Captain Tom Foundation ordered to demolish spa complex built using charity’s name

Captain Tom Moore could be described as the totemic figure of the Covid lockdown period in the UK. Raising millions of pounds for NHS charities by walking laps of his garden, one of the defining images of the first lockdown was the uniform-adorned 99-year-old and his walking frame. Captain Tom became a global news story overnight, and his efforts were celebrated as the embodiment of the spirit and determination of the British public during the pandemic. He would go on to be knighted by Queen Elizabeth II, before passing away in February 2021 aged 100.

Before he died, the Captain Tom Foundation would be launched in his name. His daughter, Hannah Ingram-Moore, and her husband would become trustees of the charity in February 2021. The charity made Hannah Ingram-Moore an interim CEO, where she earned £85,000. It has come under intense scrutiny for its high costs relative to its charitable grants, leading to a statutory inquiry by the Charity Commission which began in June 2022.

This takes us up to the present day, where Ingram-Moore and her husband have lost a planning application appeal for a spa complex in their garden which was built using the charity’s name. They have also been given three months to demolish the structure by Central Bedfordshire Council.

Keep reading to learn more about the case and the lessons that can be learned for charities like the Captain Tom Foundation.

Background

The building on the grounds of the family home originally gained planning permission in August 2021 for an L-shaped building to be used for foundation activities and housing memorabilia.

However, a revised planning application was made in February 2022 for a C-shaped building. This included a spa pool, toilets, as well as a kitchen for private use. The justification for the building by Ingram-Moore and her family was that the new building would allow “Captain Tom’s story to be enjoyed by the public”. They also suggested that the spa pool would be opened up for rehabilitation sessions to be enjoyed by elderly people once or twice a week. However, there were no clear details regarding how the plans would work in practise.

This version of the building was refused planning permission by the Council, leading to the planning authority issuing an enforcement notice on 16^th March 2023 requiring the unauthorised building to be demolished. This enforcement notice required the demolition of the detached single storey building, the removal of the building materials from the land, as well as the restoration of the land to its former condition prior to the building being constructed.

An appeal was subsequently filed under section 174(2) (a),(e),(f),(g) of the Town and Country Planning Act, however ground (e) was subsequently withdrawn. The remaining grounds relate to:

1. (a) The effect of the ground on the Old Rectory (a Grade II listed building), the character and appearance of the area, and the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, having regard to outlook

2. f) That the requirements of the notice exceed what is necessary to achieve its purpose

3. g) That the time given to comply with the requirements of the notice is too short

Why were these grounds of appeal unsuccessful? Let’s find out.

Why did the appeal against the planning decision fail?

There was one key reason why the ground (a) appeal for the unauthorised building failed. The scale and massing of the building caused harm to the Old Rectory; the Grade II listed building the family lived in. The inspector argued that conditions would not be able to overcome the harm to the building. Despite this, the planning inspector determined that it was not demonstrated that there was unacceptable harm to “either the character and appearance of the area or local residents”. This was in relation to the living conditions of the local residents in terms of outlook.

Both grounds (f) and (g) also failed. In the case of ground (f) the appellants failed to specify lesser steps which would overcome the objections to the development. However, the requirement to restore the land to its former condition before the building was constructed was removed from the enforcement notice. The reason for this is that the appellants interpreted the notice to mean that they would be required to re-instate the tennis court which preceded the L-shaped building.

For the ground (g) appeal, it was determined that the actual removal of the building (rather than what happens before and after this) should take no more than three months. This was despite the appellants originally arguing that they believed it would take a year to demolish the building, source the appropriate contractors and to leave the site in a fit condition.

The Executive Member for Planning and Development, Councillor Mary Walsh, said:

“Naturally, we are pleased that the Planning Inspector has dismissed this appeal and upheld the council’s requirement that the building is demolished. We have a duty to protect the appearance and setting of heritage assets such as the Old Rectory and our decision making is guided by national and local policies. In this case, the Inspector agreed with the council that the proposed use of the building was not justified and that, by virtue of its size and appearance, caused sufficient harm to warrant its removal.

We will always take robust enforcement action when it is appropriate to do so. Our next steps are to monitor compliance with the enforcement notice and expect the building to be demolished within three months, as set out in the Inspector’s decision.”

Our thoughts

This is a case which clearly demonstrates the importance of conforming to the original planning permission. In this instance, the family of Captain Tom decided to considerably alter what was notionally meant to be a meeting place for the Captain Tom Foundation by adding a spa and kitchen.

Further issues which are not covered by the planning inspector’s decision arise over the blurred lines between the family and the Captain Tom Foundation. While the Ingram-Moores applied for planning permission using their own name, they also used the charity’s name and logo, stating that the building was intended for the charity. This raises potential IP/trademark complications as the trademarks are registered under Club Nook Ltd, a private company they had set up.

An investigation was launched over a year ago by the Charity Commission in relation to conflicts of interest between businesses owned by the Ingram-Moores and their charity, the Captain Tom Foundation. There are also concerns over mismanagement and compliance with charity law. It now seems that the Foundation will not exist for much longer, with family lawyer Scott Stemp stating: “It’s not news to anybody that the foundation, it seems, is to be closed down following an investigation by the Charity Commission.”

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

20 year residence appeal – refusal to accept tribunal decision leads to win

20 years is a long period for an individual. Our team has assisted many clients with their 20-year long residence application, with people seeking to obtain legal immigration status in the UK after being in the UK for such a long period of time.

