11

In 2009, I was banned for deception (I applied as a student/dependent and my sponsor’s tax document was deemed fake). My sponsor claims (still) that the document wasn’t fake and it was obtained from the appropriate authorities even if he used a broker (which he still uses till date).

Unfortunately, we never received the document back from the Visa Office (it was withheld) and could not ascertain the validity of the claim (we submitted the original copy).

I was not allowed to appeal and my attempt at an administrative review was not received at the consular. I also didn't have the funds to get a UK immigration lawyer to help with my case. After several failed attempts to get my case looked at, I simply concluded that I was a guinea pig of a flawed system in my own country.

November 30, 2019 made it 10 years. I have served my time, gained full employment and have a work related meeting coming up in our London office in March 2020 (In the past, I have missed several work opportunities due to the ban even if I was a student and knew nothing about the document).

I am Nigerian but was recently assigned to a project in a different country. Curious to know what my options are and general next steps after one has gone through the 10 year ban period.

I don’t want this to affect my career growth like it has done in the past couple of years.

Traveller
  • 33,186
  • 3
  • 52
  • 127
Divine26
  • 111
  • 5
  • 7
    If your ban has expired the next step is to apply for a visa, making sure your application is impeccable (possibly with the help of a qualified immigration lawyer if you can afford it). Reading this comprehensive answer https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/92121/uk-visa-refusal-on-v-4-2-a-c-and-sometimes-e should help. – Traveller Jan 07 '20 at 12:09
  • 2
    What's you nationality? – BritishSam Jan 07 '20 at 13:20
  • 4
    Was the document in fact fake? – phoog Jan 07 '20 at 14:50
  • 1
    @phoog Why does that matter now, given that the OP knew nothing about it at the time of application? – Patricia Shanahan Jan 07 '20 at 15:37
  • 1
    @PatriciaShanahan If the document was not in fact fake, the ban could have been overturned by demonstrating this. Now, there is no longer a ban, but the applicant has a history of deception. Showing that the document was genuine should erase this history of deception. However, there has been some recent jurisprudence concerning deception as it relates to documents supplied without the applicant's knowledge, so it may not be relevant: that may already have erased the history of deception. – phoog Jan 07 '20 at 15:44
  • @phoog a false document that the applicant was not aware of does not lead to a ban in the first place. The burden to prove lack of awareness is on the applicant of course. – uberqe Jan 07 '20 at 16:17
  • 1
    @uberqe "a false document that the applicant was not aware of does not lead to a ban in the first place": Do you have a basis for that assertion? As far as I'm aware, this principle was only established in the last two or three years. – phoog Jan 07 '20 at 21:13
  • 3
    @uberqe and how can you prove lack of awareness? I'd be extremely skeptical of anyone claiming to not know something they give me is a fake, especially in cases like this where the person handing over the document must have either produced it themselves or know the origin very well indeed. – jwenting Jan 08 '20 at 05:07
  • 1
    @jwenting not everyone presenting fake currency notes realize they are fake. The standard of proof is a balance of probabilities so the applicant has to prove that it is more likely than not that he was not aware. Evidence could be circumstantial, or a written statement from the sponsor/broker admitting that the OP did not know. – uberqe Jan 08 '20 at 10:52
  • @uberqe If I present fake currency I'm considered the source of that fake currency and charged with that if it is traced back to me. Those charges may be dropped if I can in turn trace it back to someone else and thus lead police to the printer, but that's about the only hope you have to not go to prison as a result. – jwenting Jan 08 '20 at 10:55
  • @jwenting no, that's not at all how it works. You can't be convicted of producing counterfeit banknotes simply because you have one in your possession. In every modern legal system, the presumption of innocence means that the prosecutor has to prove that you were actually involved in the production of the note for that charge to stick. Furthermore, in the US, for example, passing counterfeit notes is only a crime if there is "intent to defraud," so showing that you didn't know they were fake is a valid defense whether or not it's possible to identify the source of the counterfeit banknote. – phoog Jan 09 '20 at 05:32
  • @phoog strongly disagree. They will need to put someone in jail for this counterfeit money to close the case. If their only loose end is you - it will be entirely your (and your layer’s) job to find someone else to be responsible for the money, that’s how the police works. Tough and totally unjust. – Netherwire Dec 10 '22 at 14:59
  • @Netherwire you must not have had much experience with the US federal justice system. – phoog Dec 11 '22 at 01:09

1 Answers1

6

For refusals, the ECOs are required to provide a refusal letter stating why they believe you are not eligible for a visa. Since the ban has now expired, you cannot be refused under paragraph v3.6. However, your credibility has been dented and your application and your purported intentions will be more closely scrutinized.

You now need to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that you are eligible under the visitor rules published here: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-appendix-v-visitor-rules

You should explain the circumstances that led to the submission of false documents—short of an apology. If you can show on a balance of probabilities that you were not aware of the false documents, there would not have been a ban in the first place. If you can’t, tell them it was an error of judgment on your part and explain how your circumstances have changed for the better and why they should believe you now.

It would be a good idea to hire a UK-based solicitor. Good luck.

uberqe
  • 1,369
  • 1
  • 9
  • 14
  • 1
    "If you can show on a balance of probabilities that you were not aware of the false documents...": or that the document was not in fact false. – phoog Jan 07 '20 at 21:14
  • @phoog but it was sourced from the sponsor, and the whole sponsor thing is unexplained, and it could be that the entire context for the sponsorship is corrupt. Last thing you want is to prove the document is genuine but reveal an illegal purpose for the prior trip. Who knows; the OP never tells, and we never ask. – Harper - Reinstate Monica Jan 08 '20 at 21:50
  • @Harper-ReinstateMonica sure, all sorts of reasons might exist why proving that the document wasn't fake would be a bad idea. My point is only that proving that it wasn't fake at all is another way of beating the deception rap. In general, it is easier to prove something concrete like that than to prove something less tangible like knowledge or lack thereof. I've read many immigration appeals where the home office made completely unreasonable findings of deception. If that was the case here, it's probably easier to attack the original determination than to claim ignorance. – phoog Jan 09 '20 at 05:19