My Complaint to Rob Whiteman

Complaint to Rob Whiteman…

06-04-2013
Rob Whiteman is one of the top guys in UKBA – He used to be the Cheif Exec, but since UKBA lost Executive Agency status, thats not the case.  He is still pretty high up though…  therefore
Subject: Complaints – Updated List…. Including breaches of FOI Act by UKBA…
From: Me @ Mine
To: [email protected];
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Bcc:
Date: Saturday, 6 April 2013, 4:44
Mr W P ADDRESS

Date: As Emailed

FAO: Rob Whiteman
CC: Nadhim Zahawi / Paula Scott
* MP Ref: xx
* Home Office Ref: (Its a long reference)
Dear Mr Whiteman,
I am writing today in relation to a number of complaints that I have with the service of your staff, both in the European team, and the Solihull Reporting Centre.
As outlined numerous times previously, in emails to [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected] I requested the passports of myself, my daughter and my wife be returned back in Jan 2013. This has not been done.
I have highlighted numerous laws which state that a government cannot withhold travel documents, and prevent a person leaving any country – even his own. UKBA fail to respond to this.
My wife has been discriminated against on a number of occasions when she has been to her reporting sessions, and in various FOI requests that I have made, it is clear that a large number of your staff have the same discriminative attitude.
My wife made an application to remain in the country in 2010, which was reliant upon article 8 of the ECHR. This application was refused with no right of appeal. However, as the application was insistant upon my wifes need to leave the UK this should have attracted a right of appeal.
Further to this, I have been a worker in the EEA (Finland) in 2004. I worked for the Espoo Institute of Business. My wife submitted an EEA2 application to Euro (details above), which included a letter from my employer – the assistant principle at the school. I outlined that I have been active in the EEA and that further to Directive 2004/38/EC my wifes application should also be viewed as the spouse of an EEA national – I draw attention to the memo attached in Annex A of your FOI response 23660 (Available here:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/123723/response/302513/attach/html/2/UKBA%20FOI%20response%2023660.pdf
—–
4. Legal advice has clarified that the British sponsor in a Surinder Singh case does not need to prove that s/he continues to be a worker or self-employed person upon his/her return to the United Kingdom. The UK national is only required to show that s/he was a worker or self-sufficient person before returning to the United Kingdom. The UK national is not required to be a qualified person under the Regulations following his return to the UK.
—–
I have supplied evidence that I have been a worker in another EEA member state, yet a response to the DWP about my wifes case states that she currently has an application in for Derivative Residence under the EEA regulations – the response omits the fact that she also has an application as the partner of an EEA National (which under directive 2004/38/EC I must be treated as an EEA National upon my return – The directive states no time limit for when this treatment ends! – and infact Case ) – I am stating again… My wifes application should be treated under Singh, and Zambrano. I would appriciate written acknowledgement of this message. – and written confirmation that my wifes application shall be treated as the following:
1) The family member of an EEA National (Myself)
2) The Primary Carer of *THREE* British Citizens – Zambrano.
2a) Chloe p 2b) Charlie p
2c) Myself – WP
Any such refusal of my wifes right to reside in the UK should be based on all four points above! – Including a full explaination of how you have considered the rights of the children in a refusal…
I note: recent UK case law has actually stated that the time between the economic activity within Europe and return to the UK does not matter. I’m more than willing to take any possible refusal to court to add further case law.
I can however provide numerous case law examples which should be considered by yourselves – as a court of law would certainly consider them.
I have given you written permission to contact my GP should further information be required as to my personal health, or to contact myself and I can forward the information on to yourselves.
The ‘Evidential Flexibility’ policy states that should evidence be available and you require it, you must give the applicant sufficient chance to provide the evidence. Evidence of our childrens dependancy upon my wife can be provided should further evidence be required… Evidence of my dependancy upon my wife can be provided should it be required. This can also be obtained from my GP directly in the form of medical records – which I have previously given written permission to obtain. (Note: I have also sent a copy of my Blue Badge into yourselves, which I’m sure everybody in the department is aware of the qualifying factor to obtain, along with my prescription list with a list of medications I am currently taking).
The UKBA have failed to respond to many FOI requests posted by myself and others. Infact the UKBA have breached the FOI Act 2000 in a very recent request by myself.
I requested very specific documentation under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act which has not been complied with.
This is not the only instance of when I have failed to recieve a response to a very real freedom of information request. I understand that the UKBA previously held Executive Agency status that has now been lost. However, this did not give UKBA power to break laws.
A list of other FOI requests can be found here:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/travel_expenses_for_is96_reporti#incoming-373837 < your own internal review concluded that the response failed to meet the requirements of the FOI act
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/certificate_of_application_guida#incoming-372940 < the request was sparked by previous request, which stated that no further guidance was held on the issuance of a COA… If this statement was correct, then by the legislation of FOI Act, a response should of been made swiftly (this can even mean FASTER than 20 working days – as outlined previously ^) -should the guidance requested in this FOI request exist, it means the response to the initial request withheld information requested, and illegally covered up the information being held…
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/eea_family_permits_wife_mother_o#incoming-370844 < click on “show quoted sections” i draw attention to the response of UKBA on 28th Feb – look at the quoted email from UKBA – Subject Line – Internal review of Freedom of Information request – EEA Family Permits (Wife & Mother of British Citizens …. UKBA failed on its own obligation to conduct an internal review of my request within the timelines it publishes…
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/public_funds_for_a_partner_of_a#outgoing-261299 < requested information on what is considered as a public fund as per ukba and its statement of “No recourse to public funds” and a list of benefits which the partner / spouse of a british citizen is able to access… – as explained on your own guidance… – this request was ignored, despite further reminders…
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/universal_credits_and_partner_wh_3#outgoing-261297 < another FOI request ignored – in relation to Universal Credits and removal of Working / Child tax credits…
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/is96_reporting_conditions_and_li#incoming-369110 < your response was late, and your internal review played down the fact that your response was late… a late response is still a breach of the FOI Act… a day or a month, its a breach… – If my car insurance expires today, and I drive my car on a public highway tomorrow… Can I use the excuse “Oh, its only a day” when I go before a judge for driving without insurance?
Now, with the complaints above, I would expect a full written response. My address is included above. Should further information be required, I would be more than happy to response by either email or post.
Yours,
Mr W P