We were instructed by a client that had arrived in the UK in 2000. He instructed us to apply for leave to remain on the basis of 20-year Long Residence, on his behalf. Although this client provided plenty of documents to prove his continuous residence in the UK from 2000, the Home Office refused his application.

We believed that the decision was wholly wrong as our client had genuinely been in the UK for over 20 years and therefore we appealed the decision. Keep reading to learn more about why we were successful with this 20 year residence appeal.

Appeal

After lodging the appeal against the refusal of our client’s application, we represented this client in the First-tier Tribunal, primarily challenging the decision’s legality under Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998. We stated that the client was relying on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, citing his health and long-term residency in the UK (18 years at the time of application and over 20 years at the time of the hearing), to show that a refusal would breach his right to a private life and that there would be significant barriers in his reintegration into China.

Understandably our client did not have documentary evidence for every year that he had been in the UK illegally. However, he did have witnesses who gave evidence as to his residence.

The judge was not satisfied with the lack of documentary evidence and believed that the witnesses were not credible. The Judge gave much weight to the fact that the Home Office had conducted a home visit a few years ago and the client was not there. The Judge then concluded that the client had not been in the UK resident since 2000.

Permission to Appeal

Following receipt of the appeal determination, we believe the judge erred. The reason for this is that we felt adequate reasons were not given as to why the Judge concluded that there were intervening years during which our client was not present in the UK.

We argued that it should be considered that producing documentary evidence for individuals who live unlawfully in the UK for lengthy periods can be challenging. Therefore, a lack of evidence covering each year does not necessarily invalidate a claim of having been present during the relevant periods.

We argued that the Judge did not give adequate reasons as to why it was decided that little weight would be given to the client’s witnesses.

Permission was granted to appeal. The Upper Tribunal agreed that errors had been made and the appeal was scheduled to be reheard.

New Appeal Hearing

At the new appeal hearing, the client’s witnesses attended again, and the case was heard from the start this time by a different Judge. The Home Office case was the same, that is to say that the client has not been in the UK continuously since 2000 as there was years not accounted for.

We argued that the disputed years represented a minority of the client’s total residence in the UK.

The Judge agreed that the balance of the evidence is that it is more likely than not that the appellant has been present throughout each of the disputed years. He has resided in the UK continuously since 2003. The disputed years represent a minority of the appellant’s total residence in the UK.

Accordingly, the client was granted leave to remain.

The conclusion

Our client was delighted that his case was finally successful.

This case highlights the importance of ensuring that a decision should not just be accepted. Any decision needs to be carefully reviewed to ascertain whether it has been considered fairly and in accordance with the law. In our client’s case it had not, and therefore should we not have challenged this our client would not have leave to remain today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Trainee Solicitors begin training contracts with Lisa’s Law

We are delighted to share the news that two exceptional members of our team have officially begun their training contracts on their journey to becoming solicitors. This underlines our ongoing commitment to nurturing talent within the company.

Lisa’s Law’s Managing Director, Chuanli Ding, expressed his excitement:

“I am very pleased to see Stephanie and Heidi progress from legal assistants to trainee solicitors. They have both demonstrated remarkable dedication, client care and business awareness; the fundamental virtues a successful solicitor needs to possess. I am confident that they will continue to thrive in their career development.”

We look forward to Heidi and Stephanie completing their training contracts with us, as well as continuing to provide excellent service for their clients at Lisa’s Law.

Heidi

Heidi joined us in December 2022.

Born and raised in Sabah, Malaysia, Heidi did her LLB, LPC and BTC in Birmingham.

Whilst she was in Birmingham, Heidi initially worked as a legal assistant, then as a paralegal at a boutique Chinese law firm for 3 – 4 years. She speaks English, Mandarin, and Bahasa Malaysia (Malay language).

Stephanie

Stephanie joined in November 2022.

Stephanie holds a degree in Asian and International Studies from the City University of Hong Kong and subsequently completed the Graduate Diploma in Law and the Legal Practice Course both at the University of Law.

Before joining Lisa’s Law, Stephanie worked as a legal intern for Zhong Lun Law Firm in London, where she assisted in the purchase and sale of residential property transactions. She will be focusing on Property Law at Lisa’s Law.

Stephanie is also fluent in English, Cantonese and Mandarin.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

No Recourse to Public Funds Lifted! UK Immigrants may access benefits in the future

No recourse to public funds (NRPF) is a not a new thing for migrants in the UK, and always appears on their BRPs. For those with ‘No Public Funds’ on their BRP, they have no recourse to public funds and are not able to claim most benefits, tax credits or housing assistance that are paid by the state.

Previously, the Home Office approach had been to only consider lifting the NRPF condition in family life, private life and British National overseas (‘BNO’) cases. However, benefits remain unavailable to the majority of migrants, including the large numbers of students who come to the UK. Since many of them are likely to be on unstable low incomes, the lack of welfare and housing support makes living in the UK difficult for them.

However, that restriction no longer persists. The Home Office has recently released a new policy directive detailing the circumstances in which NRPF conditions will be lifted for those in the UK on student leave or as dependants of students, based on a fresh judgement by the High Court.

Let’s take a look at the case in question, and why the court made their judgment.

