Mrs C complained that Border Force incorrectly stopped her entering the UK in 2012, saying that she did not have genuine visa, and also in 2013, because staff suspected that her passport was a fake. She also complained that the officers had been rude and intimidating.
What happened
Mrs C, a Sri Lankan national, was granted leave to remain in the UK in spring 2012. In winter 2012 she went on holiday abroad with her British husband. When she returned to the UK, Border Force detained her for further examination because staff suspected that the visa in her passport was not genuine. This was because information on Border Force's computer system showed that Mrs C did not have leave to enter the UK. Mrs C and her husband were asked to wait with no explanation for detaining them. After about an hour, Border Force allowed Mrs C to enter the UK. It said that its computer system had not been up?to-date.
In winter 2013 Border Force stopped Mrs C at an airport to make further enquiries about her passport. Mrs C was then allowed to enter the UK without any proper explanation.
In response to Mrs C's complaint about the two incidents, Border Force said that it could not look into the events in 2012 because of the time that had elapsed since then. When discussing the events of 2013, it said that it had encountered a growing number of fake passports and it had to make sure that people entered the UK with genuine documents. In Mrs C's case, the examination of her passport had been a routine procedure. In response to her complaint about the officers' rude and intimidating behaviour, Border Force said that it expected its officers to behave in a professional manner and apologised for any upset caused.
What we found
We partly upheld this complaint. Regarding the events in 2012, Border Force officers acted in accordance with its guidance but its computer records had not been correctly updated to show that Mrs C had been granted leave to remain in the UK in spring. This amounted to maladministration.
Regarding the events in 2013, we concluded that Border Force officers had acted in accordance with its guidance and we did not find that it had acted incorrectly.
Border Force's responses to Mrs C's complaint could have been more helpful, however, we did not consider that the shortcomings amounted to maladministration.
Putting it right
Border Force apologised to Mrs C for its errors in 2012. It also paid her £150 in recognition of the worry and inconvenience caused.
UK Border Force
UK
Replied with inaccurate or incomplete information
Apology
Compensation for non-financial loss