============

Subject: Re: Complaints – Updated List…. Including breaches of FOI Act by UKBA…
From: [email protected] Mine.com
To: [email protected];
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Bcc:
Date: Saturday, 6 April 2013, 16:56
Mr W P ADDRESS
Date: As Emailed
FAO: Rob Whiteman
CC: Nadhim Zahawi / Paula Scott
* MP Ref: x
* Home Office Ref: (Its a long reference)
Dear Mr Whiteman,
Further to my previous email today, I also highlight a relevant section of Directive 2004/38/EC.
————–
Article 4
Right of exit
1. Without prejudice to the provisions on travel documents applicable to national border controls,
all Union citizens with a valid identity card or passport and their family members who are not
nationals of a Member State and who hold a valid passport shall have the right to leave the territory
of a Member State to travel to another Member State.
2. No exit visa or equivalent formality may be imposed on the persons to whom paragraph 1
applies.
3. Member States shall, acting in accordance with their laws, issue to their own nationals, and
renew, an identity card or passport stating their nationality.

————-

I also highlight the fact that Chapter 10 of the EU handbook states that if a request to treat an application as a priority is not to be completed, then this must be explained in writing. Neither myself nore my wife have received a response confirming, or refusing to treat her application with priority. Therefore, please confirm the status of her application.
Yours
Mr W P

============

Subject: Re: Complaints – Updated List…. Including breaches of FOI Act by UKBA…
From: Me @ Mine
To: [email protected]; [email protected];
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Bcc:
Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2013, 1:23
Mr W P Address Date: As Emailed
FAO: Rob Whiteman
CC: Nadhim Zahawi / Paula Scott
* MP Ref: x
* Home Office Ref: (Its a long reference)
Dear Mr Whiteman / Euro,
Further to my previous messages of 6th April 2013, which have again been ignored (I recieved a response stating that I would receive a response the next day from Rob Whitemans email address – this has not happened?)…
The ruling was:
1. European Union law and, in particular, its provisions on citizenship of the Union, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not preclude a Member State from refusing to allow a third country national to reside on its territory, where that third country national wishes to reside with a member of his family who is a citizen of the Union residing in the Member State of which he has nationality, who has never exercised his right to freedom of movement, provided that such refusal does not lead, for the Union citizen concerned, to the denial of the genuine enjoyment of the substance of the rights conferred by virtue of his status as a citizen of the Union, which is a matter for the referring court to verify.
See the key wording that I have underlined for yourselves. As explained previously, I have also demonstrated to UKBA the fact that I have indeed exercised my right to freedom of movement within the EU when I worked in Finland. This therefore means that the ruling of this case cannot be relied upon to prevent my rights as an EU citizen to allow my wife to reside in the United Kingdom under Directive 2004/38/EC as the Family Member of an EEA national. Should documentation be required from myself to prove that I have been residing within the UK since my return from Finland under the Directive rules, I can provide numerous P60’s, Tax Returns, P45s, Payslips, College Letters, ETC all showing that from the point that I returned from Finland, I have been qualified under one of the following categories:
– Worker
– Self Employed
– Job Seeker
– Student
With my current status in the UK standing as a worker.
Although, the following document, in response to FOI request 23660
Confirms that such documentation is not required…
Yours
W P

=================
I received the following response to these (anybody think I might be beginning to P*ss them off yet?)

Subject: RE: Complaints – Updated List…. Including breaches of FOI Act by UKBA…
From: Whiteman Rob (Submissions) ([email protected])
To: Me @ Mine; [email protected]; [email protected];
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Bcc:
Date: Tuesday, 9 April 2013, 9:56

Dear Mr P

 

Thank you for your three emails to Rob Whiteman. I have passed your queries to the relevant caseworking team and have asked them to make contact with you directly in response to your concerns.

 

Kind regards

 

Sanaya Setna

Assistant Private Secretary to Rob Whiteman Home Office 1st Floor Seacole, 2 Marsham Street, SW1P 4DF

=============
Obviously, I don’t need to say how upset I was that the guy couldn’t even respond to my messages personally.
I therefore decided to respond with a massive Human Rights email, outlining my utter frustration…
See next post….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *