# Visa refused.. Please help!



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Hi all

Thanks to this forum which is great help!
My wife's visa was refused because one of the payslips do not match the bank statement! Argh! My wages are transferred online to my bank account and for one month itwas like £11 less because my employer didn't check the amount properly!! I didn't realise until I was refused. I have attached the refusal letter as well.

I want to reapply I don't know how to rectify that mistake? Should I get a letter from my employer? What do they need to do? Your help is greatly appreciated! 

Thank you in advance.


----------



## Joppa (Sep 7, 2009)

Well, as the rejection letter says, you need full explanation about this discrepancy in the form of a letter by your employer and any subsequent correction or adjustment made to right this anomaly.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Joppa said:


> Well, as the rejection letter says, you need full explanation about this discrepancy in the form of a letter by your employer and any subsequent correction or adjustment made to right this anomaly.


Thank you for your reply. Sorry to be annoying but to be honest I don't know what they mean. Does my employer need to state that a mistake was made and need to transfer the remaining few pounds to me? And how can the accountant fix the payslip?

Sorry again


----------



## Crawford (Jan 23, 2011)

Straight up said:


> Thank you for your reply. Sorry to be annoying but to be honest I don't know what they mean. Does my employer need to state that a mistake was made and need to transfer the remaining few pounds to me? And how can the accountant fix the payslip?
> 
> Sorry again


Yes...... your employer needs to explain how the payslip says one amount and the corresponding bank transfer and statement says another.

A new payslip (if it's the payslip that has to be amended) can be re-issued.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Crawford said:


> Yes...... your employer needs to explain how the payslip says one amount and the corresponding bank transfer and statement says another.
> 
> A new payslip (if it's the payslip that has to be amended) can be re-issued.


Thank you Crawford for your reply.. I spoke to the accountant he said it is not possible to change the payslip because the problem was in Aprils payslip and all the taxes etc has been paid and cannot be amended apparently.

I can get a letter from employer and he can give me the £11 in cash and he can mention that in the letter as well. I don't know of that would be sufficient though. Your thoughts are appreciated!


----------



## i.need.help (Nov 20, 2014)

I say the better option would be to reapply with a fresh set of payslips and bank statements.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

i.need.help said:


> I say the better option would be to reapply with a fresh set of payslips and bank statements.


I am reapplying which but the past six months payslips and statements will include the April payslip, where the mistake was made.


----------



## i.need.help (Nov 20, 2014)

Straight up said:


> I am reapplying which but the past six months payslips and statements will include the April payslip, where the mistake was made.


You should start from May and delay applying until you have your 6 months payslips.

Including April may result in another refusal. I personally wouldn't risk it, not even with a cover letter explaining the difference.

If you can avoid such situations, then you should.

But that's just me, it's up to you.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

i.need.help said:


> You should start from May and delay applying until you have your 6 months payslips.
> 
> Including April may result in another refusal. I personally wouldn't risk it, not even with a cover letter explaining the difference.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your suggestion.. I was thinking the same thing.. Thanks a lot. So if I was to apply in October which will not require Payslip from April. I then don't have to explain anything about the April payslip right?


----------



## i.need.help (Nov 20, 2014)

Straight up said:


> Thanks for your suggestion.. I was thinking the same thing.. Thanks a lot. So if I was to apply in October which will not require Payslip from April. I then don't have to explain anything about the April payslip right?


You will have to explain the reason why the application was previously refused in the new application.

That's it.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Oh silly me! The refusal letter says the 5th month and for some reason I'm reading April! Lol

So it's May that has a problem.. This means I have send it asap and I can't wait until November as the English Cambridge test will expire! Ahhh

I would just ask my employer to explain the error to his best and I will hope for the best


----------



## i.need.help (Nov 20, 2014)

Straight up said:


> Oh silly me! The refusal letter says the 5th month and for some reason I'm reading April! Lol
> 
> So it's May that has a problem.. This means I have send it asap and I can't wait until November as the English Cambridge test will expire! Ahhh
> 
> I would just ask my employer to explain the error to his best and I will hope for the best


What country are you or your spouse applying from? 

