26 February 2013

Dear Mr Whiteman,

I write to comment on your dismissive reply to my MP, Mr David Morris,

concerning my wife's settlement visa application and refusal. He wrote to

Theresa May, however I presume one of her underlings referred it to one of your

underlings. Please note that I live on [Primrose] Drive, not Lane. Details (should)

matter to you (e.g. I am not the local MP), details matter to me. Thus, note also

that my wife Phataraporn's nickname is Vilai, not Vilia. It means 'lovely' (not

luvly) ... and she is a lovely woman. That is why I married her, over a year ago,

around the time that we became aware of and started to negotiate your

bewildering assault course. Because that is what it is, a series of ever moving,

rising and changing obstacles designed to hinder decent married couples wishing

to live together, as married couples normally do, presumably in the hope that we

will tell others not to bother, so you can, in that way, do the Home Secretary's

nasty bidding and cut net immigration – and keep Britain British! Nice.

I find your explanation about dealing with cases in strict order to be in very poor

taste. The truth of the matter is, I think, that your staff in Bangkok will not take

ten minutes to examine some very straightforward crystal-clear documentation

which establishes, beyond all reasonable doubt, that my income exceeded

£18,600 in 2011-12 (and does so already in 2012-13 – just ask the accountant

you made me use) until the 2 May deadline set by First-tier Tribunal (FTT), i.e.

when they really, really, really have to. They will of course spend much longer

composing emails saying we must wait ... and keep waiting and waiting and

waiting. The days when staff might have shown a little decency and common

courtesy, some vestige of humanity, to British citizens and their spouses, to

married couples, to newly-weds, are I think long gone. Now the aim seems to be

to punish us – simply for being married, to bleed us dry, to delay/avoid issuing

settlement visas, or any other visas for that matter, whenever possible. Because

'rules is rules'. Perhaps some individuals get some perverse pleasure from that,

perhaps they revel in Schadenfreude, I can think of no other reasonable

explanation, unless of course there is some sort of unwritten political directive?

Very nice.

At this point I should explain our situation. We married on 7 February 2012, i.e.

over a year ago (ask George to do the maths), when I was 58 and my wife 43.

When I needed an affidavit of freedom to marry your staff were quite happy to

issue that, and get it wrong, in a matter of minutes, for about £60, with a smile,

while I waited. Clearly that was very easy money, for doing a very simple task

incorrectly, on which no immigration consequences hinged – no question of

queues, delays, waiting lists or processing times that day – just take the mug's

money and put it in petty cash, thank you punter! No wonder they smiled.

Around the time we married I/we realised that my wife would need to take and

pass an appropriate English test before applying for a visa; like so many others,

we were naive virgins with respect to your unfathomable rules and regulations,

buried as they are, hidden deep in the bowels of your obscure annexes. As my

MP said (not me), no one understands them – doubtless no one is supposed to

understand them. Once back in the UK, in late February, I took advice from a

proofreading customer, a helpful and obliging Taiwanese woman (strange

character traits these Taiwanese) who works for Pearson Education in London;

and thus my wife took Cambridge KET in March – and passed first time – that's

before she has the opportunity to be immersed in an anglophone environment,

whereupon her level will rise rapidly, much faster than it ever can in Thailand,

where most people listen, speak, read and write, acquire and learn, in Thai, not

English. My MA is in TEFL so I do have some understanding of this domain – e.g.

Stephen Krashen and his input hypothesis. I have seen Vilai's written English

progress well in recent years: impressive spelling and vocabulary, but needs to

work on her short infinitives, e.g. 'I must to go now.'

Whilst I was out there early last year, in February, my wife went for a TB test, of

her own volition, to a reputable hospital in Bangkok (Ramkhamhaeng, I was with

her) as she knew a test was required. It was clear. She had another test in April,

a routine test organised by her then long-term employer (Redalpi) at the same

place, that too was clear. But curiously, when she came to apply for a visa in late

May (I have a screenshot saying her application was 'submitted successfully':

GWFxxxxxxxx), it became apparent that she had gone to the 'wrong' hospital. So

she went to the IOM, instead, in June. And of course they decided there might be

something awry and so she had to wait and go back in August, whereupon

2

everything was fine, despite no treatment or medication, and the savage

vicious draconian new rules were in force – odd that, especially as exactly the

same thing happened to a friend of Vilai's (in the TB test this month Vilai got her

new certificate without any wait, but yet more expense of course). That means

you can try to torture us for five years rather than two, and charge extra juicy

rising fees too. Very, very, very nice work if you can get it, innit?

