u/Creative-Kiwi-3967

We are several months into a leasehold flat purchase. Last week, the last outstanding enquiry was resolved and the transaction moved forward to sign off - what we anticipated would lead to agreeing exchange and completion dates.

However, our conveyancers carried out an OS1 search last week which returned an intending charge on the title. This is what it said:

>An official search certificate dated 2 September 2026 and timed at xx:xx:xx has been issued to protect an intending CHARGE in favour of [named individual] affecting the whole of the title. The relative priorities conferred by the issue of two or more official search certificates are governed by rule 153 of the Land Registration Rules 2003.

The issue is that the named individual is a young man who is a director of many care homes. The current owner is in care and the sale is being dealt with (and signed) by a family member as a deputy.

We find this intending charge situation highly unusual, especially as this intending charge was lodged about a month ago and as the sale progressed towards the end; the seller (deputy) was not proactive/upfront and disclosed this; and the seller (deputy) and their solicitors have yet to reply with an explanation of the situation since last week.

As we understand, this charge hasn't been registered yet, it may expire or be withdrawn. It has priority over the OS1 our conveyancers ran, as it was lodged first. But the lack of transparency, and other facts of the related intended charge-holder, cause suspicion. We are concerned that we may exchange prior to the intended charge expiring, it is then registered, and we are forced to complete with a new registered charge on the title, favouring the named individual. We have communicated with our conveyancers not to exchange until we get a satisfactory reply, though if I'm honest, I have little to no trust on the seller at this moment.

Is this some sort of housing scam? Any advice or wisdom appreciated.

Key points from Home Secretary's speech yesterday:

• New earned settlement rules will apply retrospectively to people already on route to settlement

>It remains the case that the rules that apply to you are the rules that are in force at the point of your application, not when you arrived in the country. So that will continue to apply in the normal way.

>[...]it has been the case, settled case law, both a court of appeal and a House of Lords judgement. The rules that are in place, sorry, the rules that apply to you when you make your application are the rules in place at the point of application, long settled principle.

• New rules to start taking effect prior to cohorts eligible for settlement from February 2027

>So these are policy questions to be settled on transitional arrangements and so on, but that will happen later this year and in good time before you get the sort of first round of people qualifying who arrived in 2022.

• Notice period: not clearly specified, but new rules/policy to be announced later this year with implementation expected to affect people qualifying from February 2027, so one could guess a couple of months' notice will be given

>I'm obviously very aware that a large group of people that arrived in 2022 without absent any change would qualify in February 2027. Obviously, we've got to give certainty to the system. It remains the case that the rules that apply to you are the rules that are in force at the point of your application, not when you arrived in the country. So that will continue to apply in the normal way. We will set out later this year this new policy on settlement, taking into account all of the consultation responses we've had, as well as any transitional arrangements we might decide to implement as well.

• Crucially, the details of the new earned settlement contribution model and any transitional protections have not been settled and decided yet

>So I mean, there are elements of migration policy that are to be settled. We've had a consultation running on settlement. We will be making policy decisions on that very soon. And of course, that will be shaped by the new Prime Minister, as it would have been done under the old previous Prime Minister.

>Look, the transitional protections are something that we specifically consulted on, and there's a range of different options available for what transitional protections might look like, everything from passporting certain cohorts through, so no change, and they still qualify at five years, to different options for what you might do with other cohorts over a longer period. That is policy to be settled. I will obviously come to the House to inform the House of what that policy is once it is settled, and it will pass in the normal way.

• Some cohorts may be fully protected under transitional arrangements, and still qualify in 5 years

>Look, the transitional protections are something that we specifically consulted on, and there's a range of different options available for what transitional protections might look like, everything from passporting certain cohorts through, so no change, and they still qualify at five years, to different options for what you might do with other cohorts over a longer period.

• Changes will be announced in "the normal way", meaning a statement of changes

>I will obviously come to the House to inform the House of what that policy is once it is settled, and it will pass in the normal way. And of course, I'm sure there will be lots of public debate, and we Home Office will make sure that those rules are clear.

Full transcript [1:24:xx to 1:30:xx]:

And more generally, can we expect any major changes to immigration policy under the new Prime Minister? So I mean, there are elements of migration policy that are to be settled. We've had a consultation running on settlement. We will be making policy decisions on that very soon. And of course, that will be shaped by the new Prime Minister, as it would have been done under the old previous Prime Minister. We obviously have an immigration bill already in train, which will proceed. It's already had second reading. I think you're all about to take oral evidence on the bill, I believe, soon. If not, you've already done it. In any case, the bill will continue to progress, as will other parts of the asylum policy statement in delivery. And I've already had good conversations with the new Prime Minister about aspects of migration policy.