Background

PA, a Ghanaian national, arrived in the UK as a dependent on her ex-husband’s student visa but was subsequently abandoned by him. She later gave birth to NA, whose father was not PA’s ex-husband. Since NA’s father had settled status in the UK at the time of NA’s birth, NA was granted a British passport.

PA supported herself and NA as a single mother through work, but they faced financial difficulties. The defendant initially granted PA a fee waiver to apply for a visa under the family life route based on her relationship with NA. While this application was pending, their circumstances worsened. PA promptly applied to remove the NRPF condition from her student dependant visa. However, the Home Office initially refused to consider PA’s NRPF application, citing an inability to alter the conditions of her leave. PA issued judicial review proceedings against this decision and the related policies.

After obtaining permission for judicial review and expediting the claim, the Secretary of State for the Home Department (SSHD) made several crucial decisions. These included revoking NA’s British passport, refusing PA’s family life application because NA was no longer recognized as a British citizen, and maintaining the NRPF condition. PA appealed the family life refusal and applied to amend their grounds for judicial review to target the most recent NRPF refusal decision.

Section 3 of Immigration Act 1971

Section 3(1) of the Immigration Act 1971 (IA 1971) empowers the Secretary of State to grant limited leave to enter or remain in the UK to persons who require it. IA 1971, Section 3(2)(c)(ii) provides that the Secretary of State may grant limited leave to enter or remain subject to the NRPF condition. However, this statute does not state the circumstances in which the NRPF condition applies.

While the Immigration Rules provide that the NRPF condition should be lifted where (i) the person is destitute or imminently destitute; (ii) there are significant child welfare considerations; or (iii) there are other exceptional circumstances, presently, those exceptions only apply to persons on family, private life or BNO visas.

Court opinion

During the substantive judicial review, the judgement approved two declarations that were agreed by both sides. Firstly, the Secretary of State retains a discretion to lift or not impose the NRPF condition on a person’s grant of limited leave to remain. Secondly, it was unlawful for the Secretary of State to fail to adequately identify for caseworkers the statutory discretion to lift the NRPF condition for those on student visas.

The court held the following in relation to some of the declarations presented by claimants:

1. The Secretary of State retains a discretion to lift or not impose the NRPF condition on a person’s grant of limited leave to remain, including for persons with leave other than on family, private life and BNO routes.

2. The Secretary of State’s initial decision refusing to consider PA’s application to lift the NRPF condition was unlawful because it did not recognise the statutory discretion which applies irrespective of an applicants’ visa type.

3. Thirdly, the Secretary of State’s failure to adequately identify for caseworkers the statutory discretion to lift the NRPF condition for those on student visas was unlawful.

4. Even if the Immigration Rules do not refer to the Secretary of State’s discretion to lift the NRPF condition from a grant of limited leave to remain (as with the student visa provisions), the Secretary of State nevertheless retains the statutory discretion to lift or not impose the NRPF condition and she must consider requests to lift the NRPF condition from applicants on any type of visa.

The above is a summary of the court’s judgement.

Lastly, the court noted the claimants’ other challenges were superseded by the Secretary of State ‘s issuing of the new policy, according to which, the Secretary of State promptly granted NS access to public funds.

In the end, the Secretary of State agreed to reconsider NA’s application for a British passport. On the second day of the hearing, the Secretary of State granted NA access to public funds and the parties reached a settlement.

Our comments

The approval of this case is definitely good news for immigrants who need more support from the public funds, opening up the possibility for more visa holders to apply to lift the NRPF condition from their leave to remain. What’s truly remarkable is that this opportunity isn’t limited to specific visa types; even immigrants with student visas can benefit from it.

The judgment also underscores the government’s responsibility, calling on them to provide clear policy guidance to ensure that statutory rights are correctly applied. Following the judgement, the Secretary of State to publish a new interim policy, ‘OPI 1415’, outlining how such applications should be considered, by reference to child welfare, destitution and whether applicants can be reasonably expected to return to their home country.

The approval of this case is a significant step forward in securing the rights for immigrants in the UK, offering them a long-awaited opportunity to improve their lives and visa conditions.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill – is this the end of leasehold as we know it?

A new law on leasehold reform was announced in the King’s Speech with the potential to affect millions in the UK. Leaseholds have come under intense scrutiny in recent times, with leasehold properties often subject to punishing fees related to extending their leases, service charges, ground rent or purchasing a freehold.

Leaseholds differ from freeholds because while owning a freehold means that you own both the property and the land it occupies outright, a leasehold essentially means that you only own the property for a specified period of time. Once this lease expires, the property returns to the freeholder. The cost of extending a leasehold is often highly expensive, however extending a property is usually necessary as properties lose a significant amount of value once they go below 80 years.

Those who are hoping for the eradication of the leasehold system will be disappointed, as the leasehold system is likely to be revised rather than abolished. The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill is set to ban leaseholds for new houses, but not flats, meaning that the vast majority of leaseholds will not be covered. According to the most recent data, an estimated 4.98m properties are classed as leasehold dwellings in England, equivalent to 20% of English housing stock. 70% of these nearly 5 million properties are flats.

The Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Secretary, Michael Gove, has previously described the leasehold system as unfair and outdated. However, does this mean that the government will abolish the system entirely through the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill? Keep reading to find out.

Ban on new leasehold houses

As mentioned, the government has said that it will ban leaseholds for new houses. This represents roughly 30% of leasehold properties. However, it is worth noting that the proportion of new-build houses which are sold as leaseholds fell from a 15% high in 2016 to a tiny proportion of just 1% by December 2022. It is important to point out that this reform will only be for new houses. As a small number of houses are sold as leasehold now anyway, this is hardly the seismic reform many have been hoping for.

But what about those who already live in leasehold houses? This could make it very difficult for them to sell these increasingly rare and undesirable properties. Furthermore, there was no announcement on banning leasehold flats, which make up the majority of leaseholds (around 70%).

Freehold purchase

The ease of purchasing the freehold of a property will also be made easier by the prospective reform. Currently, if a group of leaseholders wish to purchase the freehold of the building, they are prevented from doing so if 25 per cent of the building is commercial. With the proposed reform, this will be extended to 50 per cent. This will make it much easier for those living in buildings with a commercial presence to purchase the freehold.

Another important announcement is that leaseholders will no longer have to wait two years before being able to extend their lease or purchase the freehold. At the moment, this acts as a significant restriction for properties which have close to 80 years left on the lease.

Ground rent

The government has already made extensive reform to ground rent, which we covered in a previous article. You can learn more about the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act in our article here. While this legislation prevented ground rent from being charged for most new leases, this is not currently the case for existing leases.

This means that if someone was to buy a new flat with a new lease, it won’t have ground rent, or if you extend your lease, it either won’t have ground rent or the ground rent won’t increase. While the government has not included an abolition of ground rent in the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Bill, as of January 2024 it is currently consulting on capping ground rent for existing leaseholders.

Standard lease extension length

Further measures include changes to the standard contract length extension of a lease. This currently stands at 90 years for flats and 50 years for houses as per the Leasehold Reform Housing and Urban Development Act 1993. This can cause problems for those trying to sell their leasehold property unless they pay to extend the lease by a further 90 years. In good news for leaseholders, the government have pledged to increase the standard contract lease extension to 990 years, which would give leaseholders security without having to worry about extending their lease.

In reality, it may be easier for leaseholders to purchase the freehold of their property rather than choosing to extend the lease by 990 years in many cases.

Marriage value

The legislation would also reportedly remove marriage value. In plain words, marriage value is the amount of money a leaseholder has to pay the freeholder when they require their lease to be extended if its term is less than 80 years. The landlord’s argument is that when the lease is extended, the value of their freehold will be reduced (as it will be subject to a longer lease) and that their ground rent will be reduced as well.

On the other hand, the leasehold’s value is increased, therefore the leaseholder needs to pay the landlord compensation. In practice, many leaseholders feel that such compensation tends to be very high and unreasonable. If the marriage value is removed, it would help to make it much cheaper to extend a lease.

Right to manage

Finally, another touted reform is extending leaseholders right to manage. This was originally introduced by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002. Right to Manage (RTM) enables some leasehold property owners to take over the management of the building without the landlord’s agreement. They must also meet certain requirements to do so. The Leasehold Knowledge Partnership has found that residents who take over the running of their property save an average cost of 20%. As well as taking control of the communal areas of their building, the right to hire and fire property managers will also reportedly be extended.

Our thoughts

This reform will be welcome news for many who either own a leasehold or are thinking of buying a leasehold property. Nevertheless, many would argue that it does not go far enough by excluding flats from much of the new legislation.

It is also worth pointing out that there is now only a relatively short window of time for the legislation to complete its passage through parliament. The last UK general election was held on 17^th December 2019, meaning that parliament must be dissolved by 17^th December 2024.

If the legislation is introduced to parliament by the end of 2023, this only gives roughly a year for it to complete its passage through parliament. Due to the complicated nature of the property industry, this may seem optimistic. The first Leasehold Reform Bill took over a year to go through, and this only related to new leases, which are much simpler than existing leases. It is also not clear what form the bill will take by the time it has made its way through parliament due to the amendments which are often made to such bills.

Even if the Conservatives were to lose the next general election, it seems likely that there would still be further reform regardless of the party in charge. Labour have responded to the news about the government’s leasehold reform plans by saying that Labour would “fundamentally and comprehensively reform the leasehold system”. This would include a system to replace private leasehold flats with commonhold among other measures.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Health and Care Worker Visa FAQs

The Health and Care Worker visa allows medical professionals to work in the UK in an eligible job within the NHS, for an NHS supplier, or in adult social care. We have covered the Health and Care Worker Visa in more detail in a recent article specifically about the visa. Click here to read.

However, in this article, we have highlighted some of the most common questions we receive in relation to Health and Care Worker visa applications. If you have any further questions about this visa, please don’t hesitate to get in touch with us today.

1. Q: Can I take on additional work or a second job?

A: Yes, you are. In February 2023, the Home Office removed the 20-hour cap on supplementary work for sponsored workers with a Health and Care Visa. Health and Care Visa holders are now permitted to take on a second, or additional, work or employment while in the UK, provided they continue to work in their sponsored role for their sponsor. If the worker already possesses a Health and Care visa, they will not be required to file for a visa change or notify the Home Office.

2. Q: Are care workers eligible for the Health & Care visa?

A: It depends. Only workers employed in eligible roles are eligible for the Health and Care visa. Carers were added to the Shortage Occupation List in February 2022, but this status remains subject to government review and change.

3. Q: Can I combine other visas to apply for settlement in the UK via a five-year route?

A: Health and care workers may be eligible to apply for ILR if they have lived in the UK for five years under this visa or in combination with other permitted work visa categories. You will be able to include time spent with lawful status under any combination of the following visas:

Any Tier 1 visa – except Tier 1 (Graduate Entrepreneur)
Skilled Worker or Tier 2 (General)
Health and Care
Scale-up Worker
T2 Minister of Religion or Tier 2 (Minister of Religion)
International Sportsperson, T2 Sportsperson or Tier 2 (Sportsperson)
Innovator
Global Talent
Representative of an Overseas Business

4. Q: Do my dependants need to pay Immigration Health Surcharge?

A: No, Health and care workers and their dependants are all exempt from the UK Immigration Health Surcharge.

5. Q: How could I know if my salary meets the requirements?

A: The standard salary requirement for this visa is at least £26,200 per year or £10.75 per hour. If the ‘going rate’ for your job is higher than both of these, you’ll usually need to be paid at least the going rate. You can check the specific salary requirement for your job by checking your occupation code.

6. Q: How can I know if my employer is a UK approved employer for this visa?

A: The NHS, organisations providing medical services to the NHS, and organisations providing adult social care are usually approved UK health and care sector employers.

If your employer is not currently approved, they can apply for a sponsor licence if they’re eligible.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Health and Care Worker Visa Guide

A Health and Care Worker visa allows medical professionals to come to or stay in the UK to do an eligible job with the NHS, an NHS supplier or in adult social care. The Health and Care visa is integrated into the Skilled Worker route.

The Health and Care Worker visa allows applicants to benefit from expedited entry, lower visa fees, and specialized support for bringing families to the UK. The UK Health and Care Worker visa holders and their dependants are also exempted from paying the Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS).

This guide will briefly explain the general requirements that must be met to apply for Health and Care Worker visa. All requirements must be strictly met otherwise the application will be refused.

What are the requirements?

To qualify for a Health and Care Worker visa, you must have a confirmed job offer before your application and:

be a qualified doctor, nurse, health professional or adult social care professional
work in an eligible health or social care job
work for a UK employer that’s been approved by the Home Office
have a ‘certificate of sponsorship’ from your employer with information about the role you’ve been offered in the UK
be paid a minimum salary – how much depends on the type of work you do

Salary requirements

You’ll usually need to be paid at least £20,960 per year or £10.75 per hour. If the ‘going rate’ for your job is higher than both of these, you’ll usually need to be paid at least the going rate.

Each occupation code has its own annual going rate. You will need to meet different salary requirements depending on your job.

You can be paid between 70% and 90% of the usual going rate for your job if your salary is at least £20,960 per year and you meet one of the following criteria:

your job is in a shortage occupation
you’re under 26, studying or a recent graduate, or in professional training
you have a science, technology, engineering or maths (STEM) PhD level qualification that’s relevant to your job (if you have a relevant PhD level qualification in any other subject your salary must be at least £23,580)
you have a postdoctoral position in a scientific role

Knowledge of English requirements

You must prove you have passed an approved English language test with at least CEFR level B1 in reading, writing, speaking and listening, or have an academic qualification that was taught in English and is recognised by UK NARIC as being equivalent to a UK bachelor’s degree, master’s degree or PhD.

However, do not need to prove your knowledge of English if you’re a doctor, dentist, nurse or midwife and you’ve already passed an English Language assessment that is accepted by the relevant regulated professional body.

You do not need to prove your knowledge of English if you are a national of one of the majority English-speaking countries listed below:

Maintenance requirements

You must have at least £1,270 in your bank account to show you can support yourself in the UK. Your partner and children must have a certain amount of money available to support themselves while they’re in the UK. The maintenance requirement is £285 for an adult partner, £315 for one child, and £200 for each additional child.

You will need to have had the money available for at least 28 days in a row. Day 28 must be within 31 days of applying for this visa.

You don’t have to prove you have money to support yourself if:

you’ve been in the UK with a valid visa for at least 12 months
your employer can cover your costs during your first month in the UK

What if you cannot meet all the requirements?

It may be possible to still apply for a Health and Care Worker visa if you do not meet all the requirements. Please contact us to find out more information.

Health and Care Worker visa or Skilled Worker visa?

Although the Health and Care Worker visa is part of the Skilled Worker route and shares the same standard Skilled Worker application form, there are differences between the Skilled Worker and Health and Care visas.

The Skilled Worker visa open to workers in eligible occupations across many areas, whereas the Health and Care Worker Visa is specifically limited to medical professionals and individuals working in eligible health and care roles.

If you are not taking up a job role in one of the prescribed occupations for a designated organisation, you will not be eligible for the Health and Care Worker visa, although it remains open to applicants who fall outside the visa requirements to apply under the Skilled Worker visa, provided they meet the visa criteria.

Compared to the Skilled Worker visa, the Health and Care route has many advantages over the Skilled Worker route, including faster processing of visa applications, lower application fees and exemption from the Immigration Health Surcharge.

What is the Process?

Before you apply, you need to have a job offer from an approved UK employer. You need to ask for the 4-digit occupation code from your employer and check if your job is eligible for this visa. Your employer will assign you a certificate of sponsorship (Cos), which you will need for your visa application.

Once you application has been submitted, you will need to book a biometric appointment at a visa centre or enrol your biometrics via an ID app. You will not be able to submit any further documents after your biometrics have been submitted and your application will be under consideration.

Presently, the Home Office will take up to 3 weeks from your biometric submission date to decide an application unless there is a delay.

There are a number of reasons why an application can be delayed, but most commonly it can failure to provide all the required documentation, and / or the need to attend an in-person interview. Doing everything right in your application increases the chances of the approval of your application within a short waiting time.

To help avoid such potential delays, please contact us to assist with your Health and Care Worker visa applications, ensuring that avoidable delays, and refusals are dealt with at the application stage.

Health and Care Worker Visa – Granted

Should your application be granted you will be granted limited leave to remain for a period depending on your application.

You will be eligible to live in the UK within this time. As well as this, you will be able work and take on additional work in certain circumstances and study in the UK.

You cannot apply for most benefits (public funds), or the State Pension.

Health and Care Worker Visa – Refused

You’ll get a letter or an email explaining why your application was refused. Your refusal letter will explain if you have the right to either an administrative review or an immigration decision appeal

Extension

Once you are granted Health and Care Worker visa, you can extend your visa as many times as you like as long as you still meet the eligibility requirements. You can apply for renewal of your leave to remain 28 days prior to the expiry of your leave to remain.

If you change jobs or employer, you will need to apply to update your Health and Care Worker visa.

Is fast track available?

Please note that Priority Service and Super Priority Service are available for Health and Care Worker visa, where you will receive a decision within 5 working days or the next working day. The Home Office fee is £500.00 for a decision within 5 working days or £1000.00 for a decision on the next working day.

Fees

When you apply for a Health and Care Worker visa, you and your dependants will need to pay the application fee. You and your dependants are exempt from having to pay the healthcare surcharge.

Please note that when applying for entry clearance, the actual fee paid may be higher due to payment being processed in the local currency.

When can you apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR)?

Health and care workers who have lived in the UK for 5 years on the visa, or in combination with other permitted work visa categories, are eligible to apply for settlement (also known as ‘indefinite leave to remain’).

Contact us today to start the Health and Care Worker Visa process

We at Lisa’s Law regularly assist in applying for Health and Care Worker visa applications both from abroad and within the UK. We will advise and represent you throughout the process. Contact us today to start the process.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Guide to the UK High Potential Individual Visa

The High Potential Individual visa is dedicated to attracting graduates from leading non-UK universities who have the potential to work in fields such as science, technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship. The aim of this route is to cement the UK’s reputation as a hub for technological advancement by attracting some of the best and brightest from across the world.

One of the most attractive elements of the High Potential Individual (HPI) visa is the fact that it allows international graduates to work in the UK without even needing a job offer. It therefore offers an excellent opportunity for international graduates.

To be eligible for this route, applicants must have either a bachelor’s or postgraduate degree qualification from one of the top global universities outside the UK. This list is published in the Global Universities List by the Home Office. It is compiled annually and consists of institutions that are included on an annual top 50 universities list. You can view that list here.

How long can I stay?

Permission to remain in the UK will be granted for a period of 2 years for applicants who hold a qualification equivalent to a UK Bachelor’s or Master’s level degree. This is increased to 3 years where the applicant holds a qualification equivalent to a UK PhD.

Once in the UK, the applicants will be able to freely look for jobs and work for UK companies. Although this route does not lead to settlement, applicants will be able to switch to other types of visas which lead to settlement. This includes the skilled worker visa, scale-up visas and others.

In addition, the applicants will also be able to bring their spouse and dependent children with them. Keep reading to learn more about this.

How to apply for a High Potential Individual Visa?

Like other visas, the HPI visa must be applied for online. However, the way you apply varies depending on whether you are outside the UK or inside the UK.

Applying from outside the UK

In order to be eligible for applying for a HPI visa, you must apply within five years of being awarded a qualification from one of the universities on the eligibility list.

You must also prove your identity and provide supporting documents as part of your application. This will vary based your type of passport and where you are from. Some applicants will have to go to a visa application centre to get a biometric residence permit, while others will be able to use the UK Immigration: ID Check app.

When you apply, it will be made clear what you need to do. Following these steps, it will usually take under 3 weeks for you to get a decision.

Switching to a High Potential Individual Visa

It may be possible for you to switch to a HPI visa if you’re in the UK and on a different type of visa. However, you cannot apply to switch to this visa if you are in the UK on the following visas:

Visit visa
Short-term student visa
Graduate visa
Parent of a Child Student visa
Seasonal worker visa
Domestic worker in a private household visa
On immigration bail
Because you were given permission to stay outside the immigration rules, for example on compassionate grounds

In order to apply for a HPI visa, you must leave the UK if you are on one of the above visas. You must also ensure that you apply before the expiry of your current visa.

Like when you are applying from outside the UK, you must also provide a range of documents such as:

a valid passport or other travel document that shows your identity and nationality
proof of your knowledge of English

You must also pay for Ecctis to check that your qualification is valid. Ecctis will send you a statement once they have checked your qualification which you will also need to provide as part of your application.

Finally, depending on our circumstances you may also need to provide:

Your biometric residence permit (BRP) or online proof of your immigration status
Proof of your relationship with your partner or children if they are applying with you
And your tuberculosis test results if you are from a listed country. See here.

Like if you were applying from outside the UK, you also need to prove your identity if you are switching to a HPI visa.

Following the submission of your application, you will usually receive a decision with 8 weeks.

Can my partner and children come?

If your partner and children are eligible, they can also apply to join you or stay in the UK as your dependants.

A dependent partner may be your spouse, civil partner, or unmarried partner. A dependent children may be your child under 18 or your child over 18 if they are currently in the UK as your dependent.

You must however need to prove the following for your partner and/or child respectively

Partner:

You are in a civil partnership/marriage which is recognised in the UK
Or, you have been living together in a relationship for at least 2 years when you apply

For your child:

live with you, unless they’re living away from home in full-time education – for example, at boarding school or university
not be married or in a civil partnership
You’ll need to provide evidence of their address, such as:
a bank statement
credit card bills
driving licence
NHS registration document
an official letter from their university or college

How much does a High Potential Individual Visa cost?

The fee for the HPI visa application is £880 as of April 2025. You will also need to pay the healthcare surcharge of £1035 for each year you are in the UK.

If you get a job in the public health and care sector sector after you pay the healthcare surcharge then you may be able to get a refund.

Finally, if you have been in the UK for less than one year, you will need to show that you have at least £1270 available unless you are exempt. If you have a partner and/or children, they will also need to prove they can support themselves in the UK.

If you are looking to apply for a High Potential Individual Visa, don’t hesitate. Contact Lisa’s Law today!

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

Manston Immigration Centre admonished in watchdog report

By Victor Falcon Mmegwa

A report on the Manston immigration centre has seen it be described as “unacceptable” by an independent watchdog that monitors the centre. The Manston immigration centre originally opened in February 2022 to process migrants who arrived in the UK on small boats. It is designed for around 1,000 people to stay for one day.

The centre is located on the former Defence Fire Training and Development Centre next to Manston Airport about 20 miles north of Dover. Security, identity, and health checks are conducted on the migrants before they are moved into accommodation. Migrants who do not pass the checks are moved to immigration detention centres.

What are the problems with Manston?

Representatives from the Independent Monitoring Boards (IMB) made a total of 85 visits in 2022 to three Home Office processing centres for small boat arrivals – Manston, Western Jet Foil and Kent Intake Unit.

The IMB report found that each of the centres struggled to cope with an ever-increasing number of arrivals and identified serious concerns about the conditions in which people were being held. This was particularly the case at Manston immigration centre.

The report states: “At Manston, detained individuals were accommodated in marquees which we would describe as at best basic, at worst unsanitary and unacceptable.”

The local Conservative MP Roger Gale said there were around 4,000 migrants at the centre, which he described as overwhelmed. Despite this, some migrants are having to spend longer at the centre due to a lack of accommodation elsewhere.

Last autumn, the UK Health Security Agency warned that accommodation settings should be considered high-risk for infectious diseases. The Home Office suspected that a man’s death at the centre in November could have been caused by a diphtheria infection.

“Filthy conditions” at Manston

Furthermore, problems included filthy conditions, claims of assaults by guards, drug taking by guards, and the mass dumping at a central London station of asylum seekers who were moved away from Manston.

The report also stated that the army was drafted in to help with processing small boat arrivals alongside Home Office officials. Various contractors such as Mitie Care & Custody and Interforce were also used.

At first, small boat arrivals were sleeping on gym mats in the Manston marquees. However, the Home Office decided they were a fire risk and removed them, leaving people to sleep on the cold floor with just blankets to lie on. While asylum seekers were supposed to only be held in Manston for 24 hours, many were unlawfully detained there for longer. Indeed, the longest known case was of someone being held there for 43 days.

The report highlights problems with clothing. Some asylum seekers had to share coats as there weren’t enough to go around, a practice which the IMB feared could have spread scabies, a disease which was already common on the site. There was also not always suitable clothing available for young children and one instance saw a small child fall over due to wearing oversized clothing. The security guards did not always have suitable clothing and when the weather was cold and wet, they had to wrap themselves in bin bags to protect themselves from the elements.

Overcrowding at the Manston immigration centre is in part due to the backlog of asylum claims waiting to be processed, which totals almost 100,000. Whilst a rise in claims since 2019 has contributed to the backlog, a Home Affairs select committee report was published stating that antiquated IT systems, high staff turnover, and too few staff were contributing to the slow processing of claims.

Legal advice ignored

It has been reported that the Home Secretary Suella Braverman failed to act on legal advice that migrants and asylum seekers were being held at the site for an unlawful amount of time. It was also reported that Braverman had deliberately chosen not to sign off on hotels for Manston detainees to be transferred to in an attempt to reduce the £6.8 million a day government bill. A Home Office spokesperson denied that legal advice given to Braverman was ignored.

The Home Office have stated that they are grateful for the important work of the Independent Monitoring Board. Since the report, there have been significant improvements made to the Kent coast short-term holding facilities. This includes the transformation of medical services and facilities and the move to new more suitable accommodation at the Kent Intake Unit. The Home Office have also stated that the health and welfare of people in their care, and individuals working in these facilities, is of the utmost importance.

An immigration solicitor’s thoughts

Manston immigration centre is a processing centre. Therefore, no one should be held there more than 24 hours. I think the Home Office has broken the law by detaining people for weeks in appalling conditions, as highlighted in this article. More must be done for the necessary checks to be conducted on migrants and more must be done for asylum claims to be processed quickly. This will enable migrants to be moved into accommodation as quickly and safely as possible.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276, phone calls are operating as usual and will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

One year sentence not excessive for small boat asylum seekers, rules Court of Appeal

A recent case gives guidance for the courts on how asylum seekers who arrive in the UK via small boats should be sentenced.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has made ‘stopping the boats’ one of his five key priorities for 2023, but has recently suggested it may not be possible before the next election. The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 was introduced with the primary intention of preventing those who arrive via “irregular” or “unsanctioned” routes from claiming asylum by disqualifying them from consideration as refugees. The starting sentence for such an offence is 12 months’ imprisonment.

