Many migrants apply to remain in the UK having been here for significant periods of time, under the long residence rules. These entered the immigration rules and partially replaced the long residence “concession” some time ago. In essence the requirement under the rules is that a person who has been in the UK for ten years legally (with no absences abroad for more than 6 months), or for fourteen years unlawfully prior to enforcement action such as a notice of liability to removal “stopping the clock”, where there is no contrary “public interest” reason to the grant of leave, should receive settlement. 

However behind this apparently simple provision lies much more. For example, the Home Office did not immediately withdraw the “long residence” concession when the rule replaced it: this means that under the “ten year” rule short spells without leave to remain might not be fatal to an application made under that policy, given that there was a possibility of condoning short delays in submitting applications for leave to remain, at least until the policy was withdrawn in 2006. There was then a fallow period until spring 2009 when the “gap in residence” policy reappeared in a new form, by which short and innocent gaps in “continuous lawful residence” could be condoned such as to prevent the failure of an otherwise viable “long residence” application. It incorporates various discretions: (a) a presumption of a single waiver of a short overstay of no more than 10 days; (b) a waiver of a single overstay of greater than 10 days where this is adjudged to be due to extenuating reasons; (c) a presumption against waiver of multiple gaps given this tends to show a lack of commitment to lawful residence. It was discussed by the Tribunal in SA Bangladesh.  From time to time HJT Training run a course on Home Office policies: discover more next time we do so.

You can obtain an extensive set of Home Office policies in all areas of immigration law from HJT Training.