Next year, migrants who arrived in 2022 will start to qualify for settlement under the current system. And you had previously told us that the earned settlement changes are targeted at migrants in these groups. So will these reforms be implemented by next year? So I mean, the earned settlement isn't just for one group. It's a new model of settlement, which is about settlement being something that is earned with contribution and a new set of tests that lead to settlement, given that it is basically permanent residency in this country. No meaningful difference in your day-to-day life between being somebody who has indefinitely to remain or somebody who's a British citizen. So I think it's right to reassess the basis on which settlement is granted at the moment has been an effective – effectively an automatic process based on how long you've been here. So it's for a broader range than simply new arrivals. I'm obviously very aware that a large group of people that arrived in 2022 without absent any change would qualify in February 2027. Obviously, we've got to give certainty to the system. It remains the case that the rules that apply to you are the rules that are in force at the point of your application, not when you arrived in the country. So that will continue to apply in the normal way. We will set out later this year this new policy on settlement, taking into account all of the consultation responses we've had, as well as any transitional arrangements we might decide to implement as well.

I suppose there is an expectation as to what time of year it will happen, because that should be a guide for some people as to what their situation will be. Yeah, look, I mean, again, I don't want to sort of overspeak for the government grid and decide my own timeline, but look, later this year, we've always said that we would have a consultation. We had perhaps many more responses to that than we thought, and some of the analysis, not just of the responses, but the modelling that underpins it has taken a little longer, and since then we've had a change of government. So these are policy questions to be settled on transitional arrangements and so on, but that will happen later this year and in good time before you get the sort of first round of people qualifying who arrived in 2022. In terms of people being aware of what's going on, I mean, I would just say this is a highly informed cohort of people and there is a high degree of awareness, and I know that people are anticipating changes, which, as I say, we will do later this year.

Okay, and just on that, how much notice, I suppose, do you expect them to receive and what steps your department be taking to make sure that people are aware of the changes as they come into place? So look, I mean, we make immigration rule changes twice a year, every year almost automatically, and it has been the case, settled case law, both a court of appeal and a House of Lords judgement. The rules that are in place, sorry, the rules that apply to you when you make your application are the rules in place at the point of application, long settled principle. As I say, this is a highly knowledgeable cohort, and I know people have been following the debate very closely. Certainly, that is also my experience as a constituency member of Parliament. The government set out, before I came into office, in fact, in the summer, leading up to summer recess in 2025, its immigration white paper, which signalled the change for indefinite leave to remain to move from five years to ten, and then it was in November that we set off the settlement consultation. That was once I had come into post, and then we've been doing that consultation, which closed in February, and I've said that we will announce changes in the not too distant future. So I think people are aware of what's going on, and we will publicise those changes and the rules that apply to people in the normal way. As I say, this is a highly knowledgeable cohort, and they do tend to know their rules very well.

I think it's just because, really, for those who will see their pathway change, especially when there's not a cut-off date, and there's a lot of anxiety that people perhaps may fall through the gaps, and then there'll be some problems. So I just want to understand what the transitional protections would be. Look, the transitional protections are something that we specifically consulted on, and there's a range of different options available for what transitional protections might look like, everything from passporting certain cohorts through, so no change, and they still qualify at five years, to different options for what you might do with other cohorts over a longer period. That is policy to be settled. I will obviously come to the House to inform the House of what that policy is once it is settled, and it will pass in the normal way. And of course, I'm sure there will be lots of public debate, and we Home Office will make sure that those rules are clear. As I say, it's not my general experience that, again, I speak more as a constituency MP now, but if I think of the people I represent, there is a high degree of knowledge, and people find out very quickly what are the rules that will apply to them. Let me put it that way. But we will obviously do everything we are supposed to do to make that process as smooth as possible.

Parliament will be going into conference recess at the end of the day tomorrow and returning on 12 October.

While I understand statements of changes can still be presented, I wonder if this would further delay any announcements on earned settlement?

Hi everyone

HO guidance states that the LitUK test unique reference number (URN) follows the format:

HOM/010114/123456/123456789

However, mine has the following format (numbers and letters changed for anonimity):

PSI/311225/AB123CD45/EFGH6IJK

Is this correct/acceptable? It's different to the format given by HO. I booked the test following links from the gov.uk website.

Hi everyone, we're getting close to maybe hearing from HO about the new changes and I understand people (me included) can be apprehensive. We don't know what's coming but I like to read things that show how unreasonable the new proposals are and how they haven't even evidenced that the proposals will accomplish what they said it will. I came across this article from months ago and found it reassuring.

Here are some points from the article:

> One of the Committee’s most striking conclusions after reviewing all the evidence was the absence of a strong economic case for extending the settlement route. According to the report, the Government has yet to demonstrate how a longer pathway would support labour market needs or stimulate economic growth. For employers and HR teams particularly in sectors already experiencing acute skills shortages such as technology, healthcare, engineering and hospitality this lack of clarity is worrying. From our experience, an unclear pathway only increases uncertainty for overseas skilled workers and their families and risks weakening the UK’s ability to attract and retain international talent.

> A key element of the proposed reforms is the concept of migrant workers ‘earning’ settlement through measurable economic or social contribution. But the report recognises the difficulty of defining contribution fairly. For example, metrics such as income thresholds or job roles risks disadvantaging those with non-linear career trajectories, individuals working in essential but lower-paid sectors and people who then have caring responsibilities or breaks in employment.The Committee stressed that any contribution-based model must reflect the diverse ways migrants enrich the UK economy and society, not just earnings.

> The Committee’s findings acknowledged issues raised by experts including in Migrate UK’s own submission which was published along with the report. These include the need for transitional protections for migrants already partway through the current settlement route, the potential disruption to employer recruitment and retention and the risk of reforms being introduced without sufficiently robust economic analysis. Demonstrating that major reforms cannot proceed without deeper evidence, clearer justification and a deeper consultation.

Another great analysis written by Zonglin Lyu from the Skilled Worker Justice Alliance, this one focusing on the order and timing of events, including consultation results, impact assessments and implementation.

Link to RFUK questionnaire to provide evidence for meeting with Jo White

https://www.reddit.com/r/SpouseVisaUk/s/tk5Vi9eV7x

Hi everyone!

The charity RFUK has announced recently that they have been invited to a meeting with the new immigration minister Jo White (she replaced Mike Tapp).

They'll be collecting questions and concerns from members that they hope to present to the minister (not all of them of course but perhaps recurring themes).

I'll share here when they have a link to the questionnaire. In the mean time, if you're not aware of RFUK, check out their website and consider joining their circle community where they share announcements directly (a small annual donation is needed but their work is amazing standing up to families separated by the UK immigration rules).

As a side note, this subreddit allows sharing and donations requests from charities and organisations that advocate for immigrants in the UK. So feel free to share or post about any charity you're a part of or would like to bring awareness too!

I'm filling out the FLR (M) form for my extension and I noticed the finances section no longer indicates what's the financial requirement that must be met. The application clearly specified the value on my previous application 2.5 years ago.

I've checked the answers to make sure I didn't skip or answer anything incorrectly.

There are no questions about the transitional arrangements for initial applications made prior to 11 April 2024, which is my case.

I am only including my own income, which meets the old requirement of £18600 (PhD stipend). This should be enough as I know I'm on the old income threshold, but it's bugging me a bit that the application doesn't explicitly indicate what the financial requirement is or provide a place for me to explain (apart from a cover letter).

Has this been other people's experience applying recently? I'm looking for other experiences for some reassurance. Thanks :)

Dear r/ukvisa

As we all know the new earned settlement proposed changes remain uncertain. As we or our families could be affected, it's understandable that people would want to share news, updates, opinions or discuss any new development as it happens, even on a daily basis. For this reason, I created a new subreddit, r/UKEarnedSettlement.

This new subreddit caters to people who are or will be affected by the new proposed settlement rules. Posts and comments from their families, friends, or supportive members of the UK society are also welcomed, as well as from immigrant advocacy groups and charities.

This sub is for sharing news and opinions, discussing developments from the proposal or government announcements, as well as providing opportunity for people to get updates on recent changes.

Posts that usually get removed from r/ukvisa, r/SpouseVisaUk or r/SkilledWorkerVisaUK for being political will be welcomed. While political topics will be allowed, only respectful and tolerant behaviour will be accepted.

Thanks for the mods for allowing this post.

Dear r/SkilledWorkerVisaUK

As we all know the new earned settlement proposed changes remain uncertain. As we or our families could be affected, it's understandable that people would want to share news, updates, opinions or discuss any new development as it happens, even on a daily basis. For this reason, I created a new subreddit, r/UKEarnedSettlement.

This new subreddit caters to people who are or will be affected by the new proposed settlement rules. Posts and comments from their families, friends, or supportive members of the UK society are also welcomed, as well as from immigrant advocacy groups and charities.

This sub is for sharing news and opinions, discussing developments from the proposal or government announcements, as well as providing opportunity for people to get updates on recent changes.

Posts that usually get removed from r/ukvisa, r/SpouseVisaUk or r/SkilledWorkerVisaUK for being political will be welcomed. While political topics will be allowed, only respectful and tolerant behaviour will be accepted.

Thanks for the mods for allowing this post.