

                      However, this requirement is only for new employers. If employers have previously correctly checked List A documents at the start of employment, then the initial one-time check is sufficient to provide a continuous statutory excuse.
                      Last edited by Vinny; 28 May 2017, 02:42.
                      We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Vinny View Post
                        It's legal because they have amended 8(d) and 8(e) in List A.

                        However, this requirement is only for new employers. If employers have previously correctly checked List A documents at the start of employment, then the initial one-time check is sufficient to provide a continuous statutory excuse.
                        Right but rasg is saying that it takes up to 6 months to obtain a BRP. Suppose someone who entered under the old rules and was therefore never required to obtain a BRP, loses their job through redundancy, how can it be right to prevent them from getting a new job until they get a BRP? That could mean a loss of income for 6 months and cause severe hardship. I can't see this being right but if it is, its very, very wrong.

                        - - - - - - - u p d a t e d - - - - - - -

                        Originally posted by rasg View Post
                        They do change the rules all the time as they see fit
                        I am aware of that rasg but normally those under previous rules continue to be so - as in those who entered when citizenship could be obtained after 3 years. They were not required to wait longer when the rules changed to five years.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Flip View Post
                          I would like to hear a legal opinion on that....Tobias???? If that's true I doubt its legality. Someone entering under the old rules should be treated as such. It is unreasonable and certainly not the norm to change the rules someone entered the UK under. We may only be talking about £20 but what other rules might they change after someone's entered.
                          There's a difference between 'rules' and 'policy'. The holders of ILR are entitled to work in the UK, that has not changed. What has changed is the documentation required to prove to a new employer that a new employee has a right to work.
                          Tobias - โทเบียส
                          It’s better to be 6 feet apart than to be 6 feet under.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Flip View Post
                            Right but rasg is saying that it takes up to 6 months to obtain a BRP. Suppose someone who entered under the old rules and was therefore never required to obtain a BRP, loses their job through redundancy, how can it be right to prevent them from getting a new job until they get a BRP? That could mean a loss of income for 6 months and cause severe hardship. I can't see this being right but if it is, its very, very wrong.

                            - - - - - - - u p d a t e d - - - - - - -



                            I am aware of that rasg but normally those under previous rules continue to be so - as in those who entered when citizenship could be obtained after 3 years. They were not required to wait longer when the rules changed to five years.
                            And the same applies to the change from the need for A2 rather than A1 for my wife's FLR. The rule was that if you came here on Settlement visa using A1 you could use that for FLR all the way through until ILR. She will get through it quite easily but really annoying. The most annoying bit is it's another £150 on top of the yearly increases of the visas themselves. I see that Tobias has chimed in and I'm wondering if the change of A1 to A2 is a rule or a policy? Whichever it is it's bloody annoying!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Tobias View Post
                              There's a difference between 'rules' and 'policy'. The holders of ILR are entitled to work in the UK, that has not changed. What has changed is the documentation required to prove to a new employer that a new employee has a right to work.
                              Thanks for that Tobias but what about the scenario I mentioned in post 12 above? A person could have entered under the old rules and never even heard of a BRP, worked for the same company for many years, been made redundant and then prevented from working at a new job until they obtain a BRP. If, as rasg is suggesting, it could take 6 months to obtain a BRP, real hardship could be caused. Is that correct? Would proof of applying for a BRP and ILR be enough for a new employer?
                              Last edited by Tobias; 29 May 2017, 10:41. Reason: Fixed text at the request of the poster

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X