UKVI apologised for delay on an asylum claim

What happened

Mr D was a refugee. In 2006 he returned to his home country for a month following the sudden death of some of his Family members. On his return to the UK, his refugee status was removed. Mr D made further submissions to regain his refugee status and permission to stay in the UK in spring 2007. These went into the backlog of asylum cases being dealt with (known as the legacy backlog) and Mr D waited for a decision. In spring 2008 Mr D converted to Christianity and made another further submission on this basis. In autumn 2011, Mr D queried when and how his case would be resolved. UKVI told him to visit its Further Submissions Unit in Liverpool, which in turn told him to make a new asylum claim in Croydon. It was only when Mr D asked us to intervene that his claim was finally resolved in winter 2014.

What we found

UKVI should have decided Mr D's asylum claim three years sooner, by summer 2011. Had it done so, it would have granted Mr D asylum in the UK for five years, much earlier than it did. UKVI should not have rejected Mr D's autumn 2011 further submissions; it should not have advised him to make a fresh asylum application at its Croydon office; and it should have resolved his application after he had lodged a formal complaint about the contradictory advice he had been given. This caused Mr D a good deal of inconvenience.

Putting it right

UKVI apologised to Mr D. It also paid him £200 compensation for the frustration and expense caused by its delay and misinformation about how to legalise his immigration status. However, UKVI's mistakes did not prevent Mr D from working. He could have asked for permission to work at any time from late summer 2010 onwards.