The End of the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) Grant Funding from 31st March 2026

On 11 February 2026, The Home Office confirmed that it will end grant funding for EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) support from 31 March 2026. The reason for this is reduced application volumes, simplified processes for converting pre‑settled status to settled status and automated extensions for pre‑settled status.

Written by Victor Falcon Mmegwa, Senior Associate Solicitor

The Home Office confirmed that they will maintain post‑March 2026 support via the UKVI (UK Visas and Immigration) Resolution Contact Centre, the UKVI EUSS Vulnerability team and Assisted Digital Service. This arrangement is in place for vulnerable applicants.

The Home Office also confirmed that planned curtailment of pre‑settled status due to excess absences does not justify continuing grant funding.

Concerns expressed by the IMA

The Independent Monitoring Authority (IMA) has expressed concern about the continued need for support for vulnerable individuals, late applicants, and those converting pre-settled status.

They have stated that these citizens may still need the assistance and the government has a responsibility to provide this. While some support arrangements will continue to be in place, the IMA are concerned that some citizens might fall through the net.

The IMA have stated that they will continue to work with the Home Office to understand how the arrangements to support those making applications to the EUSS will operate and how assurance will be provided that the level of service is sufficient and effective.

My thoughts

I agree with the IMA’s concerns in this matter. We have experienced clients requesting for our assistance and legal advice regarding the submission of late EUSS applications and converting their pre-settled status to settled status. To date, many applications are being made, which are now more complex due to the time that has passed since Brexit.

The government have a responsibility to assisting those who still need help with their application or their status or accessing their rights, for example: when applying for further education, seeking employment or accessing healthcare.

It is great to see that the IMA will continue to work with the Home Office to understand how the arrangements to support those making applications to the EUSS will operate and how assurance will be provided that the level of service is sufficient and effective. Hopefully this will lead to a positive outcome to ensure that citizens’ rights are protected.

If you require advice in relation to making a late EUSS application or converting your pre-settled status to settled status, please consult our Immigration Team at Lisa’s Law Solicitors today.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

FAQs on Will Drafting Under English Law

Do I need a Will?

Yes. Having a Will is important for several reasons:

Asset disposition – a Will ensures your assets are distributed in accordance with your wishes after your death. A professionally drafted Will takes your personal and financial circumstances into account and can help minimise the risk of disputes.
Avoiding intestacy rules – without a valid Will, your estate will be distributed under the intestacy rules, which may not reflect your intentions.
Care for loved ones – a Will allows you to make provision for those who depend on you, including young children or vulnerable family members.

What is the process of making a Will?

The process starts by gathering information about your personal circumstances, your assets, and your wishes for how your estate should be distributed. This may involve completing a questionnaire and/or attending a meeting so that we can take your instructions in detail.

Using this information, we will prepare a draft Will for you to review. The time required will depend on the complexity of your estate and the nature of your instructions.

What are the requirements for a valid Will?

To be legally valid in England and Wales, a Will must satisfy the following:

the testator must have mental capacity (that is, a sound mind, memory, and understanding)
the testator must intend to make a Will
the Will must be in writing, signed by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses, who must also sign it in the testator’s presence

Who should be your executors?

Executors are responsible for administering your estate, including applying for probate, paying inheritance tax, and distributing assets. Executors must be over 18 and can include family members, friends, or professionals.

It is often advisable to appoint at least two executors. In some cases, appointing a solicitor as a professional executor may be appropriate.

Who are the beneficiaries?

Beneficiaries are the individuals or organisations who will receive assets from your estate under your Will. As the testator, you have discretion to decide who benefits and how your estate is distributed.

What gifts can I make in my Will?

You can make specific gifts to individuals in your Will, known as legacies. These include:

General legacies – for example, a fixed sum of money

Specific legacies – for example, a piece of jewellery, a property, or other identifiable assets

When listing gifts, it is helpful to provide a clear description and the full name and address of each intended beneficiary.

Where gifts are left to minor beneficiaries (under 18), those assets must be held in trust until they reach adulthood.

What happens if someone dies without a Will in England and Wales?

If a person dies intestate (without a valid Will), their estate will be distributed under the rules of intestacy, as follows:

Surviving spouse or civil partner – inherits all personal belongings, the first £322,000 of the estate, and half of the remaining balance
Children – inherit the other half of the balance (shared equally)
Parents – if there is no surviving spouse or children, the estate passes to the parents
Siblings and their descendants – if there are no parents, the estate passes to siblings or their children

This order of entitlement continues down the line of family relationships, including grandparents, aunts, uncles, and so forth. If there are no surviving relatives, the estate may pass to the Crown under the doctrine of bona vacantia.

How much do you charge for Will drafting?

Our standard fees are as follows:

Simple Will (no minor or trust) – £300 plus VAT
Mirror Wills (for couples with similar wishes) – £450 plus VAT
Will with minor beneficiaries – from £400 plus VAT

Mirror Wills with minor beneficiaries – from £550 plus VAT

Please note that additional charges may apply for more complex instructions, such as trusts, foreign assets, business interests, or tax planning.

For more information about our Wills and Probate service, click here.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Overseas divorce, English finances – Why the Court Will Now Usually Hear Both Sides Before a Claim Proceeds

People often assume that if their divorce happened overseas, the English court cannot help with finances afterwards. That is not always right.

In some cases, Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 allows a spouse to apply for financial relief in England and Wales after an overseas divorce. But there is an important requirement: before the case can move forward, the applicant must first get the court’s permission.

Written by Yi Ling Lio, Legal Assistant

If you are new to Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act, our earlier article, “Think your divorce abroad was unfair? You might still have a case in England”, explains the basics in plain terms.

That permission stage matters in practical terms. It affects cost, timing, and how quickly a case becomes contested. And after the Supreme Court’s decision in Potanina v Potanin, the court is now much less likely to decide that question after hearing from one side only.

In AT v NT [2025] EWFC 456, Peel J made clear that although a Part III application may still be issued without notice under the rules, the question of whether permission should be granted will now usually be decided on notice. In other words, the other party will generally be told about the application and given a chance to respond before the court decides whether the case can proceed.

That is an important practical change.

What do “on notice” and “without notice” mean?

These terms sound technical, but the distinction is simple.

On notice means the other party knows about the application and can put their case before the judge makes a decision.

Without notice means the court is asked to act before the other party is told, usually because there is said to be some urgency or risk in giving advance warning.

Historically, permission applications under Part III were often dealt with without notice at the first stage. If permission was granted, the respondent would then apply to have that order set aside. That often meant more time, more cost, and effectively two hearings about the same point.

The Supreme Court in Potanina pushed back against that approach. It made clear that where a without notice permission order is challenged, the court must decide the issue afresh after hearing both sides. Against that background, Peel J’s view in AT v NT was straightforward: if both parties are likely to be heard anyway, it will usually be fairer and more efficient to deal with permission once, on notice, rather than twice.

**What happened in AT v NT?**

The parties were Russian nationals. They had lived in England during the marriage, later divorced in Russia, and had previously reached a financial agreement in England which was intended to provide substantial support for the wife.

The wife later said that matters had seriously unravelled. On her case, the former London family home had been caught up in restructuring and borrowing, the property was eventually repossessed, and she was left in a financially insecure position. She then applied in England for permission to pursue a Part III claim.

At the same time, she asked the court for urgent protection in relation to the London property she was living in. Her concern was that if the husband was told about the application in advance, she might be evicted.

The case raised two linked but distinct questions:

should permission be granted for a Part III claim, and
what, if any, urgent protection could be put in place in the meantime?

Why is an on notice hearing now likely to be the norm?

Peel J said that, following Potanina, he had real difficulty seeing why permission should usually be granted without hearing from the respondent first.

He accepted that there may still be exceptional cases. For example, the court might dismiss a plainly hopeless application without troubling the respondent, or there may be situations where giving notice is difficult or impracticable. But those cases are likely to be rare.

The broader message is clear: applicants should no longer assume that Part III permission will be granted quietly at the first stage, with the real dispute only emerging later. In most cases, the issues are now likely to be contested earlier.

What does an applicant still need to show?

The permission stage is not a full trial, but it is still an important filter.

An applicant must show:

that England and Wales has the necessary connection to the case, and
that there is a solid basis for making a Part III claim here.

That does not mean proving the whole case at the outset. But the court does need to be satisfied that the claim is properly arguable and that England and Wales is not being asked to step in without good reason.

What if urgent protection is needed before permission is decided?

This is where the case becomes especially useful in practice.

Peel J pointed out that the specific anti-dissipation protection under section 23 of the 1984 Act only becomes available after permission has been granted. If permission is now more likely to be dealt with on notice, that can leave a gap.

But that does not mean an applicant is left without options.

Depending on the facts, the court may still be able to grant interim protection before permission is decided. That may include:

a freezing injunction, where there is a real concern about assets being moved or disposed of
a preservation order, to protect specific property while the court considers the next step
a Land Registry restriction, which can help preserve the position in relation to a property title

That last point mattered in AT v NT. Peel J was not deciding that the wife had a final proprietary right in the property, nor was he deciding the whole Part III claim at that stage. He was, however, prepared to grant a targeted restriction to hold the position while the permission question was dealt with properly.

What did Peel J do?

He did not grant permission without hearing from the husband.

Instead, he adjourned the permission application so it could be determined on notice. He said it would make little sense, and would be contrary to the spirit of Potanina, to grant permission without notice only for the parties to return for what would effectively be the same argument all over again.

At the same time, he did grant interim protection by ordering a restriction against the property. That allowed the court to preserve matters for the moment without short-circuiting the proper process on permission.

Why does this matter for clients?

The practical lesson is that Part III cases are now more likely to become contested earlier. If you are thinking about making a claim in England after an overseas divorce, you should not assume the court will decide permission without hearing from the other side. That may mean more front-loaded preparation, and more careful thought about the evidence from the outset.

Equally, if there is an immediate concern about housing or assets, the answer may not be to press for without notice permission. The better course may be to seek a more targeted form of interim protection while the permission issue is dealt with on notice. AT v NT shows how important that early procedural strategy can be.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Can You Be Sued in England While Living Abroad?

As international mobility increases, many individuals and businesses live outside the United Kingdom while maintaining significant connections with England. It is common for overseas clients to own UK property, operate UK companies, or enter into contracts governed by English law. A question we are frequently asked is a simple but important one: can someone be sued in England even if they live abroad?

The short answer is yes, in many circumstances, although the process can be legally complex. A recent decision of the Court of Appeal (England and Wales), Fridman v Agrofirm Oniks LLC, provides useful guidance on how English courts approach cross-border service of proceedings.

Written by Frankie Ng, Litigation Supervisor

Why Service of Proceedings Is Important

In English civil litigation, a claim formally begins when a claim form is served on the defendant. Service is not simply an administrative step; it is fundamental to the court’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant.

If proceedings are served correctly under the Civil Procedure Rules, the English court may have jurisdiction to determine the dispute. If service is defective, the defendant may challenge the proceedings and the claim may not proceed.

For defendants located overseas, the key question therefore becomes how proceedings can be validly served across borders.

Two Main Routes for Cross-Border Service

English law generally recognises two principal routes for serving proceedings on someone who lives outside the UK.

Service within the jurisdiction

In some situations, proceedings may still be served at an address in England, even if the defendant currently resides abroad.

The Civil Procedure Rules allow service at a defendant’s “usual or last known residence” in England. This can include:

a property regularly used by the defendant
a former residence where the claimant reasonably believes the defendant still resides
an address that remains closely associated with the defendant.

However, claimants must take reasonable steps to verify the defendant’s current address before relying on a last known residence. If they fail to do so, service may be challenged.

This situation commonly arises where overseas individuals own property in London or previously lived in the UK before relocating abroad.

Service out of the jurisdiction

If a defendant cannot realistically be served within England, the claimant may apply to the court for permission to serve proceedings outside the jurisdiction.

To obtain such permission, the claimant must usually demonstrate that:

the claim falls within a recognised jurisdictional gateway (for example, disputes involving English contracts or UK property);
England is the appropriate forum for resolving the dispute; and
the claim has a real prospect of success.

Once permission is granted, service abroad may be carried out through recognised procedures, including international service conventions or methods approved by the court.

Lessons from the Fridman Case

The decision in Fridman v Agrofirm Oniks LLC illustrates the challenges that can arise where a defendant has links to England but is located abroad.

The case involved Mikhail Fridman, a businessman who owned a substantial property in London but was living outside the UK when proceedings were issued. The claimants attempted to serve the claim form at his London residence.

The Court of Appeal examined whether service at that address was sufficient to establish jurisdiction given that the defendant was not physically present in England.

While the outcome depended on the specific circumstances of the case, the judgment highlights an important point: ownership of property in England does not automatically guarantee that service at that address will be valid. Courts will examine the defendant’s actual connection to the property and whether the claimant has taken reasonable steps to identify the defendant’s current location.

Practical Points for Overseas Individuals and Business

Property ownership may increase litigation exposure. Owning a property in England may make it easier for claimants to attempt service within the jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction challenges may be available. If proceedings are served incorrectly, a defendant may challenge the court’s jurisdiction. This must usually be done promptly.

Early legal advice is important. Cross-border service rules are technical, and early advice can help avoid costly procedural disputes.

International contracts should be carefully drafted. Clear provisions on governing law and jurisdiction can significantly reduce uncertainty if a dispute arises.

Cross-border disputes are becoming increasingly common as individuals and businesses operate internationally while maintaining ties with England. Even if a person lives abroad, they may still be subject to litigation in England where sufficient connections exist.

The decision in Fridman v Agrofirm Oniks LLC serves as a reminder that service and jurisdiction issues can be complex and highly fact-specific. For both claimants and defendants, careful consideration of cross-border service rules is essential at the outset of any dispute.

Where international elements are involved, obtaining specialist legal advice early can ensure that the correct procedural steps are taken and that potential jurisdiction challenges are properly assessed.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Five Common Remortgage Mistakes That Can Delay Your Deal

You may already be familiar with the basic steps involved in a remortgage but knowing what to look out for before you begin the process can save time, and avoid unexpected delays. We will highlight some key issues homeowners should consider before or when starting the procedure, and how we can prevent these common remortgage mistakes as your solicitor.

Written by Yitong Guo, Senior Associate Solicitor

We will check your title early

As your solicitor, when we take on the case, we will make sure we check your title documents early to avoid delay. We note that some property owners are not aware of restrictions, covenants, or rights affecting their property title.

When we act for both you and the lender, we will check the title at HM Land Registry so you do not have surprise at the last minute and that the lender can safely take a legal charge.

Undisclosed charges on the property

We note in practice, sometimes there are old loans, second charges, or equity loans registered against the property.

We will identify them early, to prevent the remortgage to fail as the new lender will require a first legal charge.

We deal with leasehold problems

In some cases, lenders can refuse remortgages when these happen:

The lease is too short
The ground rent terms are unacceptable
Building Safety Act issue triggered

As your solicitor, we will review your lease and try to resolve these issues before completion. We may negotiate on your behalf with the landlord and complete certain legal procedure to satisfy the lender’s requirements, and to ensure compliance with the up-to-date legal requirements.

Planning and building regulation consents

We note sometimes the property owners have completed extensions, loft conversions, or structural work, but may not have the required approvals and consents from the Local Authority. The lender would require certain documents to be in place.

As your solicitor, we will provide you with pragmatic advice and assist you to resolve the issues through either retrospective consent documentation or indemnity insurance.

Last-minute paperwork issues

We understand that unsigned mortgage deeds, missing documents or incorrect ownership details can delay the transaction, and we aim to prevent any of such incident to happen.

We will work in accordance with our professionally designed workflow and ensure that every step of the procedure is completed in streamline and in good time for target completion date.

Final thoughts

We believe that the purpose of remortgaging is to save you money with the best deal, without causing unnecessary stress.

As your solicitor, we will ensure that title issues, lender requirements, and legal risks are resolved early, helping your remortgage complete smoothly with minimum troubles.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

The Polkey Reduction and Endometriosis Disability in Unfair Dismissal Claims

In a recent case. the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) found that the Employment Tribunal (ET) made a legal error when it assessed the Polkey reduction. The ET used the wrong hypothetical scenario when deciding whether compensation should be reduced.

The Polkey reduction, after the House of Lords decision in Polkey v AE Dayton Services Ltd [1987] IRLR 503, is a reduction in the compensatory award made to an employee in a successful claim for unfair dismissal to reflect the likelihood that there would have been a fair dismissal in any event. It may be expressed as a percentage reduction or as a cap on future loss.

Written by Frankie Ng, Litigation Supervisor

Background

The case involved an unfair dismissal claim. The claimant had endometriosis and brought the claim against a global professional services firm. The employer’s firm operated a performance model that required employees to continually progress towards the next level. The claimant was dismissed in accordance with the firm’s ‘up or out’ performance model while experiencing significant symptoms, sickness absence, and medical treatment linked to her illness.

The ET did find that the dismissal was unfair due to breaches of the employer’s disciplinary policy. However, the ET applied a 100% Polkey reduction.

The claimant argued that the 100% reduction was legally wrong and inconsistent with the finding of unfair dismissal. It could not be certain she would still have been dismissed, or dismissed at the same time. She also challenged the finding that the employer’s progression-based model was fair. She argued that the ET was wrong to conclude she was not disabled, that the employer lacked knowledge of her condition, and that her dismissal was not linked to her endometriosis.

The employer argued that the claimant could not challenge the progression model because she had already succeeded in her unfair dismissal claim. It also contended that, when applying Polkey, the ET should assume the employer would have corrected the procedural error, which justified a 100% reduction in compensation.

The Legal Framework and EAT Findings

The EAT relied on Employment Rights Act 1996, Equality Act 2010, and considered relevant case law including Polkey v A.E. Dayton Services Ltd [1987] UKHL 8.

The EAT allowed the appeal.

It held that the ET had incorrectly applied a counterfactual in which the employer would have introduced a new policy mirroring its actual process, despite no evidence that the employer would have done so.

A Polkey reduction must be based on what the employer would or might have done had it had the opportunity to remedy the defect that made the dismissal unfair. The assessment is to consider the chances of what the actual employer would have done, not what the Tribunal would have done.

The ETA clarified that capability for dismissal must be assessed against an employee’s current contract, not their potential for future roles. As a result, an ‘up or out’ model requiring constant promotion may not constitute a valid dismissal if current duties are performed satisfactorily.

The EAT overturned the original ruling because the ET failed to properly evaluate the claimant’s disability. It neglected to consider the likelihood of symptom recurrence or the effects of the condition without treatment. The ET did not adequately assess whether the employer had constructive knowledge of the disability, noting that following internal policies likely would have revealed her medical status. Finally, the EAT found that the ET failed to determine if the claimant’s disability-related absences directly influenced the decision to dismiss her, potentially leading to discrimination arising from disability.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Access to Public Funds for Those on Spouse and Parent Visas: What the Home Office Guidance Says

The issue of access to public funds is one of the most significant conditions attached to UK family visas. Individuals granted permission to remain in the United Kingdom as a partner (spouse) or parent are usually subject to a condition known as “No Recourse to Public Funds” (NRPF). However, official guidance issued by the Home Office confirms that this condition can, in certain circumstances, be lifted.

