Listening to a programme on radio 4 and their speaker was sayng Britain is a more forgiving country and they are more likely to be given an opportunity by the establishment and the people. They say Italy has no work and that Germany and France were very hard to get on with the people and would be given no support or very little by the authorities
When their application has been turned down and they are in the appeals process?
That's right snd I think it is the right thing to do while they have a claim pending. When people say they don't get benefits it gets confused with the fact they don't have access to the mainstream benefits system.
After the first appeal if applying for further appeal, if the first appeal is out of time, if they are submitting new evidence to apply to make a new claim, if they are challenging a decision through judicial review, if they have agreed to return home and are making arrangements to do so, if they can't return for medical reasons, if they can't return because there are no safe routes (at the moment the Home Office say there are no countries with no safe routes).
Waste of bullets. The MoD has budget cuts you know.
They can't but the Home Office will want to be satisfied that they didn't lie about where they came from.
I will bet my house that 3000 is a bullshit number.
So why are they risking life and limb to cross the channel?
They destroy their documents for two reasons: so they can claim to be from an unsafe country where they are not from and to prevent deportation- how can you deport someone if you don't know where they are from?
I already answered that question no?
Not really. I'd rather claim asylum in a country I'm in (or indeed one of the 4/5) I've travelled through rather than try to outrun a eurostar. I put some quotes up earlier. They make interesting reading
This part of the thread is not about the rights and wrongs of the UK tax payer paying for asylum seekers benefits it is to establish what they get. Some stated they don't get an and then others - @Paddy O'Dors - claimed what people said was not true. I believe we have now established that they get more than most on here assumed.
Then they won't make an asylum claim and I would think they'd he held in a detention centre. I have known the Home Office dispute the country of origin based on language analysis or not having credible knowledge of the country and make a claim of where they think the person is from. I don't know what ultimately happened to the people.
Sorry, I didn't realise there were rules about what each part of the tread is about. I'll try not to state my opinion in a facts only section in the future.
I haven't read the thread but a few quotes are completely meaningless. The vast majority do claim asylum in other European countries, the question posed in the op was about why some of them (a very small percentage of the total despite what our agenda'd media would have us believe) keep going to the UK. Mostly because they know someone who'll get them jobs cleaning cars or picking fruit rather than our wondrous benefit system.
I didn't mean it like that - you make valid points. But it allows the "they can't claim benefits" lot a way out of admitting that they were wrong by changing the argument. You will note that none of them have had the decency to do that.
Ah right, I have skipped large parts of the thread and missed people saying they don't get benefits except paddy.
They'll get that through an hc2 cerificate which is issued for 6 months at a time, there can be problems with delays issuing a new certificate after one had expired. It won't be renewed if support is stopped, e.g. after a claim has failed.
