[QUOTE]A pregnant Indian woman has been refused entry to live in Scotland with her Fife husband because her language qualification for entry to the UK is too advanced.
Alexandria Rintoul, 22, wants to join her husband, Bobby, in St Andrews but was "shocked" when her visa was denied.
Mrs Rintoul passed an advanced English exam but the visa requires a different and much easier one to qualify.
The Home Office said Mrs Rintoul could apply again for the £2,000 visa.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-42358339[/url]
Now I wonder if I apply for citizenship and do the highest level test if they can do the same to me.
I'll admit, Brexit was just to keep those dirty smart people out.
I can see the issue when they brought up 'approved centre' which is more or less the key phrase, she may have done higher, but it would be invalid if not recognized at all, this is simple paperwork not being followed.
Bit of a sensationalist headline, she didn't perform the required test in the required way because her immigration lawyer seems to have misadvised her.
Of course the fact the UK government was happy to take her money despite the fact she wasn't applying with the right information is scummy in itself, but that's pretty much par for the course right now. Got to pay that divorce bill somehow.
[QUOTE=RearAdmiral;52977234]Bit of a sensationalist headline, she didn't perform the required test in the required way because her immigration lawyer seems to have misadvised her.
Of course the fact the UK government was happy to take her money despite the fact she wasn't applying with the right information is scummy in itself, but that's pretty much par for the course right now. Got to pay that divorce bill somehow.[/QUOTE]
I just took the headline from the BBC lol
[QUOTE=dunkace;52977290]I just took the headline from the BBC lol[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because 'Woman denied visa after completing wrong exam' wouldn't get nearly as many clicks. I've noticed BBC's been getting worse about this lately, lots of leading titles where they used to be purely factual.
And they wonder why an increasing number of people consider mainstream news sources untrustworthy.
[QUOTE=RocketRacer;52977024]Now I wonder if I apply for citizenship and do the highest level test if they can do the same to me.[/QUOTE]
Cambridge Certification is one widely advertised, but none of the universities I have applied for ever accepted it. Neither did Southampton. My friend was fucking pissed that he wasted a lot of money on getting CAE only to still be forced to do an IELTS
[QUOTE=catbarf;52977313]Yeah, because 'Woman denied visa after completing wrong exam' wouldn't get nearly as many clicks. I've noticed BBC's been getting worse about this lately, lots of leading titles where they used to be purely factual.
And they wonder why an increasing number of people consider mainstream news sources untrustworthy.[/QUOTE]
BBC has been going down hill for yonks. Its even more insulting because they know the licence fee guarantees their continuation.
[QUOTE=RearAdmiral;52977234]Of course the fact the UK government was happy to take her money despite the fact she wasn't applying with the right information is scummy in itself, but that's pretty much par for the course right now. Got to pay that divorce bill somehow.[/QUOTE]
Hey, gotta fund dumb fucking decisions somehow. There's no magical money tree! (unless you're paying off a bunch of bigots to ensure you can become PM)
I could understand taking the payment if she'd gotten through the process and they had to start doing more in depth investigations. But surely something like this is something we could spot at a glance and just say "this isn't the right accreditation, try again with the right one".
[QUOTE=hexpunK;52977451]But surely something like this is something we could spot at a glance and just say "this isn't the right accreditation, try again with the right one".[/QUOTE]
You'd think that, but these byzantine systems of governmental agencies frequently involve multiple components with minimal communication with one another. Office A tells you you need to go to Office B and do a procedure, which will get kicked back to them. You go to Office B and do the wrong procedure. Office A tells you you fucked up and need to try again. Office B had no idea why you were there to begin with and had no idea you were doing the wrong thing. This stuff happens all the time.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;52977451]Hey, gotta fund dumb fucking decisions somehow. There's no magical money tree! (unless you're paying off a bunch of bigots to ensure you can become PM)
I could understand taking the payment if she'd gotten through the process and they had to start doing more in depth investigations. But surely something like this is something we could spot at a glance and just say "this isn't the right accreditation, try again with the right one".[/QUOTE]
It isn't cheap to move countries, if you don't have that money, you probably shouldn't be moving. They should be going after the lawyer who advised them, because theres also a hint towards not actually supplying all the required paperwork, not just the test, invaliding the entire process.
This is exactly why people call the BBC "fake news". Look at that headline. Now look at what the actual issue was:
[Quote=Article]
A Home Office spokeswoman said: "Some applicants for visas to settle in the UK need to pass an English language test at an [b]approved centre that is specified in the immigration rules[/b]."
"[b]Mrs Rintoul failed to do this[/b] and [b]also failed to submit the necessary supporting evidence[/b] for her application. It is open to her to reapply under the Priority Visa Service."
[/Quote]
Her "Immigration Lawyer" should have known this. This has nothing to do with her English being "Too Good".
If you meet the [b]visa requirements[/b], there should be no problem at all - and yes, they are very specific about where the test is taken because some test centres were found to be participating in fraud.
[QUOTE=Boilrig;52977134]I can see the issue when they brought up 'approved centre' which is more or less the key phrase, she may have done higher, but it would be invalid if not recognized at all, this is simple paperwork not being followed.[/QUOTE]
Beurocracy at its finest.
[QUOTE=ph:lxyz;52982131]This is exactly why people call the BBC "fake news".[/QUOTE]
Anyone who calls the BBC "fake news" is an idiot. Yes, the quality of the content they post has been declining, but they still maintain some of the highest standards of reporting in this country compared to other outlets. Moreover, I would suggest that the popularity of poor quality reporting from tabloids and clickbait sites is precisely [I]why[/I] the BBC has felt the need to lower itself to their level in order to justify it's ever decreasing funding.
I'd also be willing to bet that any news outlet which doesn't subscribe to your globalist NWO conspiracy bullshit is "fake news" in your eyes.
The BBC having the highest standards of reporting in the UK doesn't excuse them for setting the bar really [b]really[/b] low.
I have to admit while I support the BBC as an institution the website's been a bit of a joke lately. I had to stop reading it because I genuinely felt like I wasn't getting the amount of coverage I needed to stay well informed.
[editline]16th December 2017[/editline]
If I wanted anecdotes about India, though, they had me covered!
[QUOTE=Wiggles;52982338]Anyone who calls the BBC "fake news" is an idiot. Yes, the quality of the content they post has been declining, but they still maintain some of the highest standards of reporting in this country compared to other outlets. Moreover, I would suggest that the popularity of poor quality reporting from tabloids and clickbait sites is precisely [I]why[/I] the BBC has felt the need to lower itself to their level in order to justify it's ever decreasing funding.
I'd also be willing to bet that any news outlet which doesn't subscribe to your globalist NWO conspiracy bullshit is "fake news" in your eyes.[/QUOTE]
"Woman's English too good for UK entry"
the headline is an outright lie. if lying ain't fake news I don't know what is
[QUOTE=butre;52983033]"Woman's English too good for UK entry"
the headline is an outright lie. if lying ain't fake news I don't know what is[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree. But to call an entire organisation "fake news" over one headline is absurd.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;52982307]Beurocracy at its finest.[/QUOTE]
This is completely normal for p. much every country I can think of.
There are always multiple paths you can take to gaining permanent residency/citizenship status, its up to you/your lawyer to make sure you're filling out and doing the things you're supposed to.
I started noticing the quality of BBC's reporting tanking back when "OMG rapes happen in India!" was the latest media trend.
They ran a smear story about how Ford India had run some print commercials that were misogynist.
The commercials in question:
[t]https://s-i.huffpost.com/gen/1053072/images/o-FORD-INDIA-AD-facebook.jpg[/t]
[t]http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/514b04aaecad04995d000024-1800-1327/3-333.jpg[/t]
The slogan for the ad commercial was "Leave your worries behind - with the Figo's Extra-Large boot."
The first picture depicts Silvio Berlusconi, former PM of Italy, with what appears to be the prostitutes from the scandal he was involved in trussed up in the back.
The second displays Paris Hilton in the driver's seat with the Kardashians - often referred to as her competition for attention - in the back.
The third, amusingly enough, was never shown or even mentioned by BBC, because its existence wouldn't have fit the version of the story they were trying to push. As far as the BBC article was concerned, the ad campaign had just consisted of the two ads above.
[t]https://www.indiancarsbikes.in/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Ford-Figo-Sexist-Print-Ad-starring-Michael-Schumacher.jpg[/t]
Michael Shumacher, former F1 driver, with his rivals in the back.
Sure, it's a pretty crude joke all told, but misogynistic? Doesn't quite work.
I couldn't help but feel this was a little unfair, and since up to that point I'd had the greatest respect for the BBC's journalism, I was always wary thereafter.
It's almost like the BBC has had massive spending cuts, including BBC News. It's also interesting that the current government also changed it's regulation to be by a government body (OFCOM), instead of an independent body, and allowed itself to select some of the members on the board of the BBC as well.
I still like the BBC, but I worry about it's future when it's finances and independence are under threat from the Tories.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