This article explains the policy position in clear terms and highlights when access to public funds may be permitted for those on family routes.

Written by Zhuoqi Li, Legal Advisor

The General Rule: No Recourse to Public Funds

When a person is granted leave to remain in the UK on a partner or parent visa under the family migration route, their permission is normally subject to the NRPF condition. This means they cannot access most welfare benefits or housing assistance defined as “public funds” under the Immigration Rules.

Public funds include, among other things, Universal Credit, Housing Benefit, income-related benefits, Child Benefit, and certain forms of homelessness assistance. The purpose of the restriction is to ensure that migrants entering or remaining under the family route are financially supported without reliance on the state.

The financial requirement attached to the spouse and partner route reflects this expectation: applicants must demonstrate that they can be maintained adequately without recourse to public funds at the point of application.

The Important Exception: Permitting Access to Public Funds

Although NRPF is the standard condition, the Home Office guidance titled Permitting Access to Public Funds makes clear that access may be granted in defined circumstances. This is not automatic, but it is an established and recognised process within immigration policy.

Individuals on a spouse or parent visa may apply for a “change of conditions” to have the NRPF restriction lifted. The Home Office will consider whether one or more of the following apply:

Destitution or risk of destitution

If a person is unable to meet their essential living needs, such as housing, food, and utilities, or is at imminent risk of homelessness, the Home Office may permit access to public funds. Evidence must demonstrate that the household cannot adequately support itself.

Exceptional financial circumstances

The guidance requires caseworkers to consider whether particularly compelling or unforeseen financial difficulties justify lifting the restriction. This could include serious illness affecting income, relationship breakdown, domestic abuse, or other substantial changes in circumstances that were not present at the time the visa was granted.

Best interests of a child

Where a child under 18 is affected, the Home Office must treat the child’s best interests as a primary consideration. If maintaining the NRPF condition would negatively impact a child’s welfare or well-being, this may justify granting access to public funds.

These provisions are especially relevant to individuals on the 10-year family route, where financial vulnerability can arise during a longer path to settlement.

Change of Conditions Applications

Those seeking access to public funds must submit a formal “change of conditions” application to the Home Office. The applicant must provide detailed evidence of their financial situation, including income, expenditure, bank statements, tenancy information, and any relevant medical or safeguarding documentation.

The Home Office will assess whether the evidence demonstrates genuine need under the policy criteria. If successful, the NRPF condition will be removed, and the individual will be permitted to claim public funds while their leave remains valid.

Importantly, lifting the NRPF condition does not change the person’s immigration route or grant indefinite leave. It simply removes the restriction on accessing public funds during the validity of their current leave.

What This Means for Spouse and Parent Visa Holders

The key point is that while partner and parent visas are normally granted with NRPF attached, it is legally and practically possible to obtain access to public funds where circumstances justify it. The Home Office guidance confirms that decision-makers must assess each case on its merits and consider vulnerability, hardship, and the welfare of children.

Individuals who find themselves in financial crisis should not assume that their visa status permanently prevents them from seeking support. Where destitution, exceptional hardship, or child welfare concerns are present, the immigration system provides a mechanism to request access to public funds.

Further details on public funds and eligibility are available through official UK government resources, including information published on GOV.UK. However, given the complexity of immigration conditions, applicants are often advised to seek specialist immigration advice before making an application.

Conclusion

The NRPF condition is a standard feature of spouse and parent visas, reflecting the requirement for financial independence under the family migration route. Nevertheless, the Home Office’s own guidance recognises that circumstances can change. Where a person on a family visa becomes destitute, faces exceptional hardship, or where a child’s best interests are at risk, access to public funds may be permitted following a successful change of conditions application.

In short, while public funds are not automatically available to those on spouse or parent visas, they are not categorically barred either. The immigration framework provides a clear pathway for access where genuine need exists.

If you require further advice in relation to accessing public funds, lifting the NRPF condition, or making a change of conditions application, you should seek professional guidance. For tailored immigration advice and assistance with your application, please consult one of our immigration advisers at Lisa’s Law Solicitors here.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Using AI for Family Law Advice

If you have found yourself asking ChatGPT about your rights in a separation, a financial dispute, or a disagreement about the children, you are not alone. It is fast, it is free, and the answers sound clear and confident.

The problem is not that you are researching. The problem is when what an AI tells you starts to feel more reliable than what your solicitor is saying. In family law, that gap can cause real difficulties and, counterintuitively, it often ends up costing more.

Written by Yi Ling Lio, Legal Assistant

AI-related “hallucination”

AI tools are designed to produce fluent and well-structured text, but they do not guarantee accuracy. AI tools have a tendency of so-called “hallucinating”, which means making up artificial laws or judgments.