Vilai (not Vilia) applied in August and was rejected in October. No problem with

the English test, TB test, accommodation or genuineness of our marriage (just

imagine, not a 'sham' marriage but a real one, sorry Sun and Daily Mail hacks, no

Valentine's Day material there); no, the supposed 'problem' was the lack of

documentation to prove my income. Before I discuss that I will tell you that I was

a professional photographer for around 25 years (I still have a large heavy bag of

Hasselblads, I can submit them as evidence – but mind your toes) and a partner

(with my ex-wife until she went off with the fat teetotal chain-smoking Greek

Cypriot motorbiking social worker who knocked her around a bit, allegedly, and

eventually succumbed to lung cancer) in a gîte-letting agency for a decade (to

help that I did a French degree to add to my collection). As a photographer I

worked very long hours, not just photographing but processing, printing,

laminating and mounting – burning a lot of midnight oil, to make the business

pay, to support my family, never claiming 'benefits'.

After my first marriage folded – my wife of 24 years had an affair and left, three

weeks after the empty nest, not long after I closed my studio, as I was starting

the final year of my French degree ... pushing me into severe clinical depression,

and into taking a sabbatical – I had a rough decade, c'est la vie quoi, hein ? But

still I did what needed to be done to pay my way and pay off my mortgage ...

without ever claiming a penny in 'benefits' (I don't do 'benefits', you can

keep your 'benefits', we're not interested in your poxy 'benefits', okay? T'as

compris ?). I did six months in a BT call centre to help get through the

depression, I worked as a language assistant in France twice (Rennes,

Valenciennes), I rented out my old studio, i.e. flat and shop (I still do, the five-

year shop renewal has just been signed), I rented out my home (and had it

somewhat trashed), I got into academic proofreading (masters' dissertations,

PhDs, book manuscripts). I never get rich but I always manage perfectly well, it's

3

a self-employed mindset, a family trait, we pay our way. No benefits sought or

wanted.

So these days, after starting with nothing material, I own outright my house,

shop and flat – in a nice village where the doctors live. My ex-wife came out of it

very nicely too. My rental income nearly satisfies the income threshold, similarly

my proofreading income – just sitting on the settee at home with Sasha my

Dalmatian (she's a dog, not a cat) – my two sons being long gone. And we will

need nothing like the threshold income to live on (in Lancashire, not London) as I

pay zero rent or mortgage – I have no housing costs, just the usual bills. Clearly

I/we don't qualify for any benefits ... and to remind you: we don't want any

benefits, okay?

According to your staff in Bangkok, when an application is received with

insufficient documentation they claim normally to contact the applicant and give

them a timescale to supply what is missing. Well they didn't do that in my wife's

case, or her friend's (as in TB testing) case, they just refused them. It is of course

at that point, and only at that point, that your 'helpful' staff (as if) specify exactly

what is required, i.e. exactly what is missing – a legal requirement no doubt. I

submitted an FOI request in relation to this and I think the recent reply

(attached, 25960) is quite illuminating. They did it quite quickly too, I was

impressed with their speed and their courtesy – so I told them they did a good

job. I do peculiar things like that when people are nice to me and treat me/us

with respect.

It seems that if you do 'allow' applicants the opportunity to submit more

documents the most you 'allow' them is ten days. In my case I had to organise a

lot of documents (you don't seem to like someone who doesn't draw a regular

salary, outside your experience perhaps, though I won't suddenly be made

redundant, you know?), and they were in Leicester at 8.06am just 23 days after

my wife made the long journey from Borabue ... to be refused. You do frequently

make applicants make very long journeys to collect refusals in person, don't you?

Do you not think that that is rather sadistic – hit them with a very depressing

refusal when they are already tired and thus vulnerable? Do some of the VFS

staff enjoy that scenario too, when the emotions erupt and the tears flow? Thais

have emotions too, 'they' are people, just like 'us'. And when you advise

4

'refusees' they can appeal, the most you 'allow' is 28 days. But then of course

FTT can take weeks to do not a lot (in our case five weeks), and Bangkok can

have much longer, 16-19 weeks (much more than it takes to process a whole

visa application), to do even less. How on earth do you justify that glaring

discrepancy?