ECO's don't like any discrepancies between payslips and bank statements. May work, may not, but as your willing to take the chance, then cool.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

i.need.help said:


> What country are you or your spouse applying from?
> 
> ECO's don't like any discrepancies between payslips and bank statements. May work, may not, but as your willing to take the chance, then cool.


My wife is from Afghanistan but we will be applying at Islamabad, Pakistan.. It is very difficult to travel between the two countries now. So I don't want her test to expire..


----------



## Sunshine6 (Jul 22, 2015)

Hi there, 

I just have a question about your situation if you don't mind: Was actually the refusal just because the payslip and bank statement didn't match or because the salary declared in the employment letter didn't correspond to both of them (Which can be the case sometimes due to taxes etc.. ) or because that salary was under the threshold ? 

I hope your next application will be granted


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Sunshine6 said:


> Hi there,
> 
> I just have a question about your situation if you don't mind: Was actually the refusal just because the payslip and bank statement didn't match or because the salary declared in the employment letter didn't correspond to both of them (Which can be the case sometimes due to taxes etc.. ) or because that salary was under the threshold ?
> 
> I hope your next application will be granted


The salary is £19,000. So it is above the required threshold. It's just that one payslip didn't match the bank statement unfortunately.


----------



## Sunshine6 (Jul 22, 2015)

I am so sorry, this is really unfortunate to not say unfair. .. but don't worry I am sure it's gonna be fine for the next application if you explain what happened as you meet all the other requirements  Good luck


----------



## Joppa (Sep 7, 2009)

So this brings back to what I said initially. Get a letter from your employer explaining the discrepancy in your May payslip, and how it has been corrected. May payslip is in 2015-16 tax year so they can still make an adjustment.


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Sunshine6 said:


> I am so sorry, this is really unfortunate to not say unfair. .. but don't worry I am sure it's gonna be fine for the next application if you explain what happened as you meet all the other requirements  Good luck


It's okay. And yes I really hope so. I feel gutted. But hopefully next time


----------



## Straight up (Aug 28, 2015)

Joppa said:


> So this brings back to what I said initially. Get a letter from your employer explaining the discrepancy in your May payslip, and how it has been corrected. May payslip is in 2015-16 tax year so they can still make an adjustment.


Thank you Joppa.. I will do that.


----------



## Vallee (Jan 1, 2016)

Straight up said:


> Hi all
> 
> Thanks to this forum which is great help!
> My wife's visa was refused because one of the payslips do not match the bank statement! Argh! My wages are transferred online to my bank account and for one month itwas like £11 less because my employer didn't check the amount properly!! I didn't realise until I was refused. I have attached the refusal letter as well.
> ...


This seriously concerns me as it appears that the ECOs are unable to follow the rules on the financial requirement. Paragraph 1 of Appendix FM-SE clearly states:

 The gross amount of any cash income may be counted where the person’s specified bank statements show the net amount which relates to the gross amount shown on their payslips (or in the relevant specified evidence provided in addition to the specified bank statements in relation to non-employment income). Otherwise, only the net amount shown on the specified bank statements may be counted.

On the logic of the ECO who typed your refusal letter, any discrepancy between the payslip and bank statement suggests you gave provided FALSE information and leads to refusal. Why does paragraph 1 exist if this is the case? And why if the rule makers have taken the time to draft this rule but not state that they require an explanation? The simple reason is that you shouldn't have to! The point of the rule is that you are penalised for the discrepancy in terms of what you can count towards the financial requirement, which is not necessarily an outright refusal.

A distinction needs to be drawn here between false and fraudulent. A mistake or an error is not fraudulent. If the payslips are genuine, paragraph 1 should be applied and a decision made from there. An explanation, although preferable, should not be a requirement, as HMRC should be able to confirm in any case. I can see from many threads that many ECOs are more than willing to contact HMRC to find a reason to refuse!

The visa process seems flawed when you see these types of refusals. If you wish to impose such strict and specific rules, ECOs should apply them even when doing so leads to an approval against their instinct. Otherwise, they should be permitted discretion the other way round, such as if my gross earnings were £18599. However, that is not the case for a reason, as should be the decision to apply paragraph 1 in this example.