In 2025, the High Court considered two cases in which legal submissions relied on authorities that simply did not exist. The Court said:

“Freely available generative artificial intelligence tools, trained on a large language model such as ChatGPT are not capable of conducting reliable legal research. Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect. The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue. They may cite sources that do not exist. They may purport to quote passages from a genuine source that do not appear in that source.”

R (Ayinde) v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin)

If AI‑generated information can appear authoritative even when it is not, it is easy to see how someone reading a polished AI response at midnight might place more confidence in it than is warranted.

Why your solicitor sounds less certain, and why that is a good sign

Family law is not a simple rulebook. Most of it turns on the specific facts of your situation: what assets there are, what each person needs, what the children’s circumstances look like, and what is actually achievable. Judges have broad discretion. Outcomes vary. AI may have a less complete version of your facts, producing inaccurate advice. Your solicitor’s advice will look different. It will be more considered, more caveated, and will often start with “it depends.”

This matters most in two areas.

Financial disputes: where outcomes depend on needs, resources, the nature of assets, housing options, and what a court would consider fair in your specific situation. There is no formula.
Children matters: where the court focuses entirely on the welfare of your child in your circumstances, not what an AI considers a reasonable outcome in the abstract.

Does using AI save money? Usually not

A common assumption is that researching online, or drafting letters with AI help, will reduce legal fees. In practice it often does the opposite: if AI has given you a confident but incorrect picture of your legal position, you arrive with a fixed view rather than an open question. The more persuasive the output, the harder that position is to shift.

Hardened positions are expensive. What might have settled early becomes contested, and costs on both sides rise. AI-drafted letters carry a similar risk: they can sound authoritative while containing inconsistencies, accidental admissions, or points that complicate your case rather than advance it.

Where things tend to go wrong

The issues are rarely dramatic. They are subtler, and harder to spot because AI output reads so plausibly.

Outcome predictions are the most common problem. AI is good at producing a plausible story about what a court is “likely” to do. It cannot weigh your actual evidence, assess how credible a witness might be, or account for the specific dynamics of your case. A prediction that sounds reasonable in the abstract may bear little resemblance to what a judge would actually do with your facts.

Procedural details are another gap. Family proceedings have timetables, deadlines, and disclosure requirements that vary depending on where your case is and what stage it has reached. A generic AI explanation may give you the wrong picture entirely, or omit steps that matter.

Rights-based framing is perhaps the subtlest issue. AI tends to present family disputes as questions of what you are owed. In reality, outcomes are shaped by a mix of legal principles, evidence, negotiation, and what is practically workable.

How to use AI sensibly

None of this means you should not research. Reading around a subject before a meeting is sensible. The question is what you use AI for, and how much weight you place on it.

Use it for orientation, not answers. If you are about to discuss financial disclosure for the first time, asking an AI to explain what a Form E is, or what “non-matrimonial assets” means, is entirely reasonable. Using it to tell you what share of the assets you should expect is not.
Bring it up early. If something you have found seems to conflict with advice you have received, bring it up at the start of the conversation rather than letting it sit as a silent source of doubt. It is quicker to address a misconception early than after a position has been taken.
Be cautious about case references. If an AI response includes case names or quotes from judgments, treat those carefully. As the High Court made clear, AI tools have been shown to invent plausible-sounding references that do not exist.
Treat certainty as a warning sign. If the answer reads like a guarantee, it is almost certainly missing the nuance that drives real outcomes. In family law, “it depends” is usually the honest starting point.

A word on where this advice is coming from

It is fair to note that solicitors have an obvious interest in clients not relying on free AI tools. We are aware of that. The reason we are raising it anyway is that we have seen, with some regularity, how AI-shaped expectations play out in practice: negotiations that take longer, positions that are harder to move, and costs that end up higher than they needed to be. This article is based on that experience, not on a general suspicion of technology.

In summary

AI is now how many people start thinking about a legal problem, and that is not going to change. Used carefully, it can help you feel more informed going into a first conversation. Used uncritically, it can set expectations that do not match reality and add cost at precisely the point you are trying to reduce it.

Clients who raise what they have read early, and treat it as a starting point rather than a conclusion, tend to get to the right outcome faster and with less difficulty along the way.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Domestic Abuse Case: Spouse Visa Holder Granted ILR Under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse

Lisa’s Law were recently instructed by a client who held leave in the UK as a spouse, originally valid until mid-2027. During the early stages of the relationship, there were indicators of controlling behaviour, including monitoring of personal accounts and verbal hostility.

From late 2024 onwards, the conduct escalated significantly. The client experienced a sustained pattern of coercive control, psychological and emotional abuse, intimidation, digital interference, monitoring, harassment, and repeated threats linked to her immigration status.

As the situation deteriorated, the client permanently left the marital home in April 2025. She subsequently engaged multiple support channels, including the police, medical professionals, specialist domestic abuse organisations, and legal protection measures through the family court.

Divorce proceedings were initiated by the partner later in 2025, prompting the Home Office to curtail the client’s spouse visa, significantly shortening her period of leave.

Written by Angel Wan, Solicitor

Our client instructs Lisa’s Law

We were instructed to prepare an application for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse, on the basis that the relationship had permanently broken down due to domestic abuse. The client also required a fee waiver due to financial hardship and inability to meet essential living needs.

At the outset, we advised that prospects of success were moderate. The client was unable to provide conclusive evidence typically referenced in policy guidance, and her financial profile, including numerous bank accounts, was likely to attract scrutiny.

Legal Framework

Settlement under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse requires applicants within the UK to demonstrate that:

they currently hold, or were last granted leave as a partner under the relevant provisions, e.g. as the partner of a British citizen or settled person under Appendix FM;
the relationship has permanently broken down; and
the breakdown occurred as a result of domestic abuse.

Decision-makers assess applications on the balance of probabilities and must consider the statutory definition of domestic abuse, which encompasses not only physical violence but also psychological, emotional, financial, coercive, and controlling behaviour, etc.

The Home Office also recognises the particular vulnerability of migrant victims, including the use of immigration status as a mechanism of control, barriers to accessing public funds, and heightened risk of destitution upon leaving an abusive relationship.

Applicants seeking a fee waiver must demonstrate that they are destitute or unable to meet essential living needs if required to pay the application fee.

Our involvement (what we did)

Our role involved comprehensive case preparation and structured evidential presentation, including:

analysing the chronology of the relationship and identifying legally relevant patterns of behaviour consistent with coercive and controlling conduct;
compiling and organising multi-source evidence, including medical records, professional assessments, witness statements, communications, and safeguarding documentation;
preparing detailed legal representations addressing both the Immigration Rules and relevant policy guidance;
demonstrating the causal link between the abuse and the permanent breakdown of the relationship;
presenting financial evidence to establish destitution and justify a fee waiver; and
addressing potential credibility concerns arising from the client’s financial arrangements and evidential limitations.

Particular emphasis was placed on evidencing the cumulative and escalating nature of the abuse, the psychological impact on the client, and the protective purpose of the domestic abuse settlement provisions.

Outcome

The application was granted just under three months after submission.

The decision was made without any request for further evidence from the Home Office. The client was granted Indefinite Leave to Remain together with a fee waiver.

Conclusion

The outcome of this domestic abuse case illustrates several important features of the domestic abuse settlement route:

Domestic abuse provisions are designed to be protective in nature and recognise a wide spectrum of abusive conduct beyond physical violence;
Decision-makers must consider the totality of the evidence and the broader context of coercion, vulnerability, and immigration-related control;
Strongly structured legal representations and coherent evidential presentation can be decisive, particularly where evidence is fragmented or non-traditional;
Financial hardship and destitution must be clearly evidenced but can be successfully established even in complex financial circumstances.

From our standpoint, this case demonstrates the importance of careful legal framing, trauma-informed case preparation, and strategic evidential analysis in applications under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse.

It also reflects the underlying policy intention: to ensure that individuals are not forced to remain in abusive relationships due to immigration dependency or financial barriers to regularising their status.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

10 Mistakes First-Time Buyers Make When Buying a Home in England and Wales

Buying your first home is exciting but it can also feel overwhelming. For many first-time buyers in England and Wales, the legal process is unfamiliar territory. While everything may seem straightforward once your offer is accepted, delays and unexpected issues can quickly arise.

Understanding the common pitfalls when buying your first home can help you move forward with confidence, reduce stress and avoid unnecessary costs. This guide explains the most first time buyer mistakes when purchasing property in England and Wales, based on issues regularly encountered by Lisa’s Law’s conveyancing solicitors.

Written by Wilson Chan, Senior Conveyancing Paralegal

Instructing a Solicitor Too Late

Many first-time buyers wait until their offer is accepted before contacting a conveyancer. This can cause avoidable delays at the very beginning of the transaction.

Tip:

Consider obtaining a quotation and instructing a solicitor as soon as you begin seriously searching for a property. This allows ID checks and initial paperwork to be completed in advance so the legal work can begin immediately once your offer is accepted.

Delaying the Mortgage Application

A mortgage offer can take several weeks, sometimes longer, particularly if the lender requires further documents regarding your income or source of funds.

Tip:

Speak to a mortgage broker or lender early in your property search. Once your offer is accepted, submit your full mortgage application promptly and respond quickly to any additional requests.

Not Understanding the Difference Between Exchange and Completion

In England and Wales (except in auction purchases), a transaction is not legally binding until contracts are exchanged and the deposit is paid. Until exchange, either party can withdraw without legal liability to another party. This can be surprising for first-time buyers.

Tip:

Avoid booking removals/moving, giving notice on a rental property or making major financial commitments until contracts have been exchanged.

Leaving the Home Survey Too Late

Some first-time buyers assume that the lender’s valuation and the searches carried out by their conveyancer are sufficient. However:

A mortgage valuation is carried out for the lender’s benefit, not yours.
Property searches do not assess the physical condition of the building.

Structural issues or hidden defects may only be identified through an independent survey.

Delaying the survey could result in last-minute renegotiations or even the transaction falling through.

Tip:

Instruct a qualified surveyor as soon as your offer is accepted so any issues can be identified and addressed early.

Failing to Budget for Additional Costs

First-time buyers often focus on the purchase price and deposit, overlooking other expenses such as:

Stamp Duty Land Tax (if applicable)
Legal fees
Search fees
Survey costs
Potential repair costs
Lease extension costs (for leasehold properties)
Post-completion fees payable to the management company (for leasehold properties)

Tip:

Ask your solicitor for a clear breakdown of costs at the outset so you can budget accurately and avoid surprises.

Overlooking Leasehold Complications

If you are buying a flat, it is likely to be leasehold. Leasehold properties involve additional considerations, including:

Ground rent and service charges
Length of the lease
Management company arrangements
Any ongoing disputes within the building

Obtaining the management information pack alone can take several weeks and may affect the overall timeline.

Tip:

Be prepared for leasehold transactions to require additional documents and slightly longer timescales.

Slow Responses to Requests

One of the most common causes of delay is slow communication, whether from buyers, sellers, lenders or managing agents.

Tip:

Respond promptly to your solicitor’s emails and provide requested documents as soon as possible. Small delays can quickly accumulate and slow down the entire chain.

Not Reviewing the Solicitor’s Report Carefully

Before exchange of contracts, your conveyancer will provide a detailed report explaining the legal title, search results and key matters affecting the property.

Some first-time buyers skim through this document without fully understanding it.

Tip:

Take time to read the report carefully and ask questions. This is your opportunity to raise concerns before you become legally committed.

Underestimating Property Chains

If your seller is buying another property, and that seller is also purchasing, a chain is formed. The longer the chain, the greater the risk of delay.

Tip:

Ask the estate agent early on whether the property is part of a chain and remain flexible where possible, as multiple transactions must align for completion to take place.

Setting Unrealistic Timeframes

While some transactions can progress quickly, many factors are outside any one party’s control, including search turnaround times, mortgage processing and third-party replies.

Tip:

Maintain realistic expectations and keep in regular contact with your solicitor to stay informed throughout the process.

Final Thoughts

Buying your first home is a major milestone. Although the legal process may seem complex, many delays can be avoided with early preparation, clear communication and proper guidance. With the right professional support and a clear understanding of the process, your first property purchase can proceed far more smoothly than you might expect.

If you are preparing to buy your first home, seeking legal advice at an early stage can help you move forward with confidence and avoid unnecessary complications.

Have questions? Get in touch today!

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

Email us on [email protected].

Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/

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

Concerns expressed by the IMA

My thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Do I need a Will?

What is the process of making a Will?

What are the requirements for a valid Will?

Who should be your executors?

Who are the beneficiaries?

What gifts can I make in my Will?

What happens if someone dies without a Will in England and Wales?

How much do you charge for Will drafting?

Have questions? Get in touch today!

What do “on notice” and “without notice” mean?

What happened in AT v NT?

Why is an on notice hearing now likely to be the norm?

What does an applicant still need to show?

What if urgent protection is needed before permission is decided?

What did Peel J do?

Why does this matter for clients?

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Why Service of Proceedings Is Important

Two Main Routes for Cross-Border Service

Service within the jurisdiction

Service out of the jurisdiction

Lessons from the Fridman Case

Practical Points for Overseas Individuals and Business

Have questions? Get in touch today!

We will check your title early

Undisclosed charges on the property

We deal with leasehold problems

Planning and building regulation consents

Last-minute paperwork issues

Final thoughts

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Background

The Legal Framework and EAT Findings

Have questions? Get in touch today!

The General Rule: No Recourse to Public Funds

The Important Exception: Permitting Access to Public Funds

Destitution or risk of destitution

Exceptional financial circumstances

Best interests of a child

Change of Conditions Applications

What This Means for Spouse and Parent Visa Holders

Conclusion

Have questions? Get in touch today!

AI-related “hallucination”

Why your solicitor sounds less certain, and why that is a good sign

Does using AI save money? Usually not

Where things tend to go wrong

How to use AI sensibly

A word on where this advice is coming from

In summary

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Our client instructs Lisa’s Law

Legal Framework

Our involvement (what we did)

Outcome

Conclusion

Have questions? Get in touch today!

Instructing a Solicitor Too Late

Tip:

Delaying the Mortgage Application

Tip:

Not Understanding the Difference Between Exchange and Completion

Tip:

Leaving the Home Survey Too Late

Tip:

Failing to Budget for Additional Costs

Tip:

Overlooking Leasehold Complications

Tip:

Slow Responses to Requests

Tip:

Not Reviewing the Solicitor’s Report Carefully

Tip:

Underestimating Property Chains

Tip:

Setting Unrealistic Timeframes

**What happened in AT v NT?**