For the appeal I was expected to produce a copy of the deeds to my old premises

(imagine submitting original deeds to UKBA, too scary!), though two legal

opinions were that an official Land Registry entry was quite sufficient. It took

weeks to have that confirmed by email by Bangkok, and even then it was only

after the intervention of the wonderful Baroness Smith, and after I had spent a

long day driving 100+ miles to 'borrow' my deeds (having tracked them down)

and do 200+ scans, just in case, as advocated by Lord Avebury. On that occasion

Bangkok obstructed me. On other occasions they have: insulted me (when

they initially refused my then fiancée a visit visa they sneered at what they

thought was a derisory amount in my current bank account – my substantial

savings are kept in a deposit account – and withheld an original bank

statement, which I had to ask for later); lied to me (in August I think the

'Appendix 2' that my wife got useless 'help' with from one of the hangers-on near

VFS, Regent House, under duress from VFS staff, at a cost of £70, was wrong, so

I was advised by your staff that I could redo it – I did do that and your staff

denied having received it in the refusal, a blatant lie. I sent that information

again, to prove a point, but no reply of course); and ignored me (the repeated

requests I made in early January for a timescale to check through the appeal

documents). And the best bit is that if I want to complain I must do that by

sending an email to the same email address that is often the cause of the

complaint – no doubt to be ignored again? Oh do please beam me up Scotty!

In addition to a solicitor-certified official Land Registry entry, I had to submit

copies of: leases for my two tenants; a letter confirming registration for self-

employment; a NI statement; my last tax return (prepared by an ex-Inland

Revenue employee whose letter confirming my income was considered

insufficient for a visa application); an income tax statement; an additional set of

chartered accounts (they cost £384 and simply repeated, to within £20, what

was already done, a very abusive requirement if ever there was); proof of

ongoing income; and as a final insult, a full year's bank statements. You really

5

don't take anyone or anything on trust do you, not even a respectable chartered

accountant's accounts? Mon Dieu, j'y crois pas ! No wonder John Vine talks of a

'culture of disbelief'. As stated above, I did all that in just three weeks – some

straightforward, some difficult. Why? Because I'm married. I have a wife. I have

responsibilities (I support my wife and help support her mum). Oh yeah, and I

love my wife. I nearly forgot that bit amidst all this dingy dismal dross, this

cesspit of human misery that we wade through. Yes, we want to start our

married life together, scandalous isn't it? Are you married Mr Whiteman? If so

you should try spending a year apart. Your 'system' is booby-trapped to make us

starting our married life as difficult as possible – so we'll tell others not to bother?

Shameful and repugnant isn't it?

Mr Whiteman, in December, Bangkok processed seven settlement visa

applications, not exactly 'swamped' (I'm always amused by the threat from water

metaphor), there are no figures for January yet. You know as well as I that your

staff could check through those appeal documents in minutes, but they won't will

they, not until it's near the court deadline, when they 'must to do that'. Or if they

have already checked through them then they will sit on their response until the

deadline no doubt. Perhaps they want to 'teach me/us a lesson', for daring to

challenge them, pestering them, being critical, not cringing in a corner, refusing

to kowtow to the killjoy UKBA, being interviewed for Radio 4 'Today' and by Radio

London – for all the good that (and this missive?) did/will do. And I feel sure they

will try very, very, very hard to find some flaw in my wife's appeal so they can

delay issuing a visa for many more months – i.e. after a court hearing and the

two months they are then allowed to issue a visa. After I turn 60 and my wife

turns 45. Marital bliss? No, enforced separation.

You give some information on the website about processing times for visa

applications, but there are no statistics for what should be a very simple,

straightforward and quick perusal of documents referred back by Leicester, as

used to be the case I believe. Why is that? You see we have already waited

many, many times Mr Whiteman: for the English test, for the TB tests, for the

refusal, for FTT to open an envelope and charge me another £140 (that's over

£1,000 in fees for doing not a lot, plus all the other costs incurred, approaching

two grand in total I dare say), and now for Bangkok, eventually, to reply to the

court. This all seems designed to rip us off and wear us down. Truly, it's a

6

#settlementvisanightmare, a very sad reflection on the UK in 2012-13. But what

it does is make us all the more determined, stoical even, to see this nasty

pernicious process, this blatant abuse of power, through to the bitter end.

However hard you may try Mr Whiteman, your cold, cruel, calculated and cynical

system will not prevent us having our married life together, via the Surinder

Singh route if necessary, d'accord ? Note that I will never, ever, forget – or

forgive – the truly appalling way we have been treated by your agency, 'a

deeply shameful event in British history' (nice phrase David). I don't take kindly

to being treated like something someone has stepped in.

What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. Part of your job is to

support genuine marriages, not to seek to destroy them. I suggest you

remember that Mr Whiteman.

And as for offering world-class service, Frank Carson never told one as good as

that. I've now been well and truly shafted by my ex-wife and by my own

government. Shame on you.

Yours sincerely,

Gerard Hearne MA.

7