It is hard enough stressing about making a mistake when preparing your application. You should not have to worry about flawed decisions that are out of our control. The appeal process is far too drawn out and they must be full aware that many will choose to reapply (i.e pay) again when faced with the prospect of being separated from loved ones for such a long time.


----------



## skyf (Mar 26, 2015)

Vallee said:


> This seriously concerns me as it appears that the ECOs are unable to follow the rules on the financial requirement. Paragraph 1 of Appendix FM-SE clearly states:
> 
> The gross amount of any cash income may be counted where the person’s specified bank statements show the net amount which relates to the gross amount shown on their payslips (or in the relevant specified evidence provided in addition to the specified bank statements in relation to non-employment income). Otherwise, only the net amount shown on the specified bank statements may be counted.
> 
> ...


Is it reasonable to criticise the decision of ECO when they just view documents which in this case do not correspond. The case goes back many months and the OP has been advised to obtain a letter from employer. The Accountant appears to refuse making an adjustment which is strange. The Employer here is at fault and not the ECO.
This situation illustrates how careful applicants must be and need to cross-check and double-check information being submitted.


----------



## Vallee (Jan 1, 2016)

skyf said:


> Is it reasonable to criticise the decision of ECO when they just view documents which in this case do not correspond. The case goes back many months and the OP has been advised to obtain a letter from employer. The Accountant appears to refuse making an adjustment which is strange. The Employer here is at fault and not the ECO.
> This situation illustrates how careful applicants must be and need to cross-check and double-check information being submitted.


I do think it is reasonable to criticise if ECOs wish to cite and rely on the immigration rules when they refuse applications. Yes, the documents do not correspond but there is a rule in Appendix FM-SE where the wording implies that there will be a lack of correspondence by the very nature of the rule itself (paragraph 1). I appreciate this rule was formulated with the intention of applying to those who are paid in cash (in order to ensure they deposit the full amount), but the loose wording of the paragraph and the lack of the word "deposit" suggests to me that this rule can have a wider application.

If the rule makers do not wish for this to be the case, they should update the rules (they do this frequently anyway) and in the meantime they should apply the rule as it is written at the date of the application. 

Yes the employer is at fault for the immediate error, and applicants should also check and double check their application, but it is also reasonable to suggest that an applicant could submit their application fully knowing there is an error and that only the net amount deposited into the bank account should be applied and that they will meet the financial requirement regardless. I guess it will help if they point this out to the ECO in an accompanying letter so there is at least some pressure for them not to stray in their decision making. 

If there is an error on a payslip and the correct amount is not deposited into the bank account, I can understand why they may argue that the payslip is not genuine. But if they are unable to exercise some common sense in this situation, then they also should no longer give those paid in cash (who do not deposit the full amount) the benefit of the doubt by allowing them to apply the net deposited amount and therefore infer that the payslip is genuine in those circumstances. They should equally come to the conclusion that the payslip(s) are FALSE as there is no way to prove the sponsor was actually paid what they claim. Sure, there are employer letters and contract of employments, but couldn't these also be submitted by somebody with erroneous payslips to back up the truth?

The rules should require that all applicants are paid by direct debit if they are unable to apply the rules equally. But this is not what i think - I actually prefer the common sense approach (even over the evidential flexibility rule, which is clearly used very little in recent times).

I appreciate this thread is now outdated but many people like me look on these threads for the answers about how the rules are applied. There is actually very little information surrounding this particular area and I think it will be useful for others to understand that the rules are not worded so simply. Yes, if you are aware that there is an error you should attempt to fix it in case (1) you do not meet the financial requirement when paragraph 1 is applied and (2) the ECO is not willing to apply the rules as they are written (regardless of the intention when drafted). Otherwise, it is completely feasible that an applicant who does analyse the rules may decide to proceed with an application containing erroneous payslips with misinformed confidence that paragraphs 1 should be applied.