However, it is important to note that there are now very few safe and legal routes for asylum seekers. This means that many asylum seekers have no route to the UK other than by small boat.

What is the background to this case? Keep reading to learn more.

Background – R v Ginar [2023]

The individual in this case (R v Ginar 2023) is a Turkish national. Ginar travelled to the UK in 2023 hoping to claim asylum following the destruction caused by a major earthquake which destroyed his home. The political situation in the country was also difficult for him and his family.

He travelled with more than 50 other foreign nationals across the English Channel by a rigid inflatable boat. It was intercepted by UK Border Force in June 2023 and he was subsequently detained.

Following this, Mr Ginar pleaded guilty to contravening section 24 (D1) of the Immigration Act 1971. The amendments to this which Ginar was found in breach of were introduced in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022. Ginar was reportedly not aware that he was breaking the law and claimed he would not have travelled if he had known. He also claimed he was threatened with death by the people smugglers after seeing how overcrowded and dangerous the boat was.

Grounds for appeal

Mr Ginar was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment in August 2023. This was reduced to eight months following his guilty plea. He then applied for permission from the Court of Appeal to appeal his sentence. The basis for this appeal was on two grounds:

1. That irrelevant information was treated as an aggravating factor by the sentencing judge

2. That his sentence of 12 months reduced to eight was manifestly excessive

Regarding the first ground for appeal, the irrelevant information was the applicant’s immigration history. Mr Ginar had previously been through the UK asylum process in 2005 after being refused leave to enter. Despite his asylum application being refused, and an appeal dismissed, it appears that he stayed in the UK. After another application for leave to remain in 2013 that was refused, he left the UK in November 2015. The argument was made that it was not a criminal offence to enter the UK without valid entry clearance at the time of his previous immigration history.

The second ground of appeal relied on Mr Ginar’s first ground. Ginar argued that if the sentencing judge ignored his immigration history, there were no aggravating features in his case.

Decision

However, the court refused the appeal. They concluded that there was no arguable ground for challenging the decision or approach made in the sentencing of Mr Ginar. The court held that the aggravating and mitigations factors balanced each other out, leading to the sentence of 12 months.

They argued that the offence was aggravated by previous convictions and “a history of unsuccessful applications for leave to enter or remain or for asylum”. Even though the previous attempts did not amount to a criminal offence, the examples of previous failure made the attempt to arrive without valid entry clearance more egregious.

It was therefore held that the sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment reduced to eight months following a guilty plea was not ‘manifestly excessive’.

Our thoughts

The decision made by the Court of Appeal could be said to be a surprising one. Despite this, it does provide clarity on how the courts will approach criminal sentences for those convicted for the offence of arriving in the UK without entry clearance. While the court referred to safer alternative routes being available, as pointed out previously these are not available for the majority of asylum seekers. Instead, this is largely limited to schemes from specific countries. This includes Ukraine and to a lesser extent Afghanistan. Many Afghans continue to arrive via small boat.

With reports in the media that convicted criminals may avoid jail from this week because prisons are full, it could be seen as contentious for the government to prioritise the sentencing of asylum seekers who arrive in the UK via small boats.

Have questions about this article? Get in touch today!

Call us on 020 7928 0276. Our phone lines are open and we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.

Use the Ask Lisa function on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/ask-question/

For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.

James Cook

See Full Bio

News and Insights

Background

Why did the appeal against the planning decision fail?

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Appeal

Permission to Appeal

New Appeal Hearing

The conclusion

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Heidi

Stephanie

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Background

Section 3 of Immigration Act 1971

Court opinion

Our comments

Ban on new leasehold houses

Freehold purchase

Ground rent

Standard lease extension length

Marriage value

Right to manage

Our thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

1. Q: Can I take on additional work or a second job?

2. Q: Are care workers eligible for the Health & Care visa?

3. Q: Can I combine other visas to apply for settlement in the UK via a five-year route?

4. Q: Do my dependants need to pay Immigration Health Surcharge?

5. Q: How could I know if my salary meets the requirements?

6. Q: How can I know if my employer is a UK approved employer for this visa?

What are the requirements?

Salary requirements

Knowledge of English requirements

Maintenance requirements

What if you cannot meet all the requirements?

Health and Care Worker visa or Skilled Worker visa?

What is the Process?

Health and Care Worker Visa – Granted

Health and Care Worker Visa – Refused

Extension

Is fast track available?

Fees

When can you apply for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR)?

Contact us today to start the Health and Care Worker Visa process

How long can I stay?

How to apply for a High Potential Individual Visa?

Applying from outside the UK

Switching to a High Potential Individual Visa

Can my partner and children come?

How much does a High Potential Individual Visa cost?

What are the problems with Manston?

“Filthy conditions” at Manston

Legal advice ignored

An immigration solicitor’s thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Background – R v Ginar [2023]

Grounds for appeal

Decision

Our thoughts

Subscribe to our newsletter

Subscribe Newsletter Blog Sidebar