Updates, commentary, training and advice on immigration and asylum law

Charities advising on EU settled status warned to refer complex cases on

THANKS FOR READING

Older content is locked

A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement, become a member of Free Movement to get unlimited access to all articles, and much, much more

TAKE FREE MOVEMENT FURTHER

By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features;

  • Single login for personal use
  • FREE downloads of Free Movement ebooks
  • Access to all Free Movement blog content
  • Access to all our online training materials
  • Access to our busy forums
  • Downloadable CPD certificates

The Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has released guidance for charities accredited to advise on the EU Settlement Scheme only. The light touch accreditation scheme, which allows not-for-profit organisations to give immigration advice limited to the Settlement Scheme without jumping through the usual OISC hoops, was apparently a bit too light touch.

The OISC notes a number of “red flags”, or issues in a case that will make it too complicated for an adviser accredited only for Settlement Scheme work. Such issues include:

  • derivative right to reside cases
  • Surinder Singh cases
  • missing documentation¬†
  • “where you need to prove something that is open to interpretation”
  • where the suitability criteria might apply

The document says that it “incorporates advice issued by Refugee Action as part of their training programme and matters raised by Rights of Women”. Free Movement understands that the regulator was pulled in opposing directions by the two organisations, with Refugee Action keen to allow Settlement Scheme advisers to do as much as possible and Rights of Women concerned about encouraging people with limited training to go beyond straightforward cases.

In particular, Rights of Women argues that Settlement Scheme-only advisers should not touch retained right to reside cases at all, given the legal and practical complexities. It also thinks that various other types of case should be listed as red flags, including Lounes family members, excessive absences, refusals and children who may have a claim to British citizenship. 

Relevant articles chosen for you
CJ McKinney

CJ McKinney

CJ McKinney is a specialist on immigration law and policy. Formerly the editor of Free Movement, you will find a lot of articles by CJ here on this website! Twitter: @mckinneytweets.

Comments

2 Responses

  1. Very much agree with the attitude of Refugee Action, the EUSS complex cases are all ‘coming out of the wood-work’ as the scheme progresses, marriage interviews happening via video-link to Liverpool etc., these representatives will not be able to attend the interviews and hence will be unable to demonstrate that the application was within their competence.