In the interests of fairness, I should add a caveat that the ECO should only really exercise discretion where the difference is minimal or the applicant, sponsor or employer acknowledges the issue in writing so that there is some form of transparency over the issue. I do not think that the error should be explained in technical terms - the majority of us are not accountants and should not assume the responsibility of one or attempt to explain a mistake beyond our knowledge. 

If the payslip is incorrect but still genuine, HMRC will confirm that the right tax has been paid so there should be no issue provided the amount deposited into the bank account is less than the net figure on the payslip. It is only the employee who will have lost out in these circumstances by (1) being underpaid by their employer (by some amount whether large or small; and (2) losing the ability to count the gross amount on the payslip in accordance with paragraph 1.

The whole area is a good area for debate I guess


----------



## skyf (Mar 26, 2015)

Like it or not a decision was made on which the OP received advice, and as far as is known choose not to challenge the ECO.
The ECO would have seen documents which may have influenced the decision. The ECO has flexibility to defer a decision, pending submission/clarification of documents submitted, unless it is considered further information would not permit a Grant.

The payslip error occurred last May so the OP should by now have submitted a fresh application including a covering letter from Employer to explain the conflicting payslip/bank transfer issue.


----------



## Vallee (Jan 1, 2016)

skyf said:


> Like it or not a decision was made on which the OP received advice, and as far as is known choose not to challenge the ECO.
> The ECO would have seen documents which may have influenced the decision. The ECO has flexibility to defer a decision, pending submission/clarification of documents submitted, unless it is considered further information would not permit a Grant.
> 
> The payslip error occurred last May so the OP should by now have submitted a fresh application including a covering letter from Employer to explain the conflicting payslip/bank transfer issue.


My wife's application was approved last week despite the fact that there were payslip errors on each of my previous employer's payslips (over £100 difference on each - but genuine accounting errors). I believe it was approved because I acknowledged the issue and requested that the ECO apply paragraph 1 and therefore voluntarily agreed to lose over £500 from each payslip, which could have been counted towards the financial requirement. It is debateable, but I think it is the transparency which allowed the ECO to see past this issue.

Although I agree it is preferable (and I did fear her application would be denied for lack of), my employer did not provide an explanation, but only the standard employer letter stating my employment terms (including what I was paid net weekly for clarity/ i.e. the figure that went into my bank account). I also provided a separate employer letter with the payslips confirming each gross and net amount so there could no doubt that the payslips (despite being original) were genuine (albeit erroneous).

I do not advise that people apply with errors in their payslips, particularly if it can be fixed (although this is rare - usually it is corrected on the next payslip which just complicates things further). Mine was previous employment so could not be fixed. 

I do not see this working with Category A unless (as a minimum requirement) the net deposited figure in the bank account is over £1550 (so about £1900 gross). My example was under Category B so there is no way of knowing with Category A unless somebody else posts.

In both cases, I do not agree with people advising people to wait another 6 months as if this simple. It is up to the applicant in every case and I imagine there is an element of luck depending on the ECO, but my example above goes to show for certain now that it is not mandatory that bank statements and payslips match, rather it is preferable, and can be overcome with adequate explanation and evidence. Proceed at your own risk, however


----------



## skyf (Mar 26, 2015)

Vallee said:


> My wife's application was approved last week despite the fact that there were payslip errors on each of my previous employer's payslips (over £100 difference on each - but genuine accounting errors). I believe it was approved because I acknowledged the issue and requested that the ECO apply paragraph 1 and therefore voluntarily agreed to lose over £500 from each payslip, which could have been counted towards the financial requirement. It is debateable, but I think it is the transparency which allowed the ECO to see past this issue.
> 
> Although I agree it is preferable (and I did fear her application would be denied for lack of), my employer did not provide an explanation, but only the standard employer letter stating my employment terms (including what I was paid net weekly for clarity/ i.e. the figure that went into my bank account). I also provided a separate employer letter with the payslips confirming each gross and net amount so there could no doubt that the payslips (despite being original) were genuine (albeit erroneous).
> 
> ...


Congratulations.

It would be folly for other applicants to use your experience as a blueprint